ini

Ro)Oo jas
')S
5H == ————
—— —— DIAM-—6— —+————-—-——-——
a:
Napehs
ce ex atatinaei
GS eet emaseteacrp
ea Ds Pe15 31M.
P 9€1M.151M.
| . | . |
sale tseachtain
cedeBee lt cleat
I SYS
re ie eSoa rot eon SE nm oem Ne
>!WI ~ di aclhe crain
ar reed Naceate Boa nske were
eah Har
te — — —fe keZW
I aeWlSt Wisk Kast
+ é t
 The Library
SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY
AT CLAREMONT

WEST FOOTHILL AT COLLEGE AVENUE

CLAREMONT, CALIFORNIA
A HISTORY OF ARCHITECTURE

ON THE COMPARATIVE METHOD

S. Paul’s Cathedral, London, from the west (1675-1710
See p. 906
(yy
we =< A HISTORY OF
ARCHITECTURE
ON THE COMPARATIVE METHOD

by

SIR BANISTER FLETCHER

President of the Royal Institute of
British Architects 1929-31

Seventeenth Edition

revised by

R, A. CORDINGLEY
Professor of Architecture in the
University of Manchester

NEW YORK
CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS
1961
 Published in the U.S.A. by
CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS
597 Fifth Avenue, New York 17
New York

New material in this edition

© 1961 The Royal Institute of British Architects and
The University of London

The first edition of this book was published

in 1896

Theolegy Library

SCHOOL OF TH EOLOGY
AT CLAREMONT
California

Printed in Great Britain by

ROBERT MACLEHOSE AND CO LTD
GLASGOW W3
 FOREWORD

UNDER the terms of the Will of Sir Banister Fletcher, who died on 17 August 1953,
the Royal Institute of British Architects and the University of London became the
joint beneficiaries of a Trust Fund, of which one of the principal assets is the
copyright in A History of Architecture on the Comparative Method. The income
from this Fund, which is shared equally by the Institute and the University, is to be
devoted to the furtherance of architectural teaching and appreciation in accordance
with the various intentions expressed by Sir Banister Fletcher in his Will.
After reviewing the position of the History of Architecture, the sixteenth edition
of which was in the press at the time of its author’s death, the Royal Institute of
British Architects and the University of London came to the conclusion that the
time had arrived for a major revision of the text, which had undergone little change
in essentials since the publication of the ninth edition in 1931. They were fortunate
in securing the services of Professor R. A. Cordingley, Professor of Architecture in
the University of Manchester, as general editor, and they take this opportunity of
expressing their gratitude to him for the manner in which he has carried out his
arduous task. Professor Cordingley explains in the Preface to this edition the lines
upon which the revision has proceeded. The Royal Institute of British Architects
and the University of London are confident that the new edition, whilst it incor-
porates much new material derived from modern historical and archaeological
research, at the same time faithfully preserves the spirit, purpose and form, and in
great part the actual language, of A History of Architecture on the Comparative
Method as its distinguished author left it to their care.
The first sixteen editions of the History of Architecture were published on behalf
of the author by Messrs B. T. Batsford Ltd., whose long and outstandingly success-
ful management of the book has placed generations of readers in their debt. The
transfer of the new edition to the Athlone Press of the University of London has
been made in compliance with the University’s settled. policy of using the facilities
of its own publishing organisation for important works in respect of which it bears
a direct share of responsibility. ‘ -

WILLIAM G. HOLFORD . BIRKETT

President of the Royal Institute Chairman of the Court of the
of British Architects University of London
 PREFACE

THE system which Sir Banister Fletcher devised to give a unity of treatment to his
book was thus described by him in his Prefaces to the sixteenth and earlier editions :

‘This ‘History of Architecture on the Comparative Method,” of which the short

title is “Comparative Architecture,” aims at displaying clearly the characteristic
features of the architecture of each country by comparing the buildings of each
period and by giving due prominence to the influences—geographical, geological,
climatic, religious, social, and historical—which have contributed to the formation
of particular styles, and which hitherto have not been emphasised systematically in
presenting the story of architectural development....
The analytical and comparative method adopted enables the essentials of in-
dividual styles to be easily grasped; thus the character of Gothic is emphasised by
comparison with Classic and Renaissance architecture, a similar treatment being
followed throughout the book.
Each style is considered under five sections, as follows:

Section 1. INFLUENCES
i. Geographical ii. Geological
iii. Climatic iv. Religious
v. Social vi. Historical
These six leading influences help to shape architecture; the first three are
physical, the next two civilising, and the last the historical background.

Section2. ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER

The general appearance and special features of the buildings of each period are
in this section described in detail, together with various theories of origin and
evolutionary development.

Section 3. EXAMPLES
In this section is given a wide range of typical buildings throughout the ages;
these are shown both photographically and by specially prepared drawings which
latter serve as a key to the size and proportion of the structures, while the text is
confined to brief descriptive notes.

Section 4. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

. Plans, or general arrangement of buildings.
. Walls, their construction and treatment.
. Openings, their character and shape.
. Roofs, their treatment and development.
Columns, their position, structure, and decoration.
Om
ap Mouldings, their form and decoration.
Qa . Ornament, as applied in general to any building.

This analysis of the characteristic features which resulted from solving certain
 PREFACE vii
structural problems enables the student to visualise clearly the main factors which
brought about changes in each style.
Section 5. REFERENCE BOOKS
The chief books are given to which readers who wish to pursue their studies in
greater detail may profitably refer.’

In the text of this, the seventeenth edition, the above system has been scrupulously
preserved.
Sir Banister died on 17th August 1953. He had concluded the preface of the
previous, sixteenth, edition on Coronation Day of that year. For very many years
the book had been internationally renowned, and so familiar to students of archi-
tecture everywhere as to be known almost invariably by his own name, rather than
by the formal title he gave to it. He received many honours both at home in Britain,
where he was President of the Royal Institute of British Architects over the years
1929-31, and abroad—France, Belgium, Greece, Italy, Roumania, Japan, and China
—and was the author of other books on the practice and history of architecture as
well as this, his most famous work. It was translated in entirety into Spanish and
Russian, and is in general use as a text book in the United States of America as in
Britain and the British Commonwealth of Nations. In the last of his Prefaces he
wrote of the developments since the first publication of 1896: the illustrations
comprising specially-prepared drawings, aerial views, restored models, and photo-
graphs had been increased from about 100 to over 3,200 in the course of the succes-
sive editions. He prided himself on the fact that he had personally visited almost all
of the sites and buildings of which he wrote in the text, in whatever part of the
world, visiting some of the countries many times.
At every opportunity Sir Banister corrected the book in accordance with the
latest investigations; but necessarily, the amendments or additions were made
piecemeal, and as a whole, the chapters remained essentially in the form in which
they had been conceived originally or as they stood after the last major reassess-
ment of 1931. Thus each represented an interpretation which might or might not
still be valid at the present time, in view of the considerable progress made mean-
time in the archaeological field or in historical research. These latter developments
and the passage of time have occasioned changes, too, in informed opinion, affect-
ing certain chapters more strongly than others. His treatment of nineteenth and
twentieth century architecture raised questions of another kind.
The revision of the various parts of the book for the seventeenth edition has, in
consequence, demanded a varying and flexible approach, and below there is given
some brief indication of the different problems involved, and the means adopted
towards their solution.
In chapters I and II, on the ancient architectures of Egypt and West Asia,
account has had to be taken of much important archaeological research and dis-
covery which has added greatly to our store of knowledge. In particular, the
chronologies that had previously served have been replaced or modified, and a
greater—though not necessarily final—relative and specific precision has now been
given to them. These two chapters therefore have been largely rewritten and much
extended.
As regards Greek architecture, it has for some little time been appreciated that a
‘dark age’ of centuries had intervened between an ‘Aegean’ culture in Greek lands
and the brilliant Hellenic epoch which succeeded it, while the Hellenistic phase to
which this gave way in turn has assumed a much greater significance than formerly
in linking Greece and Rome in matters of constructional method, civic design and
Vili PREFACE

the evolution of building-types as well as in respect of the architectural and

decorative arts. Chapter III accordingly has been recast and enlarged sufficiently to
allow the Aegean and Hellenistic phases their due identity, and for the rest there has
been quite a little rearrangement and amendment of detail. The chapter is about
one-tenth longer than previously.
The account of Etruscan and Roman Architecture contained in chapter IV
proved to need local rather than extensive revisions, though these have been
fairly numerous and have occasioned a modest expansion of the total text. The
succeeding series of chapters on Early Christian, Byzantine and Romanesque
Architecture (V-—X) was found still to be admirably sound in essentials, and the
one major change has been to transfer considerations of centrally-planned Italian
buildings from the Early Christian to the Byzantine chapter. The same can cer-
tainly be said of the ‘Mediaeval’ or ‘Gothic’ series of chapters (XI-XVIID),
especially the English, which always has been considered the finest part of the
book: the earlier editions were produced at a time when the interest in Gothic
architecture was keener and more discerning than it is now, and critics always have
adjudged the Gothic series to be authoritative and profound. Some fresh elements
have been added to the English chapter (XII—to the accounts of timber roofs,
castles and manor houses) and, in general, other moderate adjustments have been
made elsewhere, but only the Belgian and Dutch Gothic chapter (XV) has been
entirely rewritten.
The series of chapters on Renaissance architecture has undergone heavy revision.
Chapter XIX (European) has been partly rewritten; chapter XX (Italian) almost
wholly so, and is now about one-third longer than before; chapter XXI (French)
has had considerable local amendment; chapter XXII (German) has been exten-
sively rewritten and moderately extended; chapter XXIII (Belgian and Dutch) is a
complete rewriting; chapter XXIV (Spanish) has been partly recast, locally re-
written and slightly extended; while chapter XXV (English) has had many amend-
ments, the more extensive applying to the Georgian elements and as a whole
lengthening the chapter by about one-quarter. This Renaissance series of chapters
presented special problems to the reviser. Despite intercalations made with the
intention of correcting the bias, the treatment in the sixteenth edition remained
strongly coloured by the view, common among nineteenth-century architectural
historians and the public at large, that the Baroque and Rococo manifestations were
despicable and quite unworthy of serious attention. Thus, although the Renais-
sance period was deemed to extend to about 1830 in Europe, the Italian chapter
had little or nothing to say about architecture after c. 1600 and the examples
selected included only one or two of the more outstanding monuments after this
date. There was a similar though less serious unbalance in the accounts of the
Renaissance style in other European countries. Much recasting and new writing
was required in each case; not solely for this reason but also because terminology
raised some difficulties too.
Present-day architectural historians incline to limit the term ‘Renaissance’ to the
initial stages of the adoption of the style in the various European countries, without
having substituted another term to embrace as a whole that revived Classicism
which, first adopted in the architecture of fifteenth-century Italy, followed a trace-
able connected course in Europe up to the early nineteenth—to about 1830. Here,
in the seventeenth edition, the term ‘Renaissance’ has been allowed still to carry its
former meaning; and the former mode of subdivision of the style into periods in
each of the respective European countries also has been almost completely retained.
Of necessity there had to be one or two changes. In latter-day writings the term
‘Mannerist’ frequently is used to denote the more classically-irregular of two
 PREFACE &
alternative architectural expressions which arose in sixteenth-century Italian archi-
tecture. It is not, however, a very satisfactory term, if only for the reason that the
definitions given are insufficiently broad to embrace all building-designs of the
nonconforming type in the period before c. 1600, and indeed seem to relate only to
practices which arose from the re-discovery of stucco as an architectural medium.
Then too, there arose the difficulty that the reflection of Mannerism in other coun-
tries than Italy has not yet been adequately traced. Thus, in this seventeenth
edition, the term ‘Proto-Baroque’ is used instead, to stand for all that architecture,
which, throwing off the restraint of Classical rule—though not the Classical elements
themselves—led more or less directly to the culmination of the whole movement, in
Italy at least, in the Baroque. ‘High Renaissance’ is used for the conforming Italian
type over the same period. It was necessary also to coin the term ‘Antiquarian’ to
describe a tendency, evident in Europe from about 1750, to revert to ancient Classi-
cal (Greek and Roman) and Mediaeval precedent for inspiration.
It was in the parts of the book dealing with architecture after 1830 that the most
considerable amount of revision and expansion was required. Since the origins of
the History of Architecture lie in the last decade of the nineteenth century, and its
growth slowed down after 1931, architecture after 1830 was not treated upon the
scale of the earlier chapters, nor did Sir Banister apply to it his own system of chap-
ter organisation. Though material on the nineteenth and twentieth centuries was
added from time to time, it was arranged on no discernible plan, and in the sixteenth
edition the three chapters devoted to it occupy only 35 pages. They have been re-
placed in the new edition by four wholly new chapters, occupying 188 pages, in
which the system is extended to embrace all Western architecture down to the
present day. ‘Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Architecture in Britain’ is fol-
lowed by a parallel treatment of ‘Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Architecture
in Continental Europe’, with an intervening short chapter on the ‘Architecture of
South Africa, Australia and New Zealand’. The whole ‘Architecture of the
Americas’—South America, the United States and Canada—including the ancient
manifestations there, is brought together in a concluding chapter of Part I.
The former general heading (“The Non-Historical Styles’) for Part II was
anomalous; the architectures of the East are just as historical as those of the West.
The historical styles under Part I now are headed ‘Ancient Architecture and the
Western Succession’, and those under Part II, ‘Architecture in the East’. All the
chapters in Part II have been rewritten, though on the former lines, and the intro-
ductions to the two parts and the preliminary chapter on ‘Prehistoric Architecture’
have been considerably changed.
In the course of the revision it became abundantly clear what a tremendous
achievement the book represented. The fruit of a professional lifetime, it had built
up to massive proportions over the years. Even so, the former total of 1126 pages
has now risen to 1390, and the illustrations from 3232 to 3611. The admirable line
diagrams of famous buildings and their details, which have for so long been a dis-
tinctive feature of the book, have been retained almost in their entirety, though a
certain number, mostly in the earlier part of the book, proved to need small amend-
ments. Over 40 new diagrams have been made; and the 30 maps heading the
chapters are entirely new, the old ones having been redrawn on a clearer system.
The photographic illustrations have been both revised and very considerably ex-
panded. A large number of those appearing in the sixteenth edition have been
replaced by other photographs of the same subjects, and the previous total of 772
individual half tone illustrations has been increased by the addition of new material
to 1147. For the reader’s convenience, dates are appended to these illustrations as
well as page references to the related text.
 x PREFACE

Every part of the book has been checked, and besides the principal revisions
referred to above there have been very many minor corrections, reframings and
additions. Wherever feasible, both the commencing and completion dates of
buildings now are given, rather than an average date as previously, or a dash
indicates which of the two dates has not been forthcoming. The lists of reference
books concluding the chapters and the general list at the end of the book have been
brought up to date. The glossary contains about twice as many items as formerly,
and the very complete index, also much extended, is improved by the addition to
the respective items of direct references to the plates, as well as to the text;
previously, it was necessary to turn up the text in order to locate particular illustra-
tions. A further improvement is that the principal text reference is distinguished
by bolder type from those of a secondary character.

CONTRIBUTORS TO THE SEVENTEENTH EDITION

In the task of revision I have been so fortunate as to secure the assistance of
specialists to whom I have been able to confide particular charge of certain of the
chapters, and I most gratefully acknowledge their major contribution to the
preparation of the new edition. As indicated above, the amount and character of
the necessary revision has not been uniform throughout the book; some of these
collaborators accordingly have been mainly concerned to amend the existing text
in detail, while others have had either to recast or extend it in varying degrees, to
rewrite completely or to contribute entirely new chapters. Their names and the
parts undertaken by each are listed below, following the chapter order of the book.
Mr. CECIL STEWART, M.A., D.A.(Edin.), F.R.I.B.A.,) A.M.T.P.I., A.I.L.A.: Chapters
V to X (Early Christian, Byzantine, Romanesque in Europe, Italian Roman-
esque, French Romanesque, German Romanesque).
Mr. MICHAEL DAVID BEASLEY, A.R.I.B.A., A.A. DIPLOMA: chapter XV (Belgian
and Dutch Gothic) and chapter XXIII (Belgian and Dutch Renaissance).
Mr. FRANK ILLTYD JENKINS, B.ARCH., M.A. (Durham), M.S.(ARCH.)(Illinois),
A.R.I.B.A.: Chapter XXVII (Architecture of South Africa, Australia and New
Zealand) and chapter XXIX (Architecture of the Americas).
Mr. JOHN TERRY, F.R.I.B.A., A.A. DIPLOMA: chapter XXX (Architecture in India
and Pakistan).
Mr. HowarD KELLY, F.R.1.B.A.: chapter XX XI (Chinese Architecture).
Mr. WILLIAM ARTHUR SHERRINGTON, F.R.1.B.A., F.R.I.C.S., A.R.C.A. (London):
chapter XXXII (Japanese Architecture).
Mr. MARTIN SHAW BRIGGS, F.R.I.B.A.: chapter XXXIII (Muslim Architec-
ture).
For the detailed revision of the remainder of the text as, of course, for the general
plan of the edition, I am responsible.
Several other authorities have given generous help and advice regarding elements
of the text. Professor R. R. Betts (London University) made a preliminary check of
the facts contained in the historical preambles of the Mediaeval and Renaissance
chapters of the sixteenth edition, supplying many useful comments and corrections.
Mr. Alan Rowe (Manchester University) took an unflagging interest in the re-
organisation of the Egyptian material, contributing a flow of factual information
and ideas gained in his long years of experience in archaeological excavation and
research in Egypt and Cyrenaica. Mr. W. C. Brice (Manchester University),
deeply informed regarding the circumstances of ancient Anatolia and the early
 PREFACE xi

Aegean, gave unstinted help in the framing of the text relative to those areas. Dr.
J. F. Healy (Manchester University) made productive comments on the drafts of
the revised Greek chapter. Professor Peter Collins (McGill University), contributed
outline suggestions for the French Renaissance section. Professor Thomas Howarth
(Toronto University) took an important part in the initial framing of the Americas
chapter, giving further guidance and advice in the later stages. Thanks particularly
are due to the members of the staff of the Athlone Press, upon whom extremely
heavy and exacting labours have fallen. In the processes of production of a book of
this character, used extensively for reference as well as general reading, laden with
factual statements and sewn with multitudinous cross-references, great demands
have been made upon their vigilance; on points of detail of every nature, numerous
fruitful suggestions have been forthcoming.
The prodigious index, which already in the sixteenth edition filled 56 close-knit
double-column pages, has been expertly revised and extended on the new principle
by Mr. G. Norman Knight, M.A., M.S.IND., with the assistance of Mr. L. M.
Harrod, F.L.A., M.S.IND., and Mr. Terence Miller, M.s.IND.
By far the greater part of the full-page line illustrations are those prepared for the
earlier editions under the supervision of Sir Banister. Among the persons im-
portantly concerned in the actual drawing of these admirable diagrams was Mr.
Herbert Tilley, L.R.I.B.A., F.R.I.C.S., who was for many years closely associated
with Sir Banister and whose advice regarding the system employed has been most
helpful in ensuring continuity in the present edition. For the preparation of the
new diagrams and such amendments of the older ones as it has been necessary to
make I am particularly indebted to Mr. Denis J. Cox, M.A., A.R.I.B.A., and Mr.
Leslie Parker, but also to Mr. E. Atherden, Mr. J. S. Anderson, Mr. G. H. Broad-
bent, Mr. A. D. Gardiner, Mr. A. Rigby, Mr. C. H. Simon, Mr. D. G. Woodcock
and Dr. R. B. Wood-Jones, who at various times have lent their architectural skills
to the work. All the maps in the seventeenth edition were drawn by Mrs. E. Wilson.

15th February 1961 R. A. CORDINGLEY

 CONTENTS

Line Diagrams
Sources of Illustrations XVIii

Prehistoric Architecture

PART I

ANCIENT ARCHITECTURE
AND THE WESTERN SUCCESSION
Introduction
Egyptian Architecture 13
II. West Asiatic Architecture
III. Greek Architecture 89
IY.- Roman Architecture 167
Early Christian Architecture 253
VI. Byzantine Architecture 275
VII- Romanesque Architecture in Europe 303
VIII. Italian Romanesque 311
IX. French Romanesque 335
German Romanesque 353
xT. Gothic Architecture in Europe 365
XII. English Mediaeval Architecture 379
XIII. Scottish and Irish Architecture 521
XIV. French Gothic 529
XV. Belgian and Dutch Gothic 569
XVI, German Gothic 583
 CONTENTS xiii
XVII. Italian Gothic 592
XVIII. Spanish Mediaeval Architecture 635
XIX. Renaissance Architecture in Europe 654
XX. Italian Renaissance 665
XXI. French Renaissance 761
XXII. German Renaissance 806
XXIII. Belgian and Dutch Renaissance 827
XXIV. Spanish Renaissance 841
XXV. English Renaissance 863

XXVI. 19th and 2oth Century Architecture in Great Britain 982

XXVII. Architecture of South Africa, Australia and New Zealand 1057

XXVIII. 19th and 2oth Century Architecture in Continental
Europe 1060

XXIX. Architecture of the Americas I1I9

PART II
ARCHITECTURE IN THE EAST
Introduction II73

XXX. Architecture in India and Pakistan 1174

XXXI. Chinese Architecture 1197

XXXII. Japanese Architecture P20

XXXITI. Muslim Architecture e222,

General Reference Books 1253

Glossary of Architectural Terms 1255

1275
Index
 LINE DIAGRAMS

THE illustrations and text are paged consecutively. Every illustration can be found
in the Index (p. 1275) under the name of the building or feature. A list of the full-
page line illustrations only is also given below, since some of these bear general titles
which may be more conveniently traced in this form.

Prehistoric architecture page 2 Athens, Propylaea 142

Greek and Roman theatres com-
EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE pared 145
Mastaba tombs 24 Halicarnassos, Mausoleum 149
Sakkara, step pyramid 29 Cnidos, Lion tomb 150
Pyramid, funerary temple, tombs 32 Delos, Maison de la Colline 153
Temple plans 37 Ornament (1) 157
Elephantine, Mammisi temple; Greek and Roman doorways com-
Karnak, temple of Khons 38 pared 159
Karnak, temple of Ammon 40 Comparative Greek and Roman
Ornament, sculpture, columns 54-5 orders of architecture 160
Ornament (2) and (3) 162-3
Comparative Greek and Roman
WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE
mouldings 164-5
Ziggurats 68
Assyrian architecture; Sinjerli 72 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE
Khorsabad, palace of Sargon 74 Construction of walls, arches,
Persepolis 76 vaults, domes 177
Feruz-abad; Sarvistan; Ctesiphon 80 Etruscan architecture 181
Boghazkoy; Yasilikaya 83 The Roman forums 182
Assyrian ornament 84 Rome, markets of Trajan 186
Temples; Rome, Nimes 189-92
GREEK ARCHITECTURE Temples; Baalbek, Tivoli,Rome 193, 195
Optical corrections in architecture 95 Rome, Pantheon 199
Mycenae; Knossos; Tiryns 99 Rome, basilicas 200
Mycenae, Treasury of Atreus 100 Rome, Thermae of Caracalla 203
Athens, Acropolis 104 Rome, Thermae of Diocletian 207
Comparative plans of temples 109 Rome, Colosseum 212
Evolution of Doric order IIO Circuses, bridge, gateways 216
Doric order, examples 113 Tombs 220
Temples; Paestum, Agrigentum 114 Triumphal arches 223-4
Aegina, temple of Aphaia 117 Columns; Trajan, M. Aurelius 228
Athens, Theseion 120 Spalato, palace of Diocletian 231
Athens, Parthenon 122 Rome, palaces of the Emperors 232
Bassae, temple of Apollo 124 Houses; Pompeii, Priene 234
Ionic volutes 126 Ornament (1) 246
Ionic order, examples 127 Frescoes and mosaics 249
Ephesus, temple of Artemis 130 Ornament (2) 250
Athens, temple on Ilissus; Priene 132
Athens, Erechtheion 134 EARLY CHRISTIAN
Evolution of Corinthian capital 138 Rome, S. Clemente 255
Athens, Monument of Lysicrates, Rome, S. Peter (basilica), S. Paolo 259
Tower of Winds; Didyma 141 Bethlehem; Jerusalem; Qalb Louzeh 260
 LINE DIAGRAMS XV
Rome, S. Agnese; Ravenna, S. Westminster Abbey 424-6
Apollinare in Classe 264 Heckington, S. Andrew 431
Ornament 267 Fountains Abbey 432
Types of timber church roofs 435
BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE Tower of London 436
Byzantine construction and typical Stokesay ; Kenilworth 442
domes 277 Warkworth; Tattershall 445
Constantinople, SS. Sergius and Mediaeval manor houses 446
Bacchus, S. Theodore; Athens, Penshurst; Haddon Hall 449
Little Metropole 278 Great Chalfield; Oxburgh Hall 450
Constantinople, S. Sophia 281 Compton Wynyates; Sutton Place 458
Rome, Minerva Medica; Ravenna, Hampton Court Palace 460
®. Vitale; Aix la Chapelle, Tudor features and ornament 461
cathedral 285 The smaller homes 464
Venice, S. Mark; Périgueux, S. Chapels 471
Front 288 Chantries, shrines, tombs 472
Rome, S. Stefano Rotondo, etc. 295 Hospitals and almhouses 478, 480
Rome, S. Costanza; Ravenna, Mediaeval inns 484
tombs of Galla Placidia, Theo- Worcester, Guesten Hall, etc. 485
doric 296 Crosses and tithe barns 486
Ornament 300 City walls and gateways; bridges 487
Evolution of church plans 491
Towers and spires 492
ITALIAN ROMANESQUE
Comparative treatment of English
Pisa, cathedral 313 Gothic cathedrals 494-5
Pisa, campanile, baptistery 314 Comparative buttresses 497
Pavia, S. Michele 322 Comparative doorways 498
Doorways, windows, apses, etc. 330 Comparative windows 499
Pulpit, altar, carved ornament 332 Types of secular timber roofs 500
Comparative piers, caps and bases 503
FRENCH ROMANESQUE Comparative carved capitals 504
Angouléme, cathedral 334 Comparative mouldings 507
Caen, Abbaye-aux-Hommes 342 Comparative ornamented mouldings 508
Doorways, apses, piers, etc. 350 Parapets, gargoyles, crestings and
Capitals, friezes, etc. 351 crockets 51
Crosses, finials, etc. 512
Fonts, piscinas, sedilia, etc. 515
GERMAN ROMANESQUE
Screens and rood lofts 516
Cologne, church of Apostles 355 Mediaeval church fittings 517
Worms, cathedral 356
Mediaeval metal work 518
Towers, doorways, columns, etc. 362
Furniture 519

GOTHIC IN EUROPE
SCOTTISH AND IRISH
Principles of Gothic construction 369
Evolution of Gothic vaulting 370 Scottish examples 520
Comparative diagrams of vaults 373 Irish examples 528
Principles of proportions 377
FRENCH GOTHIC
ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL Paris, Notre Dame 531
Anglo-Saxon style 387 Rheims, cathedral 544
Mediaeval vaulting 399 Beauvais, cathedral 545
Comparative plans of cathedrals 410-13 Secular architecture 558
Peterborough, cathedral 414 Typical English and French Gothic
Salisbury, cathedral 415 plans 560-1
416 Windows, towers, etc. 563
Lincoln, cathedral
419 Porches, buttresses, etc. 564
Lichfield, cathedral
420 Sculptured ornament 566-7
Winchester, cathedral
xvi LINE DIAGRAMS

BELGIAN AND DUTCH GOTHIC Venice, Palazzi Pesaro, Corner,

Brussels, S. Gudule 571 Vendramini 734
Antwerp, cathedral 572 Venice, S. Maria dei Miracoli, S.
Secular architecture 579 Giorgio dei Greci 735
Archway, windows, etc. 580 Venice, Library of S. Mark 740
Font, altar, shrine, etc. 581 Vicenza, Basilica 741
Vicenza, Villa Capra, etc. 742
Venice, S. Giorgio Maggiore, Il
GERMAN GOTHIC
Redentore 743
Marburg, S. Elizabeth 590 Verona, palaces 744
Vienna, S. Stephen 591
Venice, Palazzo Grimani 745
Secular architecture 592 Florentine doorways, windows, etc. 749
Porches, doorways, etc. 595 Florentine altar piece, pulpit, etc. 750
Tombs, stalls, capitals, etc. 596
Roman arcades, fountains, etc. 7153-4
Venetian doorways, windows, capi-
ITALIAN GOTHIC tals, etc. 757-8
Milan, cathedral 601-2 Genoa and Verona, doorways, etc. 759
Venice, Doge’s Palace 611
Secular architecture 612 FRENCH RENAISSANCE
Florence, cathedral 616 Blois, chateau; Bury, chateau 771
Siena, cathedral; Pavia, Certosa 617 Chambord, chateau 772,
Venice, Frari church; Orvieto, Paris, Louvre 775
cathedral; etc. 628 Paris, Chateau de Maisons, Palais
Chiaravalle, Certosa; porches, etc. 629 du Luxembourg 781
Pulpits, monuments, etc. 630-1 Versailles, Petit Trianon; vases,
lucarnes, etc. 788
SPANISH MEDIAEVAL Versailles, Petit Trianon; Rouen
Burgos, cathedral 637 and S. Denis, tombs 789
Altar, chapel, cloisters 638 Paris, Invalides, Pantheon 800
Secular architecture 646 Early doorway, windows, capitals 803
Comparative cathedral plans 649 Doorways, windows, balcony, etc. 804
Doorways, pulpits, ornament 650-1
GERMAN RENAISSANCE
RENAISSANCE IN EUROPE Heidelberg, castle 809
Comparative domes 658 Doorway, windows, capitals 824

ITALIAN RENAISSANCE BELGIAN, DUTCH RENAISSANCE

Florence, Pazzi Chapel, S. Lorenzo 676 Doorway, carved ornament 838

Florence, S. Spirito; Mantua, S. Leyden, town hall; gables, spires 839
Andrea 679
SPANISH RENAISSANCE
Florence, Palazzo Pitti 680
Florence, Palazzo Riccardi 681 Madrid, Escorial 853
Florence, Palazzo Strozzi 685 Toledo, Alcazar; Avila, patio 854
Genoa, Palazzo Municipio 690 Door, window, pulpit, etc. 860
Milan, S. Maria delle Grazie, Ospe-
dale Maggiore 698 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE
Rome, Palazzo della Cancelleria 699 Hardwick Hall; Castle Ashby 880
Rome, Tempietto in S. Pietro in Kensington, Holland House 892
Montorio, S. Andrea 700 London, Whitehall Palace 899
Rome, Palazzo Pietro Massimi 703 Greenwich, Royal Hospital 901
Todi, S. Maria; Rome, Il Gest 704. York, Water Gate; Wilton; S. Paul,
Rome, Palazzo Farnese 705 Covent Garden 902
Rome, Villa of Pope Julius 710 Ashburnham House; Stoke Hall;
Caprarola, Palazzo Farnese 711 Belton House 904
Rome, Capitol 718 S. Paul’s Cathedral QIO~I2
Rome, S. Peter 721-3 Wren’s City Churches 916
Venice, Doge’s Palace 733 S. Stephen Walbrook 917
 LINE DIAGRAMS Xvii

S. James, Piccadilly, S. Bride 918 Later Renaissance furniture 978

S. Mary-le-Bow, S. Bride 919 Later Renaissance doorways, etc. 980
Buildings by Sir Christopher Wren 925-6
Morden College; buttermarkets; INDIAN ARCHITECTURE
town halls 927. Sanchistupa; Kanarak, pagoda, etc. 1194
Castle Howard 929
Blenheim Palace 930 CHINESE ARCHITECTURE
Kedleston Hall 939 Canton, merchant’s house, etc. 1204
Chichester, Swan House, etc. 940
Early Renaissance plans 965 JAPANESE ARCHITECTURE
Late Renaissance plans 966 House, baths, temple, etc. I216
Typical doorways, windows, ar-
cades 969-70 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE
Georgian architecture 971 Cairo, mosques of Ibn Tiilin, Sultan
Comparative proportions of the Hasan; Granada, Alhambra 1232
orders (Sir W. Chambers) 972 Agra, Taj Mahal; Fatehpur Sikri;
Panelling, staircase, doorway, etc. 975 Bijapur, Jami Masjid 1247
Elizabethan and Jacobean pulpit, Muslim Ornament 1248
tombs, panelling, plaster ceilings,
etc. 976-7 Comparative Arches 1256

NOTE

Information about the supply of large-scale Lecture Diagrams

may be obtained from the publishers
 SOURCES OF ILLUSTRATIONS

THE PUBLISHERS wish to express their thanks to the great number of institutions,
commercial firms and private persons who have supplied photographs for use in
this book or who have given permission for copyright material to be used in the
preparation of plans and drawings. The following list relates primarily to new
material in the seventeenth edition; for illustrations derived from earlier editions
a source is given only where it is of special interest or where a specific request for
acknowledgment in this edition has been made. Enquiries about the sources of
illustrations not acknowledged should be addressed to the publishers.
Where acknowledgment is made to a published work mentioned in the lists of
reference books appended to each chapter the number in parentheses refers to the
page of the History of Architecture where the full title may be found.

FRONTISPIECE
ii, A. F. Kersting.

PREHISTORIC ARCHITECTURE
1, Crown Copyright, reproduced by permission of the Ministry of Works.

EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE
6, Lehnert and Landrock; 12, from Lange and Hirmer (p. 58, Phaidon Press Ltd, 3rd ed.
1961, original German edition by Hirmer Verlag, Munich); 244, after Emery, 1939 (p. 58);
24B, after Garstang (p. 58); 24C, after Badawy (p. 58); 24D, after (i) F. Benoit, L’ Architec-
ture d’antiquité, H. Laurens, Paris 1911, (ii) A.Rowe, Museum Fournal of the University of
Philadelphia, xxii, No. 1, Philadelphia 1931, (iii) A. Scharff, Handbuch der Archdologie,
Agypten, 19393 24G, after Lange and Hirmer (p. 58); 24H, after Borchardt, 1928 (p. 58)
24J, after Reisner, 1935 (p. 59); 24K, L, after (i) D. Holscher, Das Grabdenkmal des Konigs
Chephren, Leipzig, 1921, (ii) Badawy (p. 58), (iii) Edwards (p. 58); 24N, after Borchardt,
1910-13, and Edwards (p. 58); 28, drawings and reconstructions by J.-Ph. Lauer; 29, after
J.-Ph. Lauer, E. Drioton, O. M. Firth and J. E. Quibell (p. 58); 31a, Aerofilms and Aero-
pictorial Ltd; 318, from G. Jéquier, Les Temples memphites et thébains des origines a la
XVIII’ dynastie, Editions Albert Morancé, Paris 1920; 32F, in part after Edwards (p. 58);
37A, after H. Ricke, Beitrage zur Agyptischen Bauforschung und Altertumskunde, Cairo 1950,
and Baedeker, Egypt and the Sudan, Allen and Unwin Ltd, London 1908; 378, after A. M.
Calverley, The Temple of King Sethos I at Abydos, ed. Sir Alan Gardiner, vol. i, 1933, by
permission of the Egypt Exploration Society and the Oriental Institute, University of
Chicago; 37c-F, after Baedeker, Egypt and the Sudan, Allen and Unwin Ltd, London 1908
and 1929 editions; 37G, after Lange and Hirmer (p. 58); 414, Metropolitan Museum of
Art, New York, bequest of Levi Hale Willard, 1883; 42A, from Lange and Hirmer (p. 58);
46A, Aerofilms and Aeropictorial Ltd; 48a, Oriental Institute, University of Chicago;
48B, Lehnert and Landrock; 518, A. F. Kersting; 52A, Royal Institute of British Archi-
tects; §52B, Egypt Exploration Society; 59, from Carter and Mace (p. 58).

WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE

67A, Oriental Institute, University of Chicago, reconstruction by Hamilton Darby; 67B,
Oriental Institute, University of Chicago, reconstruction by H. D. Hill; 68a, after (i)
Parrot, 1946 (p. 87), (ii) Frankfort, 1954 (p. 87), (ii) Noldeke and others, Vorldaufiger Bericht
 SOURCES OF ILLUSTRATIONS xix
iiber die Ausgrabungen in Uruk-Warka, Berlin 19373; 688, after Parrot, 1946 (p. 87) and
Sir Leonard Woolley, Ur Excavations V, The Ziggurat and its Surroundings, London 1939;
68c, R. Ghirshman; 71A, from Layard, Monuments of Nineveh, 2nd series, London 18533
718, from Loud (p. 87) by permission of the Oriental Institute, University of Chicago;
71C, from R. Koldewey, Excavations at Babylon, Macmillan and Co., London 19143 72F,
after Luschan (p. 87); 72G, after Mitteilungen aus den Orientalischen Sammlungen, Heft
XXV; Ausgrabungen in Sendschirli IV, Konigliche Museum, Berlin 1911; 74C, after Loud
(p. 87) by permission of the Oriental Institute, University of Chicago; 76c, after Schmidt
(p. 88) by permission of the Oriental Institute, University of Chicago; 77a, B, Oriental
Institute, University of Chicago; 77c, from Ghirshman, 1954 (p. 87); 83, after Lloyd,
1956, and Puchstein (p. 87); 83B, after Gurney and Puchstein (p. 87); 83c, Oriental Insti-
tute, University of Chicago; 83p, after K. Bittel, R. Naumann, H. Otto, Yazilikaya,
Leipzig 1941; 83E, after K. Bittel, Die Ruinen von Bogazkéy, Berlin 1937.

GREEK ARCHITECTURE
998, after Sir Arthur Evans (p. 160, Macmillan); 100A, B, after Dinsmoor (p. 158, Batsford)
and Piet de Jong; 100c, after Lawrence (p. 161); 103A, Agora Excavations, American
School of Classical Studies, Athens/photo Alison Frantz; 106a, Metropolitan Museum of
Art, New York, Dodge Fund, 1930; 106B, model of the reconstruction in the Wellcome
Historical Medical Museum; 109, in part after Dinsmoor (p. 158, Batsford), and T.
Wiegand, Achter vorldufiger Bericht itber die von den Staatlichen Museenin Milet und Didyma
unternommenen Ausgrabungen, Berlin 1924; 110F, after Dinsmoor (p. 158, Batsford); 117E,
after Fiirtwangler (p. 158, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften) ; 118A, from D’Espouy,
Monuments antiques, vol. i (p. 158); 118B, Agora Excavations, American School of Classical
Studies, Athens ;124 B, C, F, in part after Lawrence (p. 161) and F. Krischen, Die Griechische
Stadt, Berlin 1938; 127A-C, 134F, after Dinsmoor (p. 158, Batsford) and Anderson and
Spiers, Architecture of Ancient Greece and Rome, Batsford, London 1907; 135A, Agora
Excavations, American School of Classical Studies, Athens/photo Alison Frantz; 135B,
Beaux-Arts Restorations, Paris; 136, Greek Embassy Information Office, London; 141N,
after T. Wiegand (as 109); 142G, after Dinsmoor (p. 158, Batsford); 144A, J. D. Starling;
144B, Agora Excavations, American School of Classical Studies, Athens/photo Alison
Frantz; 144C, Foto Marburg; 1458, after Dorpfeld (p. 158); 145c, after Overbeck,
Pompeii, 18843 145E, after Durm, Handbuch der Architektur, Stuttgart, 1905; 153A, B, after
Homolle (p. 158) by permission of the Ecole frangaise, Athens, and Editions Boccard,
Paris; 154A, from Wiegand (p. 161, Walter de Gruyter and Co., Berlin); 154B, after Firt-
wangler (p. 158, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften); 158, The Times; 161, R. D.
Gentle.
ROMAN ARCHITECTURE
166A, A. F. Kersting; 1668, Alinari; 1718, Alinari; 172A, B, 182A, from Gatteschi, Restauri
della Roma Imperiale, Rome 1924; 1828, after plan by H. C. Bradshaw from Anderson,
Spiers and Ashby (p. 248, Batsford); 185a-F, R. D. L. Felton; 186, R. A. Cordingley;
195A, after Anderson, Spiers and Ashby (p. 248, Batsford); 196a, Anderson; 208A, after
Gatteschi (as 172A, B); 208B, from D’Espouy (p. 248); 214A, Oreste Onestinghel,
Verona; 219A-C, Alinari; 220E-G, after Pierce (p. 248); 226B, A. F. Kersting; 234C, E, after
Robertson (p. 248), T. Wiegand and H. Schrader, Priene, Berlin 1904; 237A; model by
Gismondi/photo Alinari; 237B, after Cordingley and Richmond (p. 248); 237C, after
Pierce (p. 248); 238A, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; 2414-F, R. D. L. Felton;
245A, drawing by Gatteschi/Fototeca Unione, Rome; 249F, after Overbeck (as I45C); 251;
Anderson.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE : ;

252B, 256A, B, 263B, Alinari; 268A, from H. Decker, Venice, Anton Schroll and Co., Vienna
1953; 2688, C, A. F. Kersting; 269A, Alinari; 269B, Anderson; 270, Testolini.

BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE
and Hudson, London 1959;
273, from D. Talbot Rice, The Art of Byzantium, Thames
Hudson,
274, from Fossati (p. 302); 282A, from M. Hurlimann, Istanbul, Thames and
Powell;
London 1959; 2828, A. F. Kersting; 282c, Mansell Collection; 282D, Josephine
XX SOURCES OF ILLUSTRATIONS

2868, from Schultz and Barnsley (p. 302); 286c, from Gurlitt (p. 302); 287A, Press Attaché,
Turkish Embassy, London; 2878, Agora Excavations, American School of Classical
Studies, Athens; 291A, Alinari; 291B, 292A, from L. Price, Interiors and Exteriors in Venice,
London 1843; 292B, from H. Decker (as 268A above); 294A, from Schultz and Barnsley
(p. 302); 2948, from D. R. Buxton, Russian Mediaeval Architecture, Cambridge 19343
299A, from Gurlitt (p. 302); 2998, Alinari; 299c, Omniafoto, Turin; 302, Spyros Meletzis,
Athens.

ROMANESQUE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

310A, Archives photographiques, Paris.
ITALIAN ROMANESQUE
317B, 318A, Alinari; 321A, Brogi; 321B, Alinari; 325A, Omniafoto, Turin; 326a, Alinari;
326B, Anderson; 3266, J. B. Price; 327A, B, 333, Alinari.

FRENCH ROMANESQUE
3468, Courtauld Institute of Art/photo G. C. Druce.

ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

378, A. F. Kersting; 391B, Radio Times Hulton Picture Library; 395A, Aerofilms and
Aeropictorial Ltd; 3958, Photo Precision Ltd; 396a, c, 400A, A. F. Kersting; 4000,
National Buildings Record/Weaver; 403B, 422B, A. F. Kersting; 428, National Buildings
Record; 439A, B, 440A-C, 441A-F, Aerofilms and Aeropictorial Ltd; 449H, 450B, after
Garner and Stratton (p. 513, Batsford); 453A, from J. Nash, The Mansions of England in
the Olden Time, London 18393; 453B, National Buildings Record; 454A, Aerofilms and
Aeropictorial Ltd; 454B, National Buildings Record; 454c, Country Life; 455A, from
Nash (as 453A); 455B, C, Country Life; 456A, National Buildings Record/photo F. H.
Crossley; 456B, National Buildings Record; 456c, Country Life; 457A—C, National Buildings
Record; 458c, after Garner and Stratton (p. 513, Batsford); 460B, after Belcher and
Macartney (p. 979, Batsford); 462A, Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, by
permission of the Controller of H.M. Stationery Office; 462B, Country Life; 464B, G, H,
after Garner and Stratton (p. 513, Batsford); 464c, after Davie and Dawber, Old Cottages
and Farmhouses in Kent and Sussex, Batsford, London 1900; 464D, E, after B. Oliver, Old
Houses and Village Buildings in East Anglia, Batsford, London 1912; 465A, B, 466A, B,
Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, by permission of the Controller of H.M.
Stationery Office; 467A, J. Allan Cash; 467B, F. C. Morgan; 468, A. F. Kersting; 475A, B,
Aerofilms and Aeropictorial Ltd; 476, from D. Loggan, Cantabrigia illustrata, Cambridge
1690; 477A, B, Aerofilms and Aeropictorial Ltd; 482A, A. F. Kersting; 4828, Royal Com-
mission on Historical Monuments, by permission of the Controller of H.M. Stationery
Office; 4848, J, M, after Garner and Stratton (p. 513, Batsford); 484F, G, H, L, after Davie
and Dawber (as 464c, Batsford); 484N, after Gotch, 1891-4 (p. 979, Batsford); 485D, E, G,
after Garner and Stratton (p. 513, Batsford); 485F, after Parkinson and Ould, Old Cottages
and Farmhouses and other Half-Timbered Buildings in Shropshire, Herefordshire and
Cheshire, Batsford, London 1904; 488A, B, A. F. Kersting; 497M, after Vallance, 1912
(p. 514, Batsford); 500G, after Garner and Stratton (p. 513, Batsford); 516K, after Bond,
1905 (p. 513, Batsford).

SCOTTISH AND IRISH ARCHITECTURE

523A, A. F. Kersting; 524A—c, Crown Copyright, Ministry of Works; 526A, B, Thomas H.
Mason and Sons Ltd.

FRENCH GOTHIC
532A, B, Foto Marburg; 532c, Cathedral of S. John the Divine, New York; 535A, D, 5368,
A. F. Kersting; 539c, Foto Marburg; 546c, Giraudon; 546D, Archives photographiques,
Paris; 548B, D, A. F. Kersting; 554B, Archives photographiques, Paris; 556B, Giraudon.
BELGIAN AND DUTCH GOTHIC
575A-C, Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg; 576B, copyright A.C.L. Brussels; 582,
Netherlands Embassy, London.
 SOURCES OF ILLUSTRATIONS xxi
GERMAN GOTHIC
585A, D, Foto Marburg; 597, from L. Haghe, Sketches of Belgium and Germany, 2nd series,
London 1840-50.
ITALIAN GOTHIC
605A, B, 606A, Alinari; 606c, Anderson; 609A-c, 610A-C, Alinari; 61 5B, A. F. Kersting;
618A, B, Alinari; 619A, B, A. F. Kersting; 619C, 620A, B, 6228, 625C, Alinari; 626a, A. F.
Kersting ;626c, Anderson; 632A, A. F. Kersting; 6328, Alinari.

SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

652B-D, A. F. Kersting.

RENAISSANCE IN EUROPE
664, Anderson.

ITALIAN RENAISSANCE
675A, Brogi; 675B, C, Alinari; 682A, A. F. Kersting; 682B—-£, 689A—C, 692B-F, 693A-F, 694A,
B, Alinari; 697A, Cassa di Risparmio delle Provincie Lombarde; 6978, Alinari; 697¢, D,
Brogi; 706A-F, 712A, Alinari; 712B, Brogi; 715A—C, 720A, Alinari; 720B, Piranesi; 724A-D,
Alinari; 7248, A. F. Kersting; 724F, 727A, Anderson; 727B-D, Alinari; 728A, Anderson;
728B, C, 730A, 736A, B, Alinari; 744A, E, G—J, after A. Haupt, Renaissance Palaces of North
Italy and Tuscany, vol. ii, Batsford, London 19313; 746A, Alinari; 746B, Anderson; 756,
Alinari.

FRENCH RENAISSANCE
764A, Giraudon; 7648, after Ward, 1909 (p. 805, Batsford); 771G, after Ward, 1926 (p. 805,
Batsford); 7768, A. F. Kersting; 7788, Foto Marburg; 778c, D, Archives photographiques,
Paris; 782A, Robin, Richelieu; 782B, 784B, 786A, Foto Marburg; 786B, Giraudon; 786c,
Archives photographiques, Paris; 787A, B, 790A, B, Foto Marburg; 790c, from T. Shotter
Boys, Picturesque Architecture in Paris and other places, London 1839; 794A, Archives
photographiques, Paris; 795B, C, 796B, 797B, Foto Marburg; 797D, A. F. Kersting.
GERMAN RENAISSANCE
810B, 813A, B, D-F, 814A—C, Foto Marburg; 816A, Bundesdenkmalamt, Vienna/photo Eva
Frodl-Kraft; 816B, 819B, C, 820A, Foto Marburg; 820B, Bundesdenkmalamt, Vienna/photo
Eva Frodl-Kraft; 821a—c, Foto Marburg; 821D, from Mencl (p. 825); 822A-D, Foto
Marburg; 825A, C. N. P. Powell; 8258, Foto Marburg.

BELGIAN AND DUTCH RENAISSANCE

826A, B, Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg; 829A, Belgian Embassy, London, Press
Bureau; 829B, 833A-D, copyright A.C. L. Brussels; 833E, F, 834A, Rijksdienst
voor de Monu-
mentenzorg; 834B, 837A, copyright A. C. L. Brussels; 837B, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam/
Photo-Commissie; 837¢C, copyright A. C. L. Brussels; 837D, 840A, B, Rijksdienst voor de
Monumentenzorg.

SPANISH RENAISSANCE
843A, 844A-C, 847A, C, 848A, B, 849A, B, 850B, Mas; 854A, B, after Prentice (p. 862, Bats-
ford); 857A-C, 858A, Mas; 858B, A. F. Kersting; 858c, D, 859C, D, Mas; 860A-£, after
Prentice (p. 862, Batsford); 861A, A. F. Kersting.

ENGLISH RENAISSANCE
879A, Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, by permission of the Controller of
H.M. Stationery Office; 8798, E, A. F. Kersting; 879c, National Buildings Record; 883,
B, Aerofilms and Aeropictorial Ltd; 884A, National Buildings Record; 8848, 887A, A. F.
Kersting; 887B, Country Life; 888a, Crown Copyright, reproduced from the Ministry of
Works’s Official Guide Book to Kirby Hall, 1955, by permission of the Controller of H.M.
Stationery Office; 888B, Country Life; 890A, B, Aerofilms and Aeropictorial Ltd 3 890c,
A. F. Kersting; 891B, C, 893A, National Buildings Record; 894A, A. F. Kersting; 894D,
Country Life; 895A, B, A. F. Kersting; 895C, D, Royal Commission on Historical Monu-
ments, by permission of the Controller of H.M. Stationery Office; 896a, National Maritime
Museum; 8968, 900A, B, A. F. Kersting; 901B, D, E, 902E, F, after Belcher and Macartney
Xxil SOURCES OF ILLUSTRATIONS

(p. 979, Batsford); 903A, E, National Buildings Record; 903B, c, Country Life; 903D,
Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, by permission of the Controller of H.M.
Stationery Office; 907A, B, Country Life; 907¢, National Buildings Record; 908B, A. F.
Kersting; 908c, Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, by permission of the
Controller of H.M. Stationery Office; 908D, Warburg Institute; 909A, Aerofilms and Aero-
pictorial Ltd; 915c, D, A. F. Kersting; 917, after Birch (p. 979, Batsford); 920A, B, D,
A. F. Kersting; 921A, C, E, National Buildings Record; 9218, Royal Commission on His-
torical Monuments, by permission of the Controller of H.M. Stationery Office; 921D, F,
922A, A. F. Kersting; 9228, Country Life; 922c, Royal Commission on Historical Monu-
ments, by permission of the Controller of H.M. Stationery Office; 923, Aerofilms and
Aeropictorial Ltd; 923B, A. F. Kersting; 923c, Royal Commission on Historical Monu-
ments, by permission of the Controller of H.M. Stationery Office; 924A, B, E. J. Farmer;
924D, National Buildings Record and the Wren Society ; 927F, after Belcher and Macartney
(p. 979, Batsford); 933A, Aerofilms and Aeropictorial Ltd; 9338, Country Life; 934A, C, E,
A. F. Kersting; 934B, D, National Buildings Record; 935A-C, Country Life; 936A, D,
A. F. Kersting; 9368, J. B. Price; 936£, Aerofilms and Aeropictorial Ltd; 940A, C-E, after
Belcher and Macartney (p. 979, Batsford); 941A, A. F. Kersting; 941B, Crown Copyright,
by permission of the Controller of H.M. Stationery Office; 942A-C, 943A, B, Country Life;
944A, A. F. Kersting; 9448, Country Life; 944C, D, National Buildings Record; 945A, from
Neale, Views of the Seats of Noblemen and Gentlemen, 2nd series, vol. i, London 1824/
National Buildings Record; 9458, Country Life; 946A, Aerofilms and Aeropictorial Ltd;
947A, National Buildings Record; 947B-D, 951A, B, D, A. F. Kersting; 951C, from Survey
of London, vol. xxvii, Athlone Press 1957, by permission of London County Council;
952A, Birmingham Post and Mail Ltd; 952B, D, A. F. Kersting; 953A, National Buildings
Record; 953B, National Buildings Record/photo Gerald Cobb; 953C, 954A-C, A. F.
Kersting; 954D, 957A, National Buildings Record; 957B, E, Judges Ltd; 957C, 958A, B,
A. F. Kersting; 958c, Raphael Tuck and Sons Ltd; 958D, the Trustees of Sir John Soane’s
Museum; 959A, A. F. Kersting; 959B, National Buildings Record; 961A, A. F. Kersting;
961B, Radio Times Hulton Picture Library; 9628, A. F. Kersting; 962D, British Museum;
965A, after Gotch, Old Halls and Manor Houses of Northamptonshire, Batsford, London
19363 965B, C, after Gotch, 1914 (p. 979, Batsford); 965E-J, after Gotch, 1891-4 (p. 979,
Batsford); 966A-E, after Belcher and Macartney (p. 979, Batsford); 969B-D, after Gotch,
1891-4 (p. 979, Batsford); 971A—D, H, after Belcher and Macartney (p. 979, Batsford);
975D, 976E, after Gotch, 1891-4 (p. 979, Batsford); 977A, B, D, after G. P. Bankart, The
Art of the Plasterer, Batsford, London 1908.

NINETEENTH AND TWENTIETH CENTURY BRITISH

982, A. F. Kersting; 993A, Country Life; 993B, 994A, A. F. Kersting; 994B, D, E, National
Buildings Record; 994c, F. Frith & Co; 994F, Country Life; 997A, from Pevsner (p. 1118);
9978, A. F. Kersting; 998A, Crown Copyright/Victoria and Albert Museum; 9983, E, F,
Country Life; 998c, National Buildings Record; 998p, A. F. Kersting; 1oorA, Sanderson
and Dixon; 1001B, from Pevsner (p. 1118); IOOIC, D, F, from Howarth (p. 1056, Routledge) ;
IOO1E, Country Life; 1002A, R.I.B.A. Library, by permission of C. Cowles-Voysey; 10028,
T. and R. Annan; 1003A, Margaret Tomlinson; 1003B, Architectural Review; 1004A, B, C,
Country Life; 1005A, B, 1006A, Architectural Review/photos Dell and Wainwright; 10068,
Denys Lasdun; r006c, Director of Housing, Liverpool/photo John Mills Ltd; 1006p,
Aerofilms and Aeropictorial Ltd; rooga, National Buildings Record; 1009B-D, 1010,
A. F. Kersting; 1010B, Friends of Lancing Chapel/Sussex Photo Agency; roroc, R. A.
Cordingley; 10134, T. and R. Annan; 1013B, A. F. Kersting; 1013c, The Administrator,
Westminster Cathedral/photo Valentine and Sons Ltd; 10144, Elsam, Mann and Cooper;
1014B, Stewart Bale Ltd; 1o14c, Country Life; 1015A-C, Eric de Maré; 1016B, Country
Life; 1016C, Industrial Architecture/photo Sydney W. Newbery; 1016D, The Architect and
Building News/photo Herbert Felton; 1017B, Basil Spence and Partners/photo de Burgh
Galwey; 1018a-c, Basil Spence and Partners; 1021A, A. F. Kersting; 10218, E, National
Buildings Record; 1021, D, from Survey of London, vol. xxx, Athlone Press 1960, by
permission of London County Council; 1021F, Royal College of Physicians, Edinburgh;
1022A, City Art Gallery, Manchester/photo Elsam, Mann and Cooper; 10228, from W. H.
Pyne, The History of the Royal Residences, vol. iii, London 18193 1022C, D, 1023A, B, A. F.
 SOURCES OF ILLUSTRATIONS Xxiii
Kersting; 10244, National Buildings Record; 1024C, 1027A, A. F.
Kersting; 10278,
National Buildings Record; 1028a, Elsam, Mann and Cooper; 10288, A. F. Kersting;
1029A, B, National Buildings Record; 1029p, Architectural Review/photo Dell and
Wain-
wright; 1030A-c, T. and R. Annan; 10318, Aerofilms and Aeropictorial Ltd; 1032c,
P.A.-Reuter Photos Ltd; 1033B, The Field; 1033C, Architectural Review/photo de
Burgh
Galwey; 1034A, National Buildings Record; 1034B, Architectural Review/photo de Burgh
Galwey; 1034C, Architectural Review/photo Dell and Wainwright; 1037A, Drake and
Lasdun; 10378, J. Allan Cash; 1038, from T. Rose, Westmorland, Cumberland, Durham,
and Northumberland, 1831-2; 10388, from Builder, 29 Sept. 1849; 1038c, A. F. Kersting;
1038D, British Railways; 1039A, B, National Buildings Record; 1039c, Gerald Sanville;
1039D, A. F. Kersting; 1040a, Country Life; 10408, Sir John Summerson; 1040c, by
permission of the British Transport Commission; 1043A, National Buildings Record;
1043B, Fox Photos Ltd; 1044a, T. and R. Annan; 1044B, National Buildings Record;
1044C, Cadena Cafés Ltd; 1045A, B, Eric de Maré; 1046a, A. F. Kersting; 1046B, Archi-
tectural Review/photo Newbery; 1046c, Birmingham Post and Mail Ltd 5 1046D, J. Allan
Cash; 10498, Architectural Review/photo Newbery; 1049C, Daily Express; I049D, IOS5OA,
National Buildings Record; 1050p, Gollins, Melvin, Ward and Partners/photo Colin
Westwood; rosoc, Skinner and Bailey; 1053a, H. Tempest Ltd; 10538, Architectural
Review/photo de Burgh Galwey.

SOUTH AFRICA, AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND

1057, The Michaelis Collection/photo Arthur English.

NINETEENTH AND TWENTIETH CENTURY EUROPEAN

1060, Pier Luigi Nervi/Foto Vasari, Rome; 1069A, J. Allan Cash; 10698, F, Viollet; 1069,
Mas; 1069D, from Pevsner (p. 1118); 1069E, Netherlands Government Information
Service/photo E. M. van Ojen; 1070A, Austrian Embassy, London; 10708, c, Mas; 1073A,
Chevojon; 1073B, copyright A.C.L. Brussels; 1073c, from H. Kulka, Adolf Loos, Anton
Schroll and Co., Vienna 1931; 1073D, Koninklijke Maatschappij tot Bevordering der
Bouwkunst Bond van Nederlandsche Architecten, B.N.A.; 1073E, Netherlands Govern-
ment Information Service/photo Hans Sibbelee; 1074A, B, Lucien Hervé: 1076a, Mies van
der Rohe/Museum of Modern Art, New York; 10768, Mies van der Rohe/Williams and
Meyer; 1077A, Chevojon; 1077B, Stockholms Stadmuseum; 1078, Chevojon; 1081A,
Staatliche Landbildstelle Hamburg; 10818, Chevojon; 1081c, Austrian Embassy, London;
1081D, from P. Lavedan, Architecture francaise, Librairie Larousse, Paris 1944; 1082a,
Mas; 1082B, C, Swedish Tourist Traffic Association/photos Heurlin; 1082p, Striiwing;
1083A, B, Chevojon; 1083c, Bernhard Moosbrugger; 1084a, Lucien Hervé; 10848,
Chevojon; 1084c, Josef Josuwek; 10874, Bulloz; 10878, Viollet; 10884, Chevojon; 1088B,
c, from S. Giedion, Space, Time and Architecture, 3rd ed. Harvard 1954; 1089B, Chevojon;
IO9OA, copyright A.C.L. Brussels; 1090B, Rheinisches Bildarchiv, Cologne; 10914,
Netherlands Government Information. Service/Aero-photo Nederland; 1o91B, J. Allan
Cash; 1092A, Alinari; 1092B, Bulloz; 1095a, Netherlands Government Information
Service/photo E. M. van Ojen; 1095B, Kunstgewerbemuseum, Zurich; 1096A, Swedish
Tourist Traffic Association/photo Wigfusson; 1096B, Swedish Tourist Traffic Association/
photo Crispién; 1097Aa, The Architectural Association/F. R. Yerbury; 1097B, Dyckerhoff
and Widmann; 10984, c, Walter Gropius; 1098B, R. D. L. Felton; 1098p, Netherlands
Government Information Service/photo Rousel; 1099A, Swedish Tourist Traffic Associa-
tion/photo Péppel; 1099B, Dyckerhoff and Widmann; 1099c, Finnish Embassy, London/
photo G. Welin; r100a, J. Allan Cash; r1oon, R. D. L. Felton; r101a, G.E.Kidder Smith;
IIOIB, C, Chevojon; 1102A, C, Pier Luigi Nervi/photos Oscar Savio, Rome; 11028, Pier
Luigi Nervi/photo G. Gherhardi and A. Fiorelli, Rome; 11054, Alinari; 1105, from S.
Giedion, Space, Time and Architecture, 3rd ed. Harvard 1954; 1105C, from L’ Architecte,
II, 1906, pl. x; 1105D, Chevojon; 1105E, Viollet; 1105F, 1106A, Chevojon; 11068, Viollet;
1107A, from Pevsner (p. 1118); 1107B, Bildarchiv Stadt Stuttgart/Ludwig Windstrosser ;
I108A, Swiss National Tourist Office/photo Mischol; 1108B, Junkers Luftbild; 1109a,
Netherlands Government Information Service/photo E. M. van Ojen; 11098, R. JBL, 1b,
Felton; 1110, Pirelli Ltd/Publifoto, Milan; 1110B, Fagus-Werk Karl Benscheidt/photo
Renger-Patzsch; 1110C, Pier Luigi Nervi/photo Moisio, Turin; 11134, Omniafoto, Turin;
xxiv SOURCES OF ILLUSTRATIONS

1113B, J. Allan Cash; 1117, Striiwing; 1118, Netherlands Government Information

Service.

ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

1119, Hedrich-Blessing; 1129A, D, from Sanford (p. 1169, W. W. Norton); 11298, F,
American Museum of Natural History; 1129c, Grace Line Inc; 11292, 1130A, Wayne
Andrews; 1130B, Mrs. Hiram Bingham; 1133A-E, Wayne Andrews; 1134A, from Kelemen
(p. 1169, Macmillan, New York); 1134B, G. E. Kidder Smith; 1134c, Sawders from
Cushing; 1134D-F, from Sanford (p. 1169, W. W. Norton); 1137A, B, Wayne Andrews;
1137¢C, Library of Congress; 1137D, E, 1138A, Wayne Andrews; 1138B, City of Philadelphia;
1138c, Wayne Andrews; 1138D, photo by Abbie Rowe, courtesy National Park Service;
1141A, Colonial Williamsburg photograph; 1141B, 1142A-D, Wayne Andrews; 1142,
Chicago Architectural Photo Co.; 1145A, 1146A, Wayne Andrews; 1146B, City of Phila-
delphia; 1149A, B, Brown Brothers; 1149c, The J. Clarence Davies Collection, Museum of
the City of New York; 1149D, courtesy Supreme Council 33°, Southern Jurisdiction;
1149E, Wayne Andrews; I150A, courtesy City of Philadelphia; 11508, Museum of Modern
Art, New York; 1150c, Chicago Architectural Photo Co.; 1150p, Z, Wayne Andrews; 1150F,
Hedrich-Blessing; 1153A, U.S. Department of Interior; 1153B—D, Chicago Architectural
Photo Co.; 1153E, Wayne Andrews; 1154A, Thomas Airviews; 1154B, Charles Phelps
Cushing; 1154c, Empire State Building Corporation; 1157A, Hedrich-Blessing; 11578,
1158, I161A, B, Wayne Andrews; 1161C, Black Star/Armin Haab; 1162A, courtesy of
Johnson’s Wax; 1162B, Ezra Stoller; 11654, c, Wayne Andrews; 1165B, Black Star/Car1
Frank; 1170, Chicago Architectural Photo Co.; 1171, from F. Gutheim, One Hundred
Years of Architecture in America, Reinhold Publishing Corporation, New York 1957/photo
Moulin Studios.

ARCHITECTURE OF INDIA AND PAKISTAN

I182B, 1186A, B, Department of Archaeology, Government of India.

JAPANESE ARCHITECTURE
1220, reproduced by permission of the publishers of Chambers’s Encyclopaedia; 1221,
Ministry of Education and National Commission for Protection of Cultural Properties, Japan.

MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE
1227B, K. A. C. Cresswell; 1236A, B, from Pope (p. 1252, Oxford University Press); 12438,
Radio Times Hulton Picture Library; 1251, A. F. Kersting.

GLOSSARY AND INDEX

1253, 1255, Wayne Andrews; 1275, Public Archives of Canada.
 Stonehenge (c. 1500 B.c.). A photograph taken after
the reconstruction work in 1959. See p. 3

PREHISTORIC ARCHITECTURE

ARCHAEOLOGISTS recognize three main stages in the cultural evolution of man-

kind, respectively known as the ‘Stone’, ‘Bronze’ and ‘Iron’ Ages, according to the
use made of these materials for tools and weapons. The Stone Age was immensely
long, and so is broken down into ‘Palaeolithic’ (Old Stone), ‘Mesolithic’ (Middle
Stone) and ‘Neolithic’ (New Stone) periods. Except in a given locality, no absolute
dates can be generalized for these ‘Ages’, as the rate of progress varied enormously
in different parts of the world. Successively too, Man passed through phases in the
means of gaining subsistence. In the ‘savage’ state, livelihood came from hunting,
fishing and food gathering; in the ‘barbarian’, roughly according with the Neolithic
period, crop and cattle-rearing had been learnt and men could live a settled life.
True ‘civilization’ was only reached when economic and social development had
advanced sufficiently to allow the building of towns and cities, wherein a propor-
tion of the populace could engage in trade, industry and professional pursuits.
These latter employments necessitate records and communication by means of
writing, and writing consequently is conclusive evidence of a community having
reached a civilized state. It is with the earliest civilizations that our History of
Architecture really begins, though account will nevertheless be taken of preceding
architectural developments plainly relating to them. For the rest, there are various
ancient structures or remains distributed throughout Europe which are intriguing,
often impressive and invariably of great interest to the prehistorian but which call
only for brief comment here.
Architecture had a simple origin in the primitive endeavours of mankind to
secure protection against the elements and from attack (p. 2). The ‘savage’ hunter
sought shelter in rock caves (p. 2H), the earliest form of dwelling, and learnt to
A H.O.A.
 2 PREHISTORIC ARCHITECTURE
\
y

e : :

te agin lag

: di ai
i

ae ip MONOLITH :
LOCMARIAKER: BRITTANY
: JURA : SCOTLAND
Ses i laneMy

Uff
we
Oy
y i ( Bie

dE gh er es
al
ry :
UES
Mi,
AS ig le aaany iptainestetonA
Hf hy
Mlesi
: vat
m Neg Satie AE hy i hes Mons.
valli all sty
‘ ven awk crs
‘ c ta dt oe a

(GSTONEHENGE (as restoren ovwarniee) Uj

Vay MiP PIE as SARS)

DOLMEN:NP REGNIER: SAVOY

4 gs 4\ | WV, Y

YU
li, Ima 4 OY | Ait
AW VAG Bl s
A IE |
eaten
LY, val gS id
“red
Ba) i Aili &
Sey
“a
THE CAVE
= ae? A
 PREHISTORIC ARCHITECTURE 3

build huts of reeds, rushes and wattle-and-daub or tents of saplings sheathed in

bark, skins, turves or brushwood. The counterparts of these can still be found in
use to-day (p. 2A, C, J). Some such types served the ‘barbarian’ too, with his
flocks and herds, and crystallized into rectangular or round houses (p. 2D, E) of stone,
clay or timber in the settlements which he established near his crops. Remains have
been recovered of ancient timber-framed houses in compact ‘Lake Villages’, built
on piles, in Switzerland and elsewhere, including Glastonbury and other places in
England. When towns developed, houses had to be adapted to urban conditions;
more solidly built, crowded together and rising to two or more storeys.
But it is remarkable that once the problem of shelter and subsistence had been
effectively solved, communal effort was increasingly devoted to other than purely
material ends. Taming the landscape, ensuring water supplies and building forti-
fications might be necessities of communal life, but after these, the greatest achieve-
ments of rising civilizations usually were works of a sacred character, places of
worship or tombs. Thus the majority of the chief prehistoric building-remains in
Europe have a religious connection. Many are ‘megalithic’, built of massive stones
of astounding size when one considers that each was shaped with the most primi-
tive of stone or bronze tools and hauled and raised with next to nothing in the way
of mechanical tackle. Most of those belonging to tombs and now free-standing
were once part of round or long ‘barrows’ (tumuli), earthen mounds containing
upright and lintel stones forming chambers for consecutive burials of several to a
couple of hundred persons. The surviving megaliths commonly are called ‘dolmens’
(p. 2F) or ‘cromlechs’. Barrows vary greatly in size. Those with chambers, which
were of different types, date from the late third or early second millennium B.c. In
Britain, unchambered round barrows continued to be built until late Saxon times.
Isolated great upright stones, ‘monoliths’ or ‘menhirs’, such as those at Locma-
riaker (p. 2B) and Carnac, in Brittany (the latter is 63 ft high, 14 ft in diameter
and weighs 260 tons), perhaps were religious monuments. The famous Bronze Age
stone circles at Avebury (c. 1800 B.c.) and Stonehenge (c. 1500 B.C.), in Wiltshire,
almost certainly were sacred structures. At Stonehenge, four concentric rings of
upright stones surround a sandstone altar slab (pp. I, 2G). The outer ring, 106 ft in
diameter, comprises thirty massive sarsens (local stone), tenoned at the head into
lintels dovetailed continuously together. The next ring is of much smaller ‘blue
stones’ brought from the Prescelly Hills in Wales. The inner circuits are horseshoe-
shaped, the one made up of five enormous sarsen trilithons of graduated height,
and the innermost of small stones again of Prescelly origin. Another type of
megalithic sacred monument is the ‘Stone Row’, well represented by the extensive
remains at Carnac, Brittany, where some 3,000 stones stand spaced apart in ten to
thirteen lines stretching for about three miles.
The above-mentioned prehistoric remains show little constructive development
or sequence. Historic architecture, to which we now turn, while waxing and waning
in virility, yet followed a continuous evolutionary course. The ancient styles of
. Egypt and Mesopotamia generated the succession in Western Asia, North Africa,
Europe and the New World on the one hand (Part I), and on the other, contributed
to the styles of the East (Part II). Muslim architecture bracketed West and East,
but as its relationship with the East was the more persistent, it is included with the
latter group.
4 PREHISTORIC ARCHITECTURE

REFERENCE BOOKS
CHILDE, V. GORDON. The Dawn of European Civilisation. London, 1950.
—. Progress and Archaeology. London, 1945.
—. What Happened in History. Pelican Books, Harmondsworth, 1942.
GARNIER, C. and AMMANN, A. L’Habitation humaine—préhistorique et historique. Paris,
1892.
GRINSELL,L.V. The Ancient Burial Mounds of England. London, 1936.
HAWKES, C. and J. Prehistoric Britain. Pelican Books, Harmondsworth, 1949.
PIGGOTT, S. British Prehistory. London, 1949.
le ROVZIC,Z. Les Monuments megalithiques de Carnac et de Locmariaquer. Paris, 1931.
VIOLLET-LE-DUC,E.E. The Habitations of Man in all Ages. Trans. B. Bucknall. London,
1876,
 PART I

Ancient Architecture
and the Western Succession

INTRODUCTION

THE History of Architecture is a record of continuous evolution, beginning with

the simple and massive forms of Egypt and Mesopotamia, followed by the more
highly developed temple-building of Greece; passing through the complex types of
‘Imperial Rome, with her multitudinous public needs, and also through the ages
of Christendom, when faith and fear reared cathedrals and castles, until the men of
the Renaissance reverted to the Classic types for the varied buildings of this great
period in human development. Architecture, striding down the ages, was evolved,
moulded, and adapted to meet the changing needs of nations in their religious,
political, and domestic development. A glance along the perspective of past ages
reveals architecture as a lithic history of social conditions, progress, and religion,
and of events which are landmarks in the history of mankind; for as architecture is
in all periods intimately connected with national life, the genius of a nation is un-
mistakably stamped on its architectural monuments, whether they are Egyptian,
Greek, Roman, Mediaeval, or Renaissance. Throughout the history of the human
race, architecture, the mother of all arts, has supplied shrines for religion, homes
for the living, and monuments for the dead.
The architecture of Egypt is characterized by massive walls and sturdy, close-
spaced columns carrying stone lintels which, in their turn, support a flat roof. The
Pyramids, which are amongst the oldest monuments in stone, were the outcome of
that insistent belief in a future life which was the governing idea of the religion of
the Egyptians, who also believed that the preservation of the body was essential to
secure the immortality of the soul. The Pharaohs therefore reared, as royal fort-
resses for their mummified bodies, those stupendous mounds of masonry which,
even in these days of engineering skill, remain a wonder to the world. Pyramids
and mastabas reveal the Egyptian belief in a future state; while temples, with their
courts guarded by enclosing walls, are the outward and material expression of the
supremacy of a powerful priesthood, with its traditional and mystical religious
rites. Temples, approached along imposing avenues of sphinxes, alike in their
sombre, eerie interiors and forbidding aspect, tell of the exclusiveness of the
Egyptian religion; for they were not places of worship for the people, but rather
sanctuaries for kings and priests. These colossal monuments reveal not only the
religious faith, but also the social and industrial conditions of the land of the
Pharaohs in those far-off days; for such massive buildings would have been impos-
sible without a despotic government commanding the labour of a teeming popula-
tion of peasants and captives.
 INTRODUCTION TO PART I

Great Temple of Ammon, Karnak: view across Hypostyle Hall,

showing clear-story lighting (1312-1301 B.C.). See p. 39
 INTRODUCTION TO PART I 7
The architecture of Western Asia equally reflects national characteristics and
indicates that the Babylonians were an industrious and superstitious agricultural
people, while the Assyrians and Persians were warriors and huntsmen, more con-
cerned with material than spiritual matters. The Babylonians laboured arduously
in servile fear of awesome gods, erecting vast temple-terraces and artificial moun-
tains in diminishing stages, from the summit of which astrologer-priests consulted
the starry vault of heaven; for their aggressive leaders the Assyrians and Persians
built lordly palaces on elevated platforms, decorated with mural sculptures of
hunting, fighting and ceremonies of state, in preference to stupendous temples and
tombs for guarding spiritual mysteries. The development of brick construction in
Babylonia, due to the absence of stone, led to the evolution of arch, vault and dome
instead of the simple trabeated systems adopted in Egypt and upland Persia, where
stone was readily available. The influence of Egypt, Mesopotamia and Persia upon
the architecture of Greece is readily traceable.
The architecture of Greece reflects each stage of Greek history with remarkable
accuracy. Buildings of the ‘Aegean’ period indicate the adventurous and progres-
sive character of the early inhabitants of Crete, the neighbouring islands and the
mainland; but it was after a Dark Age of some five centuries that, with the Hellenic
period, there was ushered in the most refined architecture and sculpture the world
has ever seen, and this was concurrent with similar developments in literature and
political institutions. Greece has, indeed, been the source of the highest artistic
inspiration, and her architecture has influenced all styles almost down to our own
day. The religion of the Greeks naturally engendered a desire to erect stately
temples, and the national exultation at the final defeat of the Persians at Marathon
and Salamis found expression in the building of many fine temples in the fifty
years following the overthrow of their enemies. The world-famous buildings on
the Acropolis were completed during the rule of Pericles (444-429 B.C.), a period
which marked the climax of Athenian prosperity, art, and culture. Whereas Egyp-
tian temples were royal monuments with high forbidding walls to hide the mys-
terious halls from the public gaze, Greek temples, on the other hand, were public
monuments with only a small naos for the god, surrounded by open colonnades set
out with all the beauty of column, entablature, and sculptured pediment in full
view of the whole people. Egyptian temples were a royal prerogative; Greek
temples were the peoples’ patrimony. Greek national games and festivals encour-
aged literature, music, and the drama, and these were responsible for the erection
of stadia, palaestra, and theatres. The record in architecture of historical events
can also be traced beyond the confines of Greece and her colonies even to Northern
India, where the influence of Hellenic art is manifest in the architecture, which in
its turn influenced Muslim art. The Greek type of architecture is a development
from a wooden structure of upright posts supporting beams and sloping rafters.
This primitive timber architecture was reproduced in stone, and remained simple
in character until the qualities inherent in stone resulted in further developments.
The subtle artistic sense of the Greeks led them to make full use of the clear, shin-
ing atmosphere and fine-grained marble of their native country to produce delicacy
of outline, while their technical skill is seen in the perfect proportions and refined
treatment which are the distinguishing characteristics of that marvellous architec-
ture which has never since been equalled. Two versions of the column and entabla-
ture were elaborated, the Doric of the western and the Ionic of the eastern Greek
territories, and from the latter evolved a third, the Corinthian (p. 96). The three
are known as ‘Orders of Architecture’. In the Hellenistic period which followed,
many fresh building-types were developed, and building procedure was simplified
by the improvement of hoisting tackle and the invention of the roof truss, which
8 INTRODUCTION TO PART I

made it possible to span large unimpeded spaces. Buildings became more complex,
and new civic developments were formally planned. It was Hellenistic rather than
Hellenic architecture that the Romans imitated, especially after 146 B.c., when
Greece became a Roman province.
The architecture of Rome was influenced by the masoncraft of their forerunners,
the Etruscans, and combined the use of the arch with that of the column. Though
the Romans initiated the use of column and entablature as decorative facings to
piers with semicircular arches, they still used columns constructively, as in the
magnificent colonnades of forums, palaces, and temples. Social and political
development among the Romans is displayed in the variety and monumental
nature of their buildings, for, in addition to stately temples adorned with fine
sculpture, there were public buildings of complicated construction designed for
many purposes. Imperial palaces on an immense scale tell of the magnificence
and luxury of the Roman court; while superbly decorated private houses, as at
Pompeii, indicate the importance of the home under the patria potestas, which was
the basis of Roman law. The Roman love of justice is also evident in the numerous
basilicas or courts of law; while theatres indicate a different idea of the drama from
that of the Greeks. Amphitheatres were a new departure built for contests between
men and wild beasts, and they bear witness to that coarseness yet strength of char-
acter which enabled the Romans to bring the whole of the then-known world
under their domination; while the great ‘thermae’ are evidences of the luxury
which contributed to the decline and fall of the Empire. The great Roman roads
and triumphal arches in various parts of Europe are permanent expressions of
Roman power and dominion. Further, by the use of the newly-invented concrete
and by the employment of arch, vault and dome, the Romans were largely inde-
pendent of local building methods, and thus the architecture of Rome was repro-
duced in all parts of her Empire, and became the foundation of all European
architecture. The decadence of Rome, faithfully portrayed in her later architecture,
culminated in her final loss of world power; thus was closed a great chapter both in
civilization and architecture.
A change was now gradually initiated by the introduction of Christianity, a new
force in the world’s history. The Christian faith was first spread throughout the
Roman Empire by means of the military highways, and the Christian propaganda
was carried from its birthplace in Judaea, first to Rome and then out from this
centre to the extremities of the civilized world. The establishment of Christianity
as the State religion resulted in the construction in Rome of over thirty churches
of the basilican type. These churches, while retaining pagan architectural features,
were gradually modified to meet the requirements of the new religion. A new
direction was given to architecture by the transference of the capital from Rome to
Byzantium, when a style was evolved known as Byzantine, which reached its
culmination in S. Sophia, Constantinople (Istanbul), and became the official archi-
tecture of the Eastern or Greek Church. This style, like the Orthodox faith it serves,
has remained strangely unchanged even to recent times.
There was a pause in architectural development in Western Europe from the
break-up of the Roman Empire till Charlemagne revived the arts in the eighth
century, and thus cathedrals, churches, monasteries, and castles were erected,
especially during the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth centuries, by the new nations of
Europe in a style which was an evolution from late Roman architecture, and is
therefore called Romanesque.
The religious enthusiasm, manifested in the Crusades, gave an impetus to the
marvellous architectural developments of the Mediaeval period, which were in
their turn evolved from Romanesque architecture, and to which the name of Gothic
 INTRODUCTION TO PART I 9
has since been given. The wealth and power of the clergy and the monastic orders
made the Church the one great avenue for advancement in the Middle Ages, and
this, aided by popular religious fervour, was responsible for the outburst of church-
building in the thirteenth century, when all classes of craftsmen worked continu-
ously on these Gothic churches. A new method of construction was evolved in
which small stones were held together in equilibrium, and the pointed arch is the
outstanding feature of the style. The pointed ‘rib and panel’ vaults, over lofty
church naves, were now held in position by surrounding buttresses and flying
buttresses, weighted by pinnacles; these buttresses took the thrust of the roof, and
the walls, no longer required to support it, could be replaced with huge windows
of stained glass. The development of the style in England clearly shows the power
of priests as exemplified in the plain and somewhat ascetic character of the Early
English or thirteenth-century style; the dominance of the nobles in the more florid
treatment of the Decorated style, and the rise of merchants in the matter-of-fact
yet ornamental nature of the Perpendicular or fifteenth-century style, character-
istics which were surprisingly similar in all countries of Europe, as each of these
classes became the dominant power. Gothic cathedrals hold a unique place in the
national life of the countries of Europe as faithful exponents of Mediaeval civiliza-
tion; for they served as schools, free libraries, museums and picture-galleries, and
in the absence of printed matter they formed the history books, sacred and profane,
of the period. Sculpture and stained-glass windows not only presented incidents of
Bible history from the Creation to the Redemption, but were also chronicles of the
doings of kings and nobles, priests and people, knights and commoners. Periodical
pilgrimages to the shrines of relics and saints, the veneration of the Virgin Mary,
besides changes of ritual, influenced church plans by such additions as processional
aisles and chapels. The magnificence of Mediaeval cathedrals was largely due to
the concentration on them of the artistic energy of the period, instead of its being
spread, as nowadays, over a variety of buildings. On the secular side, the fortified
and frowning castles of the nobles form an eloquent, though silent, testimony to
the power of the feudal system, as also to the unsettled condition of Europe. By the
commencement of the sixteenth century, Gothic architecture, like the Mediaeval
civilization which it accompanied, had run its course and was overthrown by a suc-
cession of events which altered the face of Europe.
European architecture up to this period may be divided into three main types,
differentiated by important constructive principles, viz.: (1) the Greek or trabeated
style, consisting of column and beam, (2) the Roman or composite style, combin-
ing column and semicircular arch, (3) the Gothic or arcuated style, in which the
pointed arch prevailed.
There now came a break in the orderly evolution of architectural forms; but we
can trace the influences which paved the way for the ‘Renaissance,’ that great
revival of old Roman architecture, which naturally commenced in Italy. The new
movement had its birth in the prosperous commercial city of Florence, where it
was fostered by the Medici, and by the writings of Dante, Petrarch, and Boccaccio;
authors,
while it was further strengthened by the newly discovered Greek and Latin
which were the writings of Vitruvius. Many important factors
foremost among
The inven-
contributed to freedom of thought and action in an age ripe for change.
helped to
tion of printing aided the diffusion of knowledge; the use of gunpowder
New World, and
change methods of warfare; the mariner’s compass opened up the
in 1453
the immigration of Greeks into Europe after the fall of Constantinople
affected artists,
was also not without its influence. All this thought and activity
Brunelleschi, Alberti, Donatello, Bramante,
such as Della Robbia, Ghiberti,
and a host
Peruzzi, Sangallo, Raphael, Vignola, Michelangelo, Sansovino, Palladio
 10 INTRODUCTION TO PART I

of others. The Renaissance at length entered upon a Baroque phase. The character
of the architecture of the new churches and palaces faithfully reflects these changes
in favour of Classic traditions by the use, in modified forms, of the Roman Orders
of Architecture, hemispherical domes and other Classic features, instead of pointed
arches, intersecting vaults, and vertical features of the Gothic period. This Renais-
sance movement spread from Italy through France, Germany, Spain, the Nether-
lands and England, though variously delayed by distance from the fountain-head.
In France the new style was grafted upon the native Gothic architecture, in
a most delightful and picturesque fashion, in royal palaces, town halls and
country houses, rather than in ecclesiastical buildings, for the churches built in the
Middle Ages long sufficed for the religious needs of the people. The influence of
Italy upon France was the more pronounced because, on the return of Charles VIII
and Francis I from their campaigns in Italy, artists and craftsmen followed in their
train.
In Germany and the Netherlands the Reformation accompanied or even pre-
ceded a fresh building era, but the existence of independent states prevented any
such national effort as in France; although ecclesiastical, commercial and muni-
cipal buildings reflect the flourishing condition of some of the principal towns of
this part of Europe.
In Spain, after the fall of Granada in 1492, and the expulsion of the Muslim
Moors, the country was unified under Ferdinand and Isabella, and the new style
took root, although the Moorish tradition added special richness and intricacy in
architectural decoration.
In England the Renaissance synchronized with the Reformation, and was brought
about by many historical events, such as the meeting of Henry VIII with the French
king on the Field of the Cloth of Gold, and the subsequent introduction into Eng-
land of Italian and French architects. The suppression of monasteries (1536-40)
had brought about the distribution of vast revenues amongst the courtiers of Henry
VIII, and had led to the erection of mansions, and also to the building of grammar
schools and colleges. The Elizabethan period, when England had become Pro-
testant, is marked by the influx, not only of Huguenot, but also of Flemish and
German Protestant craftsmen, who influenced the design of numerous mansions.
The Renaissance style, however, in accordance with traditional English methods,
was only slowly adopted, and the new mansions retained many features of the
castles and manor houses, such as the great hall, long gallery and mullioned win-
dows. They were designed on generous lines illustrating the scale of hospitality
which obtained in the spacious days of Queen Elizabeth. The later Renaissance
period came more definitely under Classical influence, owing to the study of Italian
art by Inigo Jones, and to the work of Sir Christopher Wren in the latter half of the
seventeenth century. After the Great Fire of London, numerous Renaissance
churches were erected for the Protestant religion, which demanded a great central
preaching space, rather than processional aisles. Georgian or eighteenth century
architecture is celebrated for its dignity, grace and charm, and for a unity of expres-
sion extending to buildings of whatever type or class; it progressed from Pal-
ladianism to a spare, light style, with slender components, which especially denotes
the Regency, its concluding, early nineteenth-century, phase.
With the nineteenth century, the Industrial Revolution was set in its course.
Population increased enormously, concentrated in the zones of industrial produc-
tion, where buildings of a great variety of entirely new types were required—social,
civic, industrial and commercial. Ease of transport virtually destroyed regional
character in architecture, as formerly endowed by local building-materials, yet
itself created fresh demands for unprecedented types of structure. In quality and in
 INTRODUCTION TO PART I or

kind, so vast was the building programme that, for a while, utilitarian objectives
prevailed, and function and external expression became almost completely divorced.
For outward dress, old architectural styles were deliberately revived, often on no
greater justification than the predilection of individual architects. Before 1914,
almost every known style had had its vogue. Meanwhile, undercurrents had been
at work. Engineer-architects, with little thought of display, solved their gigantic
structural problems with spectacular success, in wood, brick, steel and, at length,
reinforced concrete; these last and other new materials slowly proceeded to inform
more commonplace structures and to produce their own genuine external character;
enlightened designers progressively brought the new building-types into subjec-
tion and, using machine-age materials rationally, achieved harmonious wholes.
From modest beginnings in the Arts and Crafts movement of the late nineteenth
century, by way of Art Nouveau and a rabid Functionalism, architecture has
achieved a new and cleanly expression in the present century. Steel and reinforced
concrete are its bones, and concrete, brick, metal, glass and a host of other natural
and synthetic materials its flesh. It is not yet mature, nor has it reached whole-
hearted popular acceptance; there are many problems awaiting solution. This
architecture of the machine-age is increasingly acquiring a common complexion
throughout Europe and the New World.
12 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

The Sphinx, Gizeh, near Cairo, with the pyramid of Cheops in background
(Before 2600 B.c.). See p. 35
MEDITERRANEAN SEA i)A
oh
(90 PYRAMIDS
Cot of
nat, A pn GIZEH
“Me
4,
Bubastis
Heliopolis. © Cheopsc

Sakkéra-tyerenis
a Da ri
i Sinat
nanan APS
Fayai S Goscaain Peninsula Chephren

Mykerinos a N
=} +---- ;
aoa Sas
Vi,

Bs Me
NF ie

44, sty,
Ra) == <
\e ~ Wy, >
ie y “ie
ey, =
s
Mastabas and
rock tombs
— Causeways ---—

THEBES

Elephantine if aes
T.of Phulae {= SMedinet Habu

2% Tombs
1 Temple of Mont
2 Great Bemeler
mmon
1500 feet
Abu-Simbel S ube Mules 100
3 Temple of Khons
4 Temple of Mut
Taxon

fie Nae We, F Great Temple

EW. —<—$—
a ——

Ancient Egypt: the Great Pyramids: Thebes

I. EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE
(Circa 3000 B.C.—A.D. Ist cent.)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. Egypt, the land of the Pharaohs, consists of a narrow strip of
fertile, alluvial soil along both banks of the Nile, flanked by shelves of barren land
and rugged cliffs, beyond which lie arid, desert plateaux. In its lower or northern
part, the river divides to form a great delta of sluggish outlets to the Mediterranean
Sea, while to the east, and roughly parallel with its course, extends the Red Sea.
Egypt was the only country of the ancient world which, by means of these two seas,
commanded outlets and inlets for both western and eastern foreign trade. The Nile
itself was of untold value, not only as a trade route and unfailing means of com-
munication but also because its overflowing and fertilizing waters made desert
sands into fruitful fields, and it may truly be described as the rich life-blood which
runs in the veins of Egypt. On its banks therefore, from time immemorial, the
Egyptians sited their villages, cities and cemeteries, and here are the tombs of the
nobles, the royal pyramids and the priest-dominated temples.
GEOLOGICAL. Thenatural products, suchas timber, brick, clay and stone, largely
determine the character of the architecture of a country. Stone is abundant
in Egypt in quantity and variety, and was used not only for buildings and their
14 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

embellishment, but also for vases, and even for personal ornaments, as the country
was poor in metals, apart from copper, gained chiefly from the Sinai Peninsula. Tin
was at length imported for the making of bronze. Iron, extremely rare, was of
meteoric origin, and not mined. For building, the chief kinds of stone were lime-
stone, sandstone and some alabaster; among the harder stones, granite, quartzite
and basalt. Porphyry was little used before Roman times. Foremost in use in the
earlier periods was a fine limestone from famous quarries at Tura and Ma‘sara in
the Mokattam Hills, a few miles south of modern Cairo, but as this was unsuitable
for long beams it was supplemented by the red or grey granite (syenite) found at
Aswan, much farther south. The limestone rocks extend up-river from the Mokat-
tam Hills as far as Edfu, and there are other ancient quarries along the river valley.
Beyond Edfu the formation changes, and at Silsila was quarried much of the sand-
stone of which Ancient Egypt’s finest temples were built. It is partly owing to the
durable nature of these building materials that so many monuments still exist. The
gigantic scale which distinguishes Egyptian architecture was made possible not only
by the materials, but also by the methods of quarrying, transporting and raising
enormous blocks of stone into position. Quarrying was done with copper tools and
by the use of timber wedges which, when swollen by water, split the blocks away
from the natural rock. Massive blocks of the harder stones were often obtained by
laboriously pounding trenches around them with balls of dolerite, a very tough,
greenish stone. Dolerite also was used for dressing the hard stones. Drilling and
sawing were known from early times. Palaces, houses and most buildings other than
tombs or temples were constructed of large, sun-dried bricks, which, when pro-
tected against the weather on the external face were strong and lasting: burnt bricks
were very rare before the coming of the Romans. There was very little building
timber, but acacia served for boats and sycamore for mummy cases; while the
indigenous date palm, whose fruit is a staple food of the people, was sometimes
used, in logs, for roofing. Cedar and other woods were imported. Palm leaves,
reeds and rushes and similar light materials, used to frame or reinforce mud-brick
constructions, or as mats for such as panels, partitions and fences, had a great and
permanent influence on the form and character of stone architecture.
CLIMATIC. Egypt has been said to have but two seasons, spring and summer. The
climate is equable and warm; snow and frost are unknown, while, except in the
Delta, storm and even rain are rare, and these conditions have contributed to the
preservation of buildings. Such a climate, with its brilliant sunshine, conduced
also to simplicity of design; for as sufficient light reached the interior of temples
through doors and roof slits, there was no real need for windows, and thus unbroken
massive walls not only protected the interior from the fierce heat of the sun, but
also provided an uninterrupted surface for hieroglyphics or pictorial representations
of religious ritual, historic events and daily pursuits. During the inundation (July
to October) the ground could not be tilled, so the vast population was available for
building work. In view of the rarity of rain, roof drainage was not an important
consideration, and flat roofs of stone slabs sufficed to cover the buildings, and
exclude the heat, while the roofs served also for religious ceremonies.
RELIGIOUS. The close connection between religion and architecture is every-
where manifest; for the priesthood was powerful, invested with unlimited autho-
rity and equipped with all the learning of the age. The religious rites of the Egyp-
tians were traditional, virtually unchangeable, and mysterious, and these traits are
reproduced in the architecture, both of tombs and temples. The religion was mono-
theistic in theory, but polytheistic in practice through the cult of many gods repre-
senting natural phenomena and the heavenly bodies, such as the sun, moon
and stars, and by the worship of animals as personifications of gods. Egyptian
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 15
mythology was further complicated by the multiplication of local gods for different
centres. The keynote of the Egyptian religion was that of awe and submission to
the
great power represented by the sun, while the chief worship was for Osiris, the
man-god, who died and rose again, the god of death, and through death of resur-
rection to life eternal. Judged by the elaborate preparations for the care of their
bodies after death, one may say that the Egyptians pre-eminently realized the
truth that ‘in the midst of life we are in death’, so the wealthy built themselves
lordly tomb-houses against the time when they should enter the great land of
silence. The deceased Pharaoh was transported across the Nile to the Western
Bank where was the Domain of the Dead, and the religious ceremonies were con-
ducted in a funerary temple or chapel (p. 241).
In those dawning days of the world’s history in Egypt there was no strict divid-
ing line between gods and kings; no need for the doctrine of the divine right of kings;
for kings were ranked, both by themselves and by their people, as actual divinities.
Often they filled the double function as kings of their people and priests of their
gods, and yet again were themselves gods, commanding priestly service. On the
other hand the gods themselves were invested with superhuman and therefore with
inventive powers, as when the awesome art of writing was regarded as the inven-
tion of the god Thoth. So gods, kings and priests kept sacred mysteries shrouded
from the public vision, and the people groped in darkness and reached out vain
hands to a world outside their own experience, which was only partially revealed
to them through signs and symbols, and against the evil of which they sought to
protect themselves by amulets and offerings. The gods they frequently associated
in triads; thus Ammon the sun-god, Mut his wife, the mother of all things, and
Khons their son, the moon-god, were the great Theban triad; while Ptah, a creator,
Sekhmet, goddess of war, his female counterpart, and Nefertem, their son, formed
the Memphis triad. Other gods were the powerful Osiris, god of the dead; Isis, his
wife; Horus, the sky-god; Hathor, goddess of love; Set, dread god of evil, and
Serapis, a bull-god, representing that strange cult of the sacred bulls. All these and
many more, totalling many hundreds, occur in turn or in combination, and the
unchanging, traditional architecture of ancient Egypt appears and reappears in all
the jealously closed temples, erected for the use of kings and priests in the service
of the gods. The outstanding feature of the religion of the Egyptians was their
strong belief in a future state, hence the erection of such everlasting monuments as
pyramids for the preservation of the dead. The dwelling-house was regarded as a
temporary lodging, and the tomb as the permanent abode. This religious attitude
is typified in the two predominant types of buildings, the solemn and mysterious
temples of the gods and the enduring and tremendous tomb pyramids of the early
kings. Here too is an epitome of the Egyptian outlook: hope of eternal life, the
supremacy of the gods in the hidden world, the omnipotence of kings in the seen
world, and the power of priests in touch with both worlds.
SocIAL. The Egyptian civilization is among the most ancient of which we have
any clear knowledge. Our information is derived from ancient literary sources,
from records on papyri and tablets, but more particularly from Egyptian buildings
and their inscriptions, through which it is traced back more than 3,000 years before
the Christian era. It was the custom to record matters of history on temples, and of
domestic and social interest on tombs and stelae.
Social and industrial conditions in Egypt were largely determined by the in-
flexible rule of an omnipotent government, which while employing large staffs of
trained craftsmen continuously, levied vast armies of labourers for the erection of
monumental buildings when the annual inundations made agriculture impossible.
Prisoners of war were also turned on to the same work, and during the reign of
16 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

Rameses II there were so many captives and foreigners in the country employed
in public works that, as recorded in Exodus (i. 9-11), the natives viewed with
alarm the growing power of these strangers in their midst. The Bible story of the
captivity of the Children of Israel in Egypt (perhaps c. 1360-1230 B.C.) throws a
vivid light on the system of labour, on the tyranny of overseers, on the tasks im-
posed, and on the social conditions of the labourers employed by the Pharaohs to
build these enduring monuments of Old Egypt. Forced labour is written over them
all, and we can picture the gangs of slaves and impressed natives striving in the
stone mines and quarries, toiling on the boats and rafts to drift the building
materials down the Nile, and then strenuously hauling them into position. Social
life is also graphically depicted in wall-sculptures of tombs, such as that of Thi,
(p. 24F) a court official, which portray the Egyptians at war, at play, at the
chase, on the farm and in the weaving shed and workshop, as well as at business.
Craftsmanship was very highly developed, particularly in the royal workshops, and
the Egyptians attained great skill in weaving, glass-blowing, pottery-turning, metal-
working, and in making musical instruments, jewellery, and furniture. The pursuit
of learning, astronomy, mathematics and philosophy was continuously carried on,
especially by the priests, and much Egyptian literature has been preserved on
papyri made from the pith of the once-abundant papyrus plant. New discoveries of
such records, and of funeral stelae, from time to time, make increasing contribu-
tions to our knowledge of Egyptian life and customs.
The kings of Ancient Egypt are known as Pharaohs, a name given to them by the
Hebrews and derived from the Egyptian Per-aa, the “Great House’. The Pharaohs,
like the Colossi of Memnon, are silhouetted against the mysterious desert back-
ground; sometimes they appear as gods or demi-gods, often as mystery priests,
generally as builders, but rarely as fathers of their people. A study of the social
system in Ancient Egypt conjures up a forbidding picture of an almighty Pharaoh,
with his court, officials and priesthood at one end of the scale and the strenuously-
toiling peasantry at the other. Of this system the royal pyramids and the frowning
temples are the outward and material testimony to this day. The Pharaohs practised
religious rites, stimulated the arts, protected their country, waged wars, fostered
trading enterprise, and encouraged industries and handicrafts, but the welfare of
the common people was of less account in all these ambitious undertakings than
the aggrandizement of the great House of Pharaoh. All these conditions were as
traditional and unchanging in their general aspect throughout successive dynasties
as was Egyptian architecture, and both alike were the product of the Nile and the
surrounding desert.
The Pharaohs have been divided into thirty dynasties by Manetho, an Egyptian
priest who, about 300 B.c., compiled a history of Egypt in Greek. These dynasties
are here, for convenience, grouped into three divisions, with dates which are quite
approximate up to 1580 B.C., but progressively more firm thereafter. As is plain
from the remains which archaeologists have uncovered, the Egyptian civilization
was already well advanced when the first dynasty was inaugurated by Menes, who
united Upper and Lower Egypt in a single kingdom.
1. Ancient Kingdom (Dynasties I-X), 3000-2130 B.c. Menes, the first dynastic
king, is reputed to have founded Memphis, at the southern extremity of Lower
Egypt, where it could command Upper Egypt too. Memphis was the capital
throughout the great pyramid-building age, extending from the Third to the Sixth
Dynasty; but from the dark period of anarchy which then ensued, in which the arts
came to be so despised that, for a time, earlier masterpieces were defaced and
monuments pillaged and even destroyed, it was Thebes that emerged, in the
Eleventh Dynasty, as the chief city. During the First and Second Dynasties,
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 17
civilization progressed; the art of writing and the hieroglyphic system already were
being developed. The tombs of the kings and nobles were of the ‘mastaba’ type,
rectangular, with flat tops, and these, like the houses, were built of sun-dried bricks.
In the Third Dynasty the royal mastaba evolved towards the true pyramid, as is
shown by the ‘Step’ Pyramid of the Pharaoh Zoser at Sakkara. This was of stone,
as were also by this time many of the mastabas, which were to continue as the cus-
tomary form of tomb for the less great personages. But it was in the Fourth Dynasty
that, after further experiments at Meydim and Dahshir, the royal pyramid be-
came fully evolved, and the culmination of achievement is represented by the
famous three at Gizeh; the Great Pyramid, built by the Pharaoh Cheops; the
Second, by Chephren; and the Third, by Mykerinos. Many other pyramids fol-
lowed, chiefly at Abusir and Sakkara in the Fifth Dynasty, among which that of
Sahura at the first place and that of Unas at the second are to be remarked. Sakk4ra
was again the favoured location for the pyramids of Sixth Dynasty kings, but in the
latter part of the period pyramids give evidence of a decline, heralding the political
and social upheavals of the Seventh and later Dynasties.
2. Middle Kingdom (Dynasties XI-XVID), 2130-1580 B.c. The Eleventh Dyn-
asty saw a progressive recovery of political stability and of mastery of the arts.
Under Mentuhetep II the country was unified again. He built an elaborate, terraced
mortuary temple at Dér el-Bahari, in which was combined a small, completely-
solid pyramid, raised on a high base, with a rock-cut tomb driven deep into the base
of the sheer cliffs behind. Thereafter pyramids usually were of crude brick, faced
with masonry; and in the New Empire period royal tombs were without exception
rock-cut, secreted in the Theban hills, their funerary temples being completely
detached and standing on the rocky shelf westward of the cultivated land. Amen-
emhat I of the Twelfth Dynasty was energetic and enterprising. He consolidated
the administrative system, made a survey of the country, set boundaries to the
provinces, carried out irrigation, re-opened the quarries at Tura, restored the
temples and founded the great temple at Karnak. Other kings there were, three
more of the same name and three Senusrets, who fostered commerce and built
temples and pyramids; the latter still grand in dimensions but inferior in construc-
tion to the stone-cored pyramids of the III-VI Dynasties. Senusret I erected at
Heliopolis the earliest-known instance of a large obelisk. Amenemhat III, a man
of many parts, fostered art and industry, irrigated the Fayim, and probably built
there the Labyrinth described by Herodotus. To the Eleventh and Twelfth Dyn-
asties belongs a series of open-fronted tombs at Beni Hasan. Then followed five
Dynasties of such confusion that even the succession of kings is uncertain. As a
consequence of a great movement of peoples taking place in nearer Asia at this
time, nomad tribes swept through Syria and Palestine and overran the Delta, and
their leaders became the Hyksos or Shepherd Kings who, though they adopted the
Egyptian language and religion, were so hated by the peoples that there was no
rest in the land until the usurpers were finally driven out at the beginning of the
Eighteenth Dynasty. It was the Hyksos peoples who introduced the horse and
chariot to Egypt.
3. New Empire (Dynasties XVIII-XXX), 1580-332 8B.c. In the two earlier
Dynasties of this period, Egypt was glorious alike in the arts of peace and war. Her
fortunes were varied thereafter, but never again reached the same peak. Amasis I,
founder of the epoch, completed the expulsion of the Hyksos from the Delta and
pursued them into Palestine, thus inaugurating Egypt’s dominion over her Near-
Eastern neighbours. Thebes was the capital, and many buildings were erected.
- Thothmes I (1530 B.C.) commenced those additions to the Temple of Ammon,
Karnak, by which successive Pharaohs made it the most imposing building in
18 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

Egypt, and he was the first Pharaoh to be buried in the rock-cut ‘corridor’ Tombs
of the Kings in the Theban mountains. Egypt prospered under the firm rule of
kings who had now overcome the power of petty rulers at home, established a
standing army, and were following a policy of aggression abroad. A remarkable
figure was Hatshepsut, the ‘Queen Elizabeth I’ of Egypt, who patronized the arts
of peace, re-established religious rites, and built below the mountain-side her fas-
cinating terraced funerary temple at Dér el-Bahari, adjacent to that of Mentu-
hetep II of the early Middle Kingdom. This, covered with coloured reliefs of the
pursuits she loved, gleams like a gem set in the living rock. Thothmes III was one
of the greatest of the Pharaohs and is renowned alike for foreign wars and home
reforms, while he rebuilt and decorated many temples. Thothmes IV (1425 B.C.)
cleared away the sand from the famous Sphinx related to Chephren’s pyramid at
Gizeh, as recorded on the tablet between its paws. Amenophis III built the greater
part of the temple at Luxor, dignified that at Karnak by pylons and sphinxes, and
erected the renowned Colossi of Memnon. Amenophis IV, who in the fourth year
of his reign changed his name to Akhnaten, daringly broke away from dynastic and
religious traditions, deserted Thebes and founded his capital at Tell el-Amarna,
laid out on formal lines and with a great palace and a temple to the sole god Aten,
whose symbol was the ‘solar disc’. A heretic Pharaoh is a striking anomaly in a
country bound by such strong chains to tradition and orthodoxy. The Tomb of
Tutankhamen, who was shortly to follow, was discovered in A.D. 1922 (p. 59).
Rameses I (1314 B.C.), founder of the Nineteenth Dynasty, commenced the great
Hypostyle Hall at Karnak. Seti I carried on wars without and temple-building
within, continued his father’s work at Karnak, restored many shattered monu-
ments, built his great Temple at Abydos and his own sepulchre among the Tombs
of the Kings. Rameses II (1301 B.C.) was called by early Egyptologists ‘the Great’,
owing to the remarkable number of monuments labelled with his name. It is known
now that he was given to usurping the achievements of his predecessors; yet un-
doubtedly he was a mighty builder. He finished and erected many temples, such as
the Rock Temples at Abu-Simbel, the Hypostyle Hall at Karnak and the Rames-
seum at Thebes, but craftsmanship had begun to deteriorate in this and following
reigns. Rameses III (1198 B.c.), second king of the Twentieth Dynasty (1200-1085
B.C.) was a religious devotee who made such offerings to the priests that about one-
sixth of the land belonged to the temple revenues. The name of Rameses was borne
by all succeeding kings of the dynasty, concluding with Rameses XI; their power
waned as that of the priests of Ammon waxed strong. It is significant of the times
that, while the temples of the gods were still respected, the tombs of the kings were
desecrated and rifled of their treasure, and so the Twentieth Dynasty tottered to its
end. Mediocrity, at best, marks the following dynasties of priestly and foreign
rulers, until, with the Twenty-sixth (663-525 B.c.) a period of good government
and trade prosperity ensued, and there was an attempt at revival of the art of the
Ancient Kingdom. Psammetichus I, the first king, completed the rout of the in-
vading Assyrians, and encouraged the immigration of Greeks, who brought in new
ideas. Egypt again extended her Mediterranean trade, developed the arts and crafts
of bronze-casting, pottery and portrait-painting, and attained a high standard in
commercial and legal procedure. Necho (609 B.c.) attempted a canal between the
Red Sea and the Nile, but the undertaking was only completed by Darius (522-
486 B.C.). From 525 B.c. Egypt was a Persian province for about a hundred years
under Cambyses the conqueror, Darius the administrator, Xerxes the tyrant, and
other rulers.
4. The Ptolemaic Period (332-30 B.c.). Alexander the Great, who rescued the
Egyptians from their hated oppressors, was hailed by the priests as the Son of
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 19
Ammon. He founded Alexandria as the capital, and it became the centre of Greek
culture. On his death in 323 B.c., Egypt fell to his general Ptolemy, and for three
centuries the lower valley of the Nile was the seat of a prosperous and powerful
kingdom. Greek customs and methods of government crept in, but the Ptolemies
upheld the gods, built temples of the native type at Alexandria, Dendera, Esna,
Edfu and Philae, patronized native art, and married the daughters of Egypt. The
reign of Ptolemy II is famous for the Pharos, or light-house, the history by Man-
etho, and the production of the Septuagint. Ptolemy III founded the Great
Serapeum of Alexandria, which, after being re-built in the Roman period, was
among the most magnificent buildings of the ancient world. Ptolemy V was so great
a benefactor of the temples that the priests accorded honours to him and his
ancestors in a decree which has proved the ‘Open Sesame’ to our knowledge of
Ancient Egypt; for this threefold inscription in hieroglyphic, demotic, and Greek
writing on the Rosetta stone, dug up in A.D. 1798 and now in the British Museum,
provided a valuable key to those wonderful hieroglyphic records of Egyptian his-
tory. Struggles with Rome were continuous, and on the death of Cleopatra Egypt
became a Roman province.
5. The Roman Period (30 B.c.-a.D. 395). Egypt under Caesar entered on another
phase of prosperity, and many Roman emperors took Egyptian titles and even in-
scribed them, in the Egyptian manner, in cartouches. Thus did the Imperial masters
of the world seek to find favour with this important grain-producing province.
From this period dates the famous ‘Pharaoh’s Bed’ at Philae. Hadrian twice in-
cluded Egypt, as he did Britain, in his Imperial visits. Under Constantine, Roman
control in Egypt extended even to religion, when in A.D. 324 Christianity was
declared to be the recognized religion of the State; the Bible was translated into
Coptic, but controversies and troubles soon overtook the Christians in Egypt.
When Theodosius the Great issued his edict in A.D. 381, decreeing that the whole
of the Roman Empire should be Christian, many temples were either diverted to
Christian use or churches were built within their precincts—a curious mingling in
architecture of the old and the new. Thus a change passed over the spirit of Old
Egypt and dealt the death-blow to her indigenous and traditional architecture,
which no longer served its original purpose and became merely a relic of the
past.
6. Later Periods (A.D. 395 to the present day). The Byzantine Period (A.D. 395-
640). Changes of Empire influenced politics and art even in the distant provinces,
and when Egypt was ruled by the Eastern Roman emperors from Constantinople
(now Istanbul), Christian churches were erected in the Byzantine style, another
mingling of east and west, which has placed domed Byzantine churches side by side
with trabeated Egyptian temples.
Egypt under the Arabs (a.D. 640-1517). The country fell under the influence of
those social customs which are inextricably bound up with the Muslim religion;
conditions which from 1517 onwards were further enforced under Ottoman rule
(Ch. XXXIII).
Egypt then passed in the nineteenth century first under French influence and
later, in 1881, it became virtually a British Protectorate. From 1914 her destinies
were presided over by a Sultan under British protection, and at length in 1922
Egypt became an independent State.
HIsTORICAL. Historical influences, as distinct from internal and social, are here
considered as arising from military and commercial contact with other countries.
It is interesting to observe that historical events are generally recorded on temples,
and social matters on tombs. Under social influences we have sketched the succes-
sive dynasties and have indicated those kings whose personality left the greatest
20 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

impression upon their country. It now therefore only remains to show the salient
historical or external events and foreign wars which were factors in Egyptian
development. The earliest historical incidents are naturally connected with the
land nearest to the Egyptian borders, i.e. the Sudan, the country of the Nubians or
Ethiopians. The Palermo Stele tells us that Seneferu, first king of the Fourth
Dynasty, raided the Sudan and brought back prisoners and loot from that vast ter-
ritory which is the Biblical Cush, and which, during the Middle Kingdom, was
finally conquered and, with its gold, copper and turquoise mines, added to the
realm of Egypt. Mentuhetep IV sent a force of ten thousand on a campaign in the
eastern desert, and a few years later, the masterful Amenemhat I, founder of the
Twelfth Dynasty, subjugated four tribes in the coveted Sudan. His son, Senusret I,
exacted tribute there, worked the copper mines and built a fort and a temple at
Wadi Halfa; while Senusret III finally conquered that country and built forts along
the Nile to protect the transport of gold. The latter also made a determined sally
into Palestine. Various kings sent expeditions to Sinai for copper, that territory
having been exploited by Egypt from early dynastic times. Later, the incursions
of nomadic tribes resulted in centuries of hated Hyksos rule and there were often
two rival kings, till after years of strife the usurpers were finally expelled and
pursued into Syria by Amasis I. He restored Nubia to Egypt and exacted more
tribute, as did also the next three Pharaohs. Egyptian power penetrated too into
Western Asia as far as the Euphrates. Queen Hatshepsut carried out a trade
expedition to ‘Punt’ (perhaps in south-west Arabia) to secure ebony, ivory, gold
and myrrh for temple service and for the embalming of the dead; the story of the
expedition is recorded on the walls of her temple at Dér el-Bahari. The mighty
warrior Thothmes III waged victorious wars in Phoenicia, in the upper Euphrates
valley and in the Sudan, and the treasure he secured was devoted to temple build-
ing, including a great Hall of Columns at Karnak, where his successes are proudly
recorded. So wars went on against Syria and Nubia till Amenophis III, the Mem-
non of the Greeks, declared himself to be not only the conqueror, but also the god
of Nubia. He carried on friendly intercourse with Asia, and through inter-marriage
introduced a foreign element into Egypt, which largely found expression in the
monotheistic tendencies of his son Amenophis IV, later to call himself Akhnaten,
who forsook Ammon, King of Gods, and worshipped Aten as the sole god. Akh-
naten’s religious bigotry brought him into stern conflict with the priesthood, whose
power it was part of his policy to check; but though tenacious in his religious
opinions and gifted as a builder, his rule was disastrously weak, and he came to be
execrated in later years if not already in his own time. He built a fine new capital
at Tell el-Amarna in central Egypt, but while he was busy building it and a
temple for the god of his choice, he lost hold over the Empire in Asia. Years later,
Seti I reverted to raids on the Sudan for gold and expeditions to Sinai for copper,
and successfully clashed with the Hittites, then dominant in Syria. His activities
were emulated by his son, Rameses II, the Great, who after bitter struggles came
to amicable terms with the Hittites over rights in Syria, and joined in a treaty
which brought peace to nearer Asia for some fifty years, the residue of Rameses’
long reign.
Meneptah, who succeeded him, quashed a revolt in Palestine, but found sterner
work in resisting the inroads of the Libyans, on the west. Egypt then suffered
internal dynastic and social troubles for a decade or two. Rameses III vigorously
restored order again, but had to withstand the ferocious attacks upon Egypt by a
confederation of ‘Peoples of the Sea’, displaced from the northern parts of the
Mediterranean by pressure from still farther north. Both by land and sea, Rameses
conquered these militant hosts. Nevertheless, Egypt thereafter gradually declined
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 21
in vigour till the end of the Twentieth Dynasty. Government was poor or bad, and
the populace went increasingly in need, so that in the reign of Rameses IX, tomb
robbery and the desecration of temples were rife. Decadence and the disintegra-
tion of effective control were the keynotes too, of the Twenty-first Dynasty. Then
in the Twenty-second, Shishak I, a chieftain of Libyan origin, ushered in a Libyan
royal succession which, though split for a long period into two overlapping dynas-
ties, endured for over two hundred years. Shishak I, a capable leader, had re-
established Egyptian rule in Syria, Nubia and Palestine, and pillaged Jerusalem.
The Nubians, constituting the Twenty-fifth Dynasty, next seized the succession;
but the Assyrian Empire now threatened the peace of Egypt and Esarhaddon
defeated the Egyptians and took Memphis (671 B.c.), while Ashurbanipal, his son,
invaded the country and sacked Thebes (663 B.c.). The withdrawal of the Nubian
rulers into their own lands left the kingdom to Psammetichus I, founder of the last
notable independent Egyptian dynasty, the Twenty-sixth (663-525 B.c.). Psam-
metichus began his reign as a mere vassal of Assyria, but with the help of Greek
and other mercenaries he threw off the foreign yoke and chased the Assyrians into
Palestine. Prosperity was restored and, again with much Greek help, trade re-
established. This commercial intercourse introduced new ideas, and once more the
Delta, with Sais as the capital, became the centre of Egyptian power. Necho (609
B.C.) emulated his father in supporting trade and briefly re-conquered Syria, but
retired after a disastrous encounter with Nebuchadnezzar. Prosperity attended the
following reigns, and art flourished, emulating the characteristics of Ancient
Kingdom masterpieces. Then, in 525 B.c., Egypt fell under Persian rule. Cambyses
II dethroned Psammetichus III, who had reigned for scarcely a year, and for well
over a hundred years, Egypt was a Persian province, prosperous under Darius,
oppressed under Xerxes the Great, and in revolt under Artaxerxes I. Egyptian
resistance secured eventual success by the opportunism of Amyrtis, the only
Pharaoh of the Twenty-eighth Dynasty (404-398 B.c.). Two further dynasties of
uneasy rule followed, with eight kings in less than sixty years, concluding with the
defeat of the last native Pharaoh, Nectanebus II, and succeeded by a second,
though brief, Persian domination (341-332 B.c.). In the latter year, Alexander the
Great, having conquered Darius III, was invited to undertake the protection of
Egypt and was hailed by the populace as saviour and as the son of Ammon. His
capital, Alexandria, became the centre for Greek scholars and artists, and under
the new impetus, architecture and the arts flourished again.
The first of the Ptolemies, the Greek general who succeeded Alexander, encour-
aged the influx of Jewish traders, and this increased the prosperity of the country.
So the tale of the Ptolemies went on with occasional wars and expeditions, but it
came about that Ptolemy XIII and his wife and sister Cleopatra were, in the will
of their royal father, placed under the protection of Rome. Court intrigues and
trouble with Rome followed, with the ultimate result that Egypt was declared a
Roman province (30 B.c.). So Greek officials gave way to Roman, and Egypt was
exploited as the granary of Rome, while Nubia was invaded for her mineral wealth.
Nero even succeeded in diverting via Egypt the trade from India and Arabia.
Under Nero too, it is said that Christianity first reached Egypt, where it soon
entered on many conflicts and, as elsewhere, suffered many vicissitudes. At times,
many Christian or Coptic churches were either erected or adapted, and by the time
of Hadrian, architecture had assumed a Graeco-Roman style. During the reign of
Constantine the Great (A.D. 324-337) the government of Egypt was reorganized,
and on the division of the Roman Empire, Egypt came under the Eastern Emperor
at Constantinople. Under Justinian (A.D. 527-565), a new and more stable admini-
stration was formed, but in a.D. 616 the country was captured by the Persians, and
22 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

in A.D.640 passed to the Muslims, whose architecture is described later (Ch. XX XIII).
Art in Ancient Egypt continued strangely unchanged through the various phases of
foreign influence from Assyria, Persia, Greece, and Rome; and, through all, the
indigenous architecture maintained that solemn dignity so suited to the immense
stretches of surrounding desert.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
Ancient Egyptian architecture was carried on, as far as the historical period is con-
cerned, from about 3000 B.C. to the first century of the Christian Era.
The primitive architecture in the valley of the Nile consisted of readily-available
tractable materials like reeds, papyrus (now practically extinct) and palm-branch
ribs, plastered over with clay. With bundles of stems placed vertically side by side
and lashed to a bundle placed horizontally near the top, walls or fences could be
made. Alternatively, palm-leaf ribs were planted in the ground at short intervals,
with others laced in a diagonal network across them and secured to a horizontal
member near the top, the whole being daubed with mud afterwards. Buildings
with circular plans could have domical coverings of similar construction, or, if
rectangular, could have a tunnel-shaped covering or a flat roof. The pressure of the
flat reed-and-mud roofs against the tops of the wall reeds may have produced the
characteristic Egyptian ‘gorge’ cornice (p. 55J), while the ‘kheker’ cresting less
frequently appearing in later architecture may have originated in the terminal tufts
of a papyrus-stalk wall (p. 55B). The horizontal binders and angle bundles sur-
vived in the roll moulding of stone cornices and wall angles of the historic period
(p. 55J). A type of pavilion or kiosk which came to have a special religious signifi-
cance in connection with the ‘Heb-sed’ or jubilee festivals of the Pharaohs—though
originally commonly used on Nile boats as well as on land—consisted of a light,
rectangular structure, open-fronted and with a porch carried on two slender angle-
shafts and having a slab-like roof arching from the back to the front. In the Heb-
sed ceremony, held at definite intervals of years in the king’s reign, the Pharaoh
seated himself on a throne beneath such an awning, raised on a high podium and
approached by a flight of steps at the front. Timber, once quite plentiful, also was
used for the better buildings, in square, heavy vertical plates, lapping one in front
of the other and producing an effect of composite buttresses joined at the head
and enframing narrow panels, in the upper parts of which window-vents might
occur. Palm logs, rounded on the underside, were sometimes used for roofs. All
these various forms of construction produced their effects on matured art and
architecture, and apart from timber, which had become scarce by dynastic times,
never entirely went out of use. Stone was not much employed before the Third
Dynasty, except as rubble and as a stiffening or foundation to mud solid walls.
Sun-dried mud-brick walling never ceased to be employed, for it was only for the
finest buildings of religious character that cut stone became normal. Even palaces
remained always relatively frail, for it was the after-life and not the present which
dominated Egyptian contemplation. Made of Nile mud and mixed with chopped
straw or sand, and thoroughly matured by exposure to the sun, the mud bricks were
very lasting. They were large, approximating to 14 ins long by 7 ins wide and 4 ins
thick. For stability, walls diminished course by course towards the top, chiefly because
of the alternate shrinkage and expansion of the soil caused by the annual inundation.
As the inner face of the walls had to be vertical for ordinary convenience, it was the
outer face only which showed this inward inclination, or ‘batter’, which remained
throughout one of the principal characteristics of Egyptian architecture whether in
brick or stone. Sometimes fibre or reed mats were placed between the brick courses
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 23
at intervals up the walls, to reinforce them, particularly at a building’s angles; and
a late development was the use of sagging concave courses, for alternate lengths of
a long wall, built in advance of the intervening stretches, to allow of the drying out
of the inner brickwork, since walls such as those around the great temple enclosures
_ were very thick, between thirty and eighty feet. Though the true arch was never
used in monumental stonework, the principle was known very early on. There are
brick vaults as early as the beginning of the Third Dynasty. Frequently, the arch
rings were built in sloping courses, so that no ‘centering’ or temporary support was
needed, and usually, there were two or more arched rings arranged concentrically,
the one lying upon the other. The Romans adopted the method of building arches
in concentric, superposed rings, though they did not slope them but used centering
in the normal way. The surface decoration of the masonry walls is also held to have
been derived from the practice of scratching pictures on the early mud-plaster
walls, which manifestly did not lend themselves to modelled or projecting orna-
ment, though their flat and windowless surfaces were eminently suitable for incised
_ relief and explanatory hieroglyphs (pp. 54, 56)—a method of popular teaching
which has its parallel in the sculptured facades and stained-glass windows of medi-
aeval cathedrals. Egyptian columns (p. 55) have a distinctive character, and a very
large proportion of them plainly advertise their vegetable origin, their shafts indi-
cative of bundles of plant stems, gathered in a little at the base, and with capitals
seemingly derived from the lotus bud (p. 55G) or the papyrus flower (p. 55C), or
representing the ubiquitous palm.
Egyptian monumental architecture, which is essentially a columnar and trabeated
style, is expressed mainly in pyramids and other tombs and in temples, in contrast
to the West Asiatic, its nearest in age, in which tombs are insignificant and spacious
palaces assume an importance rivalling that of temple structure. Egyptian temples
(p. 38), approached by impressive avenues of sphinxes—mythical monsters, each
with the body of a lion and the head of a man, hawk, ram, or woman—possess in
their massive pylons, great courts, hypostyle halls, inner sanctuaries and dim,
secret rooms, a special character; for typically, temples grew by accretion or replace-
ment according to the increasing requirements of a powerful priesthood, or to
satisfy the pious ambition of successive kings. Greek temples were each planned as
one homogeneous whole, to shelter the statue of a god, and the component parts
were all essential to the complete design, while some of the greatest Egyptian
temples were but a string of successive buildings diminishing in height behind their
imposing pylons (p. 38E).
Egyptian architecture persistently maintained its traditions, and when necessity
dictated a change in methods of construction or in the materials used, the tradi-
tional forms, hallowed by long use, were perpetuated in spite of novel conditions.
It is impressive by its solemnity and gloom as well as by its ponderous solidity,
which suggests that the buildings were intended to last eternally. The idea is not
without foundation when we realize that the avowed purpose of the pyramids was
not only to preserve the mummy of the Pharaoh for the return of the soul in the
infinite hereafter, but also to be the centre of the cult of the royal dead, and, by
consequence, the dominant element of the vast monumental complex.

EXAMPLES

Toms ARCHITECTURE
The tombs were of three main types: (a) Mastabas, (6) Royal Pyramids, and (c)
Rock-hewn tombs. ‘
life,
(a) Mastabas. Since the Ancient Egyptians believed so strongly in an after
 24 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

Bisrere ir sa nen xaos casef arse ace era sezra

GRAVE oe TOMB A
Goops SEC HAMB |
|
6 Sue =
Ff j Uy
Yy Ph _ ELEVATION
H hatte Yj YY Yy
tht tts

y
ne SA |
a8
PLAN (==
OFFERING MASTA BA
CHAPEL AT Giz

LO 7
a
PLAN iS
x
MASTABA at BEIT KHALLAF : DYN 3
}/SECTIO
VIEWNAL ==
Beea| FALSE DOOR 4 , hey GwiOURT
e — 7 SOsPRE
ahh ETRIMASTABA ® {KL (AL a
PF) 4 OFFERING YL BYYi,
i Fee LISES] ANKH Aneta f ROOM tile
D TYPICAL MASTABA (B) (F MURAL DECORATION PLAN MASTABAor
THI
GIZEH DYN 4 MASTABASTHISAKKARA SAKKARA DYN 5
PYRAMIDS AND ATTENDANT BUILDINGS
: a __trsario__ TAIL?
[a PREGINGT
TS TOMB
Suu” JCHAP

IZ YU ne

“6 | Lila
PYRAMID AT MEDUM °
SECTION
LOOKING WEST LOOKING WEST
©«9
INSEPENDENT 4 (J)
TOMBCHAMBERS YW//yW//>
4 7p»,

—Y j
—620'0*-}\-i Le -159'0-——+

PYROF MYKERINOS' =) ‘BENT'PYRAMID: DASHCIR “*US*yAvitez3 f=

GIZEH SECTION 4p, SECTION $
200, LOOKING WEST Y LOOKING SOUTH = ERDABS
eck
petohts
SUP TO ROOF
4 LANDING
NALLEY
y oy j/ J=U i j ee BUILDING

e
(ck Fete y
LEE YY / — =Y aX “ METRESS Ko) Mas eS
N)
e209
SCALE FOR SECTION tookine west MORTUARY TEMPLEeVALLEY |PYRAMID COMPLEX
SECTIONS PYRAMID OF CHEPHREN GIZEH BUILDING? CHEPHREN:GIZEH |PSAHURA :ABUSTR
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 25

they did their utmost, each according to his means, to build lasting tombs, to pre-
serve the body, and to bury with it the finest commodities that might be needed
for the sustenance and eternal enjoyment of the deceased. Embalming was initiated
during, if not before, the Third Dynasty and reached the highest perfection in the
Eighteenth. It seems that in the Ancient Kingdom, the king and other principal
personages might have two tombs, purporting to stand one in the Upper and one
in the Lower of the two kingdoms united by Menes, the first of the Pharaohs. Only
one tomb, of course, could take the real burial and the other would be the ceno-
taph. There is an important early necropolis at Sakkara, and another at Abydos,
much higher up the Nile.
By the First Dynasty, the more elaborate graves had come to simulate house
plans of several small rooms, a central one containing the sarcophagus and others
surrounding it to receive the abundant funerary offerings (p. 24A). The whole was
constructed in a broad pit below ground, the wooden roof being supported by
timber posts or crude brick pillars and the entire area covered by a rectangular,
flat-topped mound of the spoil from the excavation, retained in place by very thick
brick walls. The outer faces were either serrated with alternate buttress-like pro-
jections and narrow recesses—the so-called ‘palace facade’ arrangement, derived
from timber panelling—or plain, and sloped backwards at an angle of about 75
degrees. Such tombs are nowadays known as mastabas, from their resemblance to
the low benches built outside the Egyptian modern house. Closely surrounding
them was an enclosure wall.
Typical of the Second and Third Dynasties is the ‘stairway’ mastaba, the tomb
chamber, with its attendant magazines, having been sunk much deeper and cut in
the rock below (p. 24B). Normally, the main axis of the tomb lay north and south,
and steps and ramps led from the north end of the top of the mastaba to connect
with a shaft which descended to the level of the tomb chamber. After the burial,
heavy stone portcullises were dropped across the approach from slots built to re-
ceive them, and this was then filled in and all surface traces removed. Externally,
the imitation of panelling was usually abandoned in favour of the plain battered
sides, except that there were two well-spaced recesses on the east long side. This
was the front towards the Nile. The southernmost of the two recesses was a false
door (p. 24£), allowing the spirit of the deceased to enter or leave at will, and in
front of it was a table for the daily offerings of fresh food.
It was here that about the Fourth Dynasty a small offering chapel developed,
tacked on to the mastaba, or an offering room was constructed within the mastaba
itself (p. 24c). Tomb chambers were sunk more deeply still, approached by a
short horizontal passage from a vertical shaft sunk from the north end of the top
of the superstructure. There are many such ‘shaft’ mastabas at Gizeh (p. 24D). By
this time the majority of the mastabas were of limestone, which had been used only
sparingly for floors and wall linings in the finest of the brick mastabas of early
dynastic times. With the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties the offering room or chapel at
ground level tended to become increasingly elaborate (p. 24F, G). In the most
sumptuous examples, there might be a group of rooms, within or adjacent to the
mastaba mound, including a columned hall, the walls lined with vividly-coloured
reliefs, depicting scenes from the daily life of the deceased. Important among the
rooms was the ‘serdab’—sometimes there was more than one—completely en-
closed except for a slot opposite the head of a statue of the deceased contained
within. In the offering room was a ‘stele’, an upright stone slab inscribed with the
name of the deceased, funerary texts and relief carvings intended to serve in the
event of failure in the supply of daily offerings. An offering-table stood at its foot.
The Mastaba of Aha, Sakkara (p. 24a), second king of the First Dynasty,
26 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

takes the form of a shallow pit, subdivided by crude-brick walls into five chambers,
the centre one for the body of the king and the others for his intimate possessions.
Above them, the brick superstructure covered a broader area and had twenty-
seven compartments containing other grave goods, including jars for foodstuffs,
ceiled with timber and covered with brick or débris. The exterior had the so-called
‘panelled’ or ‘palace-fagade’ decoration of serrated vertical projections and recesses,
and was closely surrounded by two girdle walls.
The Mastaba K.1 at Beit Khallaf (p. 248) is a massive ‘stairway’ tomb of
crude brick, typical of the Third Dynasty. The stairs and ramp, guarded by five
stone portcullises, lead to a rock-cut, stone-lined tomb chamber surrounded by a
knot of magazines for the funerary offerings. Above ground, the mastaba is plain
and virtually solid.
The Mastabas at Gizeh, mostly of the Fourth and Fifth Dynasties, number
two or three hundred, arranged in orderly ranks, and adjoin the famous pyramids
there (pp. 13, 24C, D, 31A). Fourth Dynasty examples illustrate, on the one hand,
the development of the offering chapel (p. 24c), and on the other, the typical ‘shaft’
mastaba (p. 24D) with deep, underground tomb chambers and a sloping-sided
superstructure having two widely spaced recesses on the long east side, the southern
of which served as a false door (p. 24£) and for offerings.
The Mastaba of Thi, Sakk4ra (p. 24G), a high dignitary of the Fifth Dynasty,
has all the elaboration of its time. A large pillared court is attached to the north end
of the east side, approached from the north by a portico which has a serdab along-
side. A passage connects the court with a small chamber and an offering-room, with
two pillars, lying inside the mastaba itself. This is equipped with two stelae and an
offering-table against the west wall; and south of it is a second serdab, with three
slots through the intervening wall corresponding with the three duplicate statues
of Thi enclosed there. The low-relief sculptures of this tomb are among the finest
and most interesting in Egypt (p. 24F). The actual tomb chamber is below the
south end of the mastaba, behind the west wall of the offering-room but at a much
lower level. It is reached from a passage slanting diagonally to connect with a stair-
way emerging in the centre of the court.
(6) Royal Pyramids. The great pyramids of the Third to Sixth Dynasties are on
sites distributed intermittently along the west side of the Nile for about fifty miles
southward of the apex of the Delta, standing on the rocky shelf clear of the culti-
vated land. Early royal tombs were of the mastaba type, from which the true
pyramid evolved, the most important stages being demonstrated by the early Third
Dynasty ‘Step’ pyramid of the Pharaoh Zoser at Sakkara (pp. 27-30). Further stages
of development are marked by one at Meydim and by two at Dahshir by Seneferu,
first king of the Fourth Dynasty, including the so-called ‘Bent’ pyramid. The finest
true pyramids are the famous three at Gizeh, built by the Fourth Dynasty succes-
sors of Seneferu. Pyramids did not stand in solitary isolation but were the primary
part of a complex of buildings. They were surrounded by a walled enclosure, had
(i) an offering chapel, with a stele, usually abutting the east side of the pyramid
but occasionally on the north; (ii) a mortuary temple for the worship of the dead
and deified Pharaoh, on the north side in Zoser’s complex but normally projecting
from the enclosure on the east side; (iii) a raised and enclosed causeway leading to
the nearer, western edge of the cultivation where stood (iv) a ‘Valley Building’ in
which embalmment was carried out and interment rites performed. A canal was
built to connect the Valley Building with the Nile, by which the funeral cortége
magnificently arrived. Pyramids were built with immense outlay in labour and
material, in the lifetime of the Pharaohs concerned, to secure the preservation of
the body after death till that time should have passed when, according to their
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 27,
belief in immortality, the soul would once more return to the body. Infinite pains
_ were taken to conceal and protect the tomb chamber and its contents, as well as the
approach passages, but all precautions proved to be vain, for they were successively
rifled first in the period of chaos which followed the Sixth Dynasty and again in
the Persian, Roman and Arab periods. Pyramids were founded on the living rock,
levelled to receive them, and were of limestone quarried in their locality, faced
with the finer limestone coming from Tura on the opposite, eastern, side of the
Nile. Granite, in limited use for such as the linings of the chambers and passages,
was brought from up-river at Aswan. Tomb chambers and their approaches were
either cut in the rock below the monument or were in its constructed core. En-
trances normally were from the north side and the sides were scrupulously orien-
tated with the cardinal points. In all known cases, pyramids were built in a series
of concentric sloping slices or layers, around a steep pyramidal core, so that the
whole mass first appeared in step-like tiers; until, in the case of the true pyramidal
form, the steps had been filled in with packing blocks and brought with finely
finished facings to their ultimate shape, at the chosen angle of inclination. Never-
theless, all the inner layers were built more or less at the same time, course by
course, so that as it proceeded, the top was always approximately level. The final
meticulous dressing of the finished faces was from top to bottom, and the apex
stone probably was gilded. The Egyptians did not know of the pulley, and their
principal tool for raising and turning stone blocks was the lever. To transport them
overland, wooden sledges were used, with or without the aid of rollers dropped in
turn in front of a sledge and picked up again behind. Blocks for the pyramids were
hauled up great broad-topped, sloping ramps of sand or earth, reinforced with
crude brick walls, such ramps being placed at right angles to the most convenient
of the faces.
The Step Pyramid of Zoser, SakkAra (2778 B.c., beginning of Third Dynasty)
(pp. 28, 29) is remarkable as being the world’s first large-scale monument in
stone. King Zoser’s architect, Imhotep, was greatly revered both in his own and
later times, and in the Twenty-sixth Dynasty was deified. The pyramid itself
shows no less than five changes of plan in the course of building. It began as a
complete mastaba, 26 ft high, unusual in having a square plan, of 207 ft side. It
was then twice extended, first by a regular addition of 14 ft to each of its sloping
sides and next by an extension eastwards of 28 ft. At this stage the whole was used
as a basis for a four-stepped pyramid, made up of layers inclined against a steep-
sided core, and again enlarged at the same time so that its plan became a rectangle
of about 272 ft by 244 ft. A further enormous addition on the north and west, fol-
lowed by a quite slight one all round, brought it to its final dimensions of 411 ft
from east to west by 358 ft wide and 200 ft high, and added two more steps to the
height, making six in all. In this stepped form it remained. Usually, underground
tomb chambers were finished before the superstructure had been begun, but there
were here two stages owing to the successive enlargements above. A pit of 24 ft side
and 28 ft deep was the counterpart of the first mastaba, approached by a horizontal
tunnel emerging at the north side in an open ramp; but this pit was deepened to
92 ft at the pyramid stage of development, and had an Aswan granite tomb chamber
at the bottom above which was a limestone-walled room containing a granite plug
to stop a hole at the top of the tomb-chamber when the burial had been completed.
the pit
The approach tunnel too was deepened and converted to a ramp entering
at a point some 70 ft above its base. From the bottom of the pit four corridors
running
extend irregularly towards the four cardinal points, connecting to galleries
spur gal-
in approximate parallel with the four sides of the pyramid, and having
system is a
leries thrusting from them. Independent of the main subterranean
28 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

—e
B. Aerial view of the pyramid and enclosure (restored model)

SEESa

c. Processional corridor (restored) D. Angle of great court

Step Pyramid, Sakkara (2778 B.c.). See p. 27
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 29

SIEP PYRAMID OF ZOSER:SAKKARA

EO
WE
rs

miE
1 | —_ Ts)
hon
—_s

2 ‘KHEKER'& COBRA
\p2 CRESTINGS

A Pgs = a

P2 t i a hen
=e 358° O°
|
| F

| | Seine Wess
Pi | :
“a5 _ MORTUARY TEMPLES

i
1
1
1
1
1

Gua PALACE ?tan

4PIE
—)
ENT <®

4 CHAPEL HALL OFF

OFFERING

eis ie PILLARS f] f | |

D PLAN OF PYRAMID «MORTUARY BUILDINGS

0 100 200
PLAN: W.ROOM
FT 0 10 20
METRES So es 530 Mionin2 ssearone
a
f ----- ==== OO SaaS SSS ee ===
|
Sas |
|
l MAGAZINES | =
|
| ale
I
3}
BY
nD

= <A
TEMPLE

GREAT COURT PYRAM CI ial

MASTABA
4 B oO ale
' 2 ae As } vo
TEMPLE COURT ‘ !
| "MILESTONES* | |
7
HALL OF
o 2 ALTAR |
1 za
3 ROYAL PAVILION 1
JEIEEARS cr 5 4"S PALACE” (E) Ii e get | “ .
QHEB-SED COURT al COURT 4
i T 5 "N PALACE"
6 SHAM CHAPELS 1
rast /
( \
)) (/,
4 e 7 TWIN THRONES ' ey \

ATTACHED
~ ft a ~ TY

=NTRANCE G P LAN 0 F FE ET 1 O° 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 > H)COLUMN s

COMPLEX METRES ae ee LL “30° 2 REEDED AT Y

30 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

series of eleven separate pits, 106 ft deep, on the east side of the original mastaba.
These were tombs of members of the royal family. The tomb entrances were sealed
by the third extension of the mastaba.
Surrounding the pyramid was a vast rectangular enclosure, 1790 ft from north
to south and 912 ft wide, with a massive Tura limestone wall, 35 ft high, indented
in the manner of the earlier mastaba facades (pp. 28, 29). Around the walls were
bastions, fourteen in all, and each had stone false doors. The only entrance was in
a broader bastion near the southern end of the eastern face. In the fact that there is
a small offering chapel (with stelae, offering table and a statue of Zoser) and a well-
developed mortuary temple, containing two courts, a maze of corridors and many
rooms, the buildings inside the enclosure show some relation to earlier develop-
ments of the mastaba; but these two buildings abut the north face of the pyramid,
instead of the east as was to be the common practice, and all the rest of the struc-
tures are quite exceptional and unique to this complex. They are dummy repre-
sentations of the palace of Zoser and the buildings used in connection with the
celebration of his jubilee in his lifetime. Most of them therefore are solid, or almost
so, comprised of earth or débris faced with Tura limestone. They are grouped
around courts. The entrance to the great enclosure leads to a long processional
corridor lined with reeded columns—this site provides the only known instances
of the type—which bore architraves and a roof of long stones shaped on the under-
side like timber logs (p. 28c). At the inner end of the corridor is a pillared hall,
with reeded columns attached in pairs, beyond which is the Great Court (p. 29D),
where there are two low B-shaped pedestals, used in the royal ceremonial, an altar
near the pyramid south face and, on the south side of the court, a mastaba, un-
usually aligned east-west. Just inside the enclosure entrance a narrow corridor
runs deviously northwards to the Heb-sed Court, the principal scene of this
festival, lined with sham chapels, each with its small forecourt, those on the
western side representing the provinces or ‘nomes’ of Upper Egypt and those on
the eastern, of Lower Egypt. These virtually solid structures had segmental-arched
roofs; as also had two similarly-solid large halls of unequal sizes farther north, each
facing southwards into its own court and which might have symbolized the two
kingdoms. The fagades of all of them, chapels and halls, bore three slender,
attached columns. Near to the Heb-sed Court, to the west, is the so-called ‘Royal
Pavilion’, within which are three fluted, attached columns. In Zoser’s complex as a
whole, the masonry technique and the almost total absence of free-standing
columns, together with the small spans of the stone beam roofs, indicates the
novelty of stone as a building material at this time. The architectural forms show
clearly their derivation variously from earlier structure in reeds, timber or sun-dried
brick.
The Pyramid at Meydiam (p. 24H) is attributed to Huni, last king of the Third
Dynasty. Though eventually completed as a true pyramid, it is definitely known
that at one stage it was a seven-stepped structure, contrived by building six thick
layers of masonry, each faced with Tura limestone, against a nucleus with sides
sloping steeply at 75°; and that there was then an addition of a fresh layer all round,
raising the number of steps to eight. These again were faced with Tura limestone,
dressed only where the faces showed. Thus both the seven- and the eight-step
pyramids had at the time been regarded as finished. But there was yet a further
development, in which the steps were packed out and the sides made smooth with
finely-dressed Tura stone. Of this ultimate true pyramid, 476 ft square on base
and 298 ft high, with sides sloping at 51°, the lower portion still survives, but the
upper part has been oddly denuded into a shouldered, tower-like structure. The
simple, corbel-roofed tomb chamber was at ground-level in the heart of the
> EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 31
: Pyramid of Pyramid of Pyramid of
Mykerinos Chephren are te

A. The Pyramids, Gizeh: aerial view from S.E., with the Sphinx and Valley
Building of Chephren in the middle foreground (c. 2723-2563 B.C.). See pp. 32-35

B. Tombs at Beni Hasan (2130-1785 B.C.). See p. 35

 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

CREAT PYRAMID UF CHEOPS .GIZeN

SECTION THRO! 4
GRAND GALLERY ON X-X 4

‘ROSZ GRAN GALLERY

oa
KINGS CHAMBER

SECTION THRO’
KING'S CHAMBER

FUNERARY—— | THES:BENHASAN
QMENTE DER EL
f 5

iaise
EA Ui

=ENTRANCES
ih
© TO TOMBS

‘ze

| ENTRANCE
OT en YE

(Breese PLAN: TOMB OF SETI]

A ENTRANCE TO TO
(GQQOr RAMESES IX one
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 33
masonry. Around the pyramid was a stone enclosure wall, 764 ft from north
to
south, by 686 ft, within which were a small pyramid on the south side and a mastaba
on the north. Also, in the normal position abutting the centre of the east face of the
pyramid, was a small offering-chapel, with an offering-table, flanked by two stelae,
in its inner small court. There was no mortuary temple, but a causeway from the
eastern wall led to the Valley Building, now submerged.
The Bent, or South Pyramid of Seneferu, Dahshir (2723 B.c.) (p. 24J) has
the peculiarities, firstly, that the angle of inclination of the sides changes about
half-way up from 54° 15’ in the lower part to 43° in the upper, where it shows
hasty completion; and secondly that it has two entirely independent tomb chambers,
reached one from the north side and one from the west. The change in slope had
the object of lightening the weight of the upper masonry, as the walls of chambers
and passages began to show fissures. The plan is square, 620 ft, and the height
about 320 ft, the materials being the usual local stone with Tura limestone facing,
well-preserved. The tomb-chambers are covered by corbelled roofs with gradually
in-stepping courses from all four sides, that over the lower chamber concluding
with a 1 ft span some 80 ft above the floor. Corbelling, as instanced here and at
Meydum, is thus one of the earliest experimental devices for constructing a stone
vault. Around the pyramid there was a double-walled rectangular enclosure, an
offering chapel and a mortuary temple on the east side and a causeway leading to
the Valley Building. The subsidiary structures here probably provide the first in-
stance of what was to be the customary complement and arrangement.
The North Pyramid of Seneferu, Dahshtr, made after the abandonment
of the Bent Pyramid, was the actual place of burial of Seneferu, for nearby
are tombs of the royal family and officiating priests; also, it was designed and com-
pleted as a true pyramid, the earliest known. The pitch of its sides, however, is
unusually low; 43° 36’, instead of the usual 52° or so, and thus is very similar to that
of the upper part of the Bent Pyramid. For the rest the pyramid is normal. The
attendant buildings are being excavated.
The Great Pyramid of Cheops (Khufu), near Cairo, (pp. 13, 314, 32).
Cheops was the son of Seneferu, and the second king of the Fourth Dynasty. His
pyramid, largest of the famous three on this site, was originally 480 ft high and
756 ft square on plan, with an area of about 13 acres, or more than twice that of
' §. Peter, Rome. The four sides, which, as in all periods with only a minor excep-
tion, face the cardinal points, are nearly equilateral triangles and make an angle of
~ §1° 52’ with the ground. There are three separate internal chambers, due to changes
of plan in the course of building. The subterranean chamber and the so-called
‘Queen’s Chamber’ are discarded projects, abandoned in turn in favour of the
‘King’s Chamber’ where the granite sarcophagus is located. The entrance is 24 ft
off-centre on the north side, and 55 ft above ground level, measured vertically,
leading to a corridor descending at about 26° to the original rock-cut chamber.
In this descending corridor, after the first change of plan, an ascending corridor
was cut in the ceiling, about 60 ft along, rising to some 70 ft above ground, at which
level the Queen’s Chamber was constructed. But before it was entirely completed,
the approach was sealed off and the ascending corridor extended into what is now
known as the Grand Gallery (p. 32D), a passage 7 ft wide and 7 ft 6 ins high,
covered by a ramped, corbelled vault of seven great courses, rising to a height of
28 ft vertically from the floor, where the surviving span of 3 ft 6 ins is closed by
stone slabs. At the top, the Grand Gallery gave on to the King’s Chamber (17 ft 2 ins
from north to south, 34 ft 4 ins long and 19 ft high) which like its vestibule, is
lined in granite. In the vestibule there were originally three massive granite slabs,
let down in slots in the side walls to seal the chamber after the burial. The covering
H.O.A.
B
34 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

of the chamber is most elaborate. Five tiers of great stone beams, nine to a tier and
together weighing about 400 tons, are ranged one above the other, with a void
space between the layers. Above them all is an embryonic vault of pairs of great
stones inclined against one another. This latter device occurs also over the Queen’s
Chamber and again over the pyramid entrance, where just within the former casing
there are pairs of inclined stones superposed in two tiers (p. 32c). Two shafts
(8 ins x 6 ins) which lead from the King’s Chamber to the outer face of the pyramid
may have been for ventilation or to allow the free passage of the Ka or spirit of the
dead king. There are similar shafts from the Queen’s Chamber, left incomplete like
the chamber itself. Built solidly of local stone, the pyramid originally was cased in
finely-dressed Tura limestone blocks and the apex stone perhaps gilded, but only
a few stones at the base now survive. The average weight of blocks is 2} tons; they
are bedded in a thin lime-mortar, used as a lubricant during fixing rather than as an
adhesive, laid with amazingly fine joints. Little trace of the pyramid enclosure wall
now exists, nor does there much remain of the customary attendant buildings. ‘The
offering chapel abutted the centre of the pyramid east face, and the mortuary temple
stood axially in front of it, joined by a causeway which led askew eastwards towards
the Valley Building. Flanking the temple on east and west are two boat-shaped pits
cut in the rock, and there is a third alongside the north flank of the causeway. Whether
these actually contained wooden boats for the king’s transport in his after life is not
definitely known. In A.D. 1954 two more pits were discovered adjacent to the south
side of the pyramid, covered with stone beams as originally the others had been, in
which wooden boats, 115 ft long, were disclosed intact and in a remarkably fine
state of preservation. At a little distance south-east of the east face of the pyramid
are three subsidiary pyramids, with chapels on their own east sides, tombs of
Cheops’ queens.
The Pyramid of Chephren (Khafra) (Fourth Dynasty) (pp. 13, 24L, 31A) is
the second of the three at Gizeh and only a little less large than the Great Pyramid
(708 ft side and 471 ft high), but has a steeper slope (52° 20’). There is only one
chamber at the core, partly in the rock and partly built-up, but two approaches to
it from the north; one through the stonework and the other subterranean, these
joining halfway. Near the apex of the pyramid much of the original limestone cas-
ing is preserved, and there are fragments to show that the two base courses of the
facing were of granite. The remaining buildings of the complex too, are better pre-
served than in other cases. The offering chapel and the mortuary temple were in
the normal positions axial on the east face. The latter, 370 ft from east to west and
160 ft wide, was of limestone, lined internally with granite. Flanking it were five
boat-shaped pits, three on the south and two on the north. It was extremely solid
and barren of features externally. To the west of a great open court, with twelve
statues against the piers between the many openings leading to a surrounding cor-
ridor, were five deep chambers for statues of the Pharaoh, the central one wider
than the rest, whilst behind them were corresponding stores, serdabs, and the only
entrance to the pyramid enclosure. East of the court was a fore-temple, very similar
in plan to the Valley Building, with twin pillared halls and long serdabs on the
wings. From an entrance corridor there opened in the north-east corner of the
block a series of four rooms in alabaster, where there were alabaster chests contain-
ing elements of the viscera, and in the south-east corner, two rooms in granite which
received the two royal crowns. Despite the essential symmetry of the plan, the
entrance was insignificant and off-centre, leading aslant to the causeway from the
Valley Building, which survives substantially intact. The Valley Building (p. 241)
is 147 ft square and 43 ft high, of massive construction in local stone between
granite facings, battered outside and vertical within. In this building and on its
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 35
roof, various ceremonies of purification, mummification and ‘opening of the mouth’
were conducted. Dual entrances lead from a landing place to a transverse vestibule,
and thence to a T-shaped granite-pillared hall, around which were ranged twenty-
three statues of the king, the hall being lighted by slots in the angle of wall and
ceiling (as p. 40E). Off the southern arm of the hall, there are three chambers in two
tiers, while on the opposite flank, an alabaster stair turns through angles to the
roof, cutting across the approach to the causeway in the process. A little to the
north-west of the Valley Building is the Great Sphinx of Chephren (pp. 12, 13,
31A), the colossal enigmatic monster carved from a spur of rock left by Cheops’
quarry-masons. It bears the head of Chephren, wearing the royal head-dress, false
beard and cobra brow-ornament, and has the body of a recumbent lion. Thus does
the Pharaoh himself take the guise of the occult protector of the complex. The
sculpture is 240 ft long and 66 ft maximum height, the face being 13 ft 6 ins across.
Deficiencies in the rock were made good in stonework. Between the forepaws is a
large, inscribed granite stele, recording a restoration made by Thothmes IV (Eigh-
teenth Dynasty).
The Pyramid of Mykerinos (Menkaura) (Fourth Dynasty) (pp. 24M, 31A) is
much smaller than its two predecessors at Gizeh (356 ft square and 218 ft high,
with sides sloping at 51°). Much of the casing is preserved, and is mainly Tura
limestone but includes sixteen base courses in granite.
The principal pyramids of the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties (2563-2263 B.C.), ali
built at Abusir and Sakkara, were inferior in size and construction to those of the
previous dynasty, and tomb chambers and their corridors were simpler and more
stereotyped in arrangement.
The Pyramid of Sahura, Abusir (Fifth Dynasty) (p. 24N), is remarkable for
the triple series of enormous paired-stone false arches which cover its tomb
chamber. It is representative of Fifth and Sixth Dynasty practice in several impor-
tant particulars. Its complex still has the old elements of valley building, causeway
and mortuary temple, but the offering-chapel is now incorporated in the temple.
A subsidiary small pyramid is included in the south-east angle of the enclosure;
this was not a burial place for a queen but had a ritual significance. Relative to the
Fourth Dynasty, there is a considerable increase in the number of store-chambers,
which tend to enlarge and complicate the plan of the mortuary temple. In decora-
tion, wall reliefs are profuse—a circumstance which applies also to contemporary
mastabas (e.g. the Mastaba of Thi, p. 24F). Particularly important architecturally
was the use now of granite, free-standing columns, with reeded or plain shafts, and
lotus, papyrus or palm capitals, replacing the wholly plain and square pillars of
Fourth Dynasty buildings.
(c) Rock-hewn tombs. These are rare before the Middle Kingdom, and even so,
are at that time a type serving for the nobility rather than royalty; pyramids, though
of indifferent construction, remain the principal form of royal tomb.
The Tombs, Beni Hasan, numbering thirty-nine, are of the Eleventh and
Twelfth Dynasties (2130-1785 B.c.) and belonged to a provincial great family.
They are wholly rock-hewn and consist of a chamber behind a porticoed fagade
plainly imitating wooden construction in the character of the eight- or sixteen-
sided, slightly-fluted and tapered columns, their trabeation and the rafter ends
above (pp. 3IB, 32G-K). Some of the tombs, like that of Khnemhetep, have
slightly-vaulted rock ceilings, supported on fluted or reeded columns, and walls
in‘general were lightly stuccoed and painted with pastoral, domestic and other
scenes.
The Tombs of the Kings, Thebes (p. 32L-Q) are in the arid mountains on the
west side of the Nile. They witness a complete abandonment of the royal pyramid
36 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

tomb in the New Empire period in favour of a corridor type, in which stairs, pas-
sages and chambers extend as much as 690 ft into the mountain side and up to
315 ft below the valley floor. The sarcophagus usually lay in a concluding rock-
columned hall, and the walls were elaborately painted with ceremonial funerary
scenes and religious texts. The most important tombs are those of Seti I and
Rameses III, IV and IX. The tombs served only for the sarcophagus and funerary
deposits; the mortuary temples stood completely detached (e.g. the Ramesseum,
that at Medinet-Habu and Queen Hatshepsut’s temple at Dér el-Bahari), sited in
the necropolis adjacent to the western, cultivated land, where there were similar
but smaller tombs of high-ranking persons. The temple of Mentuhetep II at Dér
el-Bahari (Middle Kingdom) is transitional, in that it is conjoined with the actual
rock-cut tomb, whilst also having a small pyramid in its confines.

TEMPLES
Temples were of two main classes; the mortuary temples, for ministrations to
deified Pharaohs; and the cult temples, for the popular worship of the ancient and
mysterious gods. The mortuary temples developed from the offering-chapels of the
royal mastabas and pyramids, assuming early permanence and ever greater import-
ance. In the Middle Kingdom, when royal burials began to be made in the hillside,
they became architecturally the more important of the two elements; and in the
New Empire, stood entirely detached from the then-customary corridor tombs.
Thereafter, their special character tended increasingly to merge into that of the
cult temples, and distinction between the two types was eventually lost. Cult
temples began in the worship of multifarious local deities. The original essentials
were a rectangular palisaded court, entered from a narrow end flanked by pennon-
poles and having centrally within them an emblem of the deity. Inside the further
end of the court was a pavilion, comprising vestibule and sanctuary. Owing to suc-
cessive rebuildings upon these ancient sites, the stages of development are difficult
to trace. Apparently, little but the sanctuary and attendant apartments was being
built in stone at the opening of the Eighteenth Dynasty, but somewhat later in the
New Empire, the influx of wealth and the universal spread of favoured cults
brought the cult temples into full flower. By this time, both mortuary and cult
temples had most features in common, yet still bore a resemblance of arrangement
to the most venerable shrines. Along a main axis, not specifically orientated, there
was a walled open court, with colonnades around, leading to a covered structure,
comprising a transverse columned vestibule or ‘hypostyle hall’ and a sanctuary
beyond (or more than one if the temple had a multiple dedication) attended by
chapels and other rooms needed by the priesthood. An impressive axial gateway to
the court was traditional; it now was extended across the whole width of the court
to form a towering, sloping-sided pair of pylons, with tall portal between, equipped
with pennon-masts, gorge cornice and roll-moulded outer angles. Temple services
were held thrice daily, but none but the priesthood was admitted to them, though
privileged persons might sometimes be admitted to the court for certain cere-
monies. In the cult temples, processions were a feature, particularly during the
periodic festivals. So free circulation was required through or around the sanctuary.
Numerous festivals were celebrated during the year, some of which might last for
days; at times, shrines of the gods were carried by land or water, to other temples
or sacred sites in the neighbourhood, and it was only on such occasions that the
populace in general took any kind of part. The whole temple itself stood within a
great enclosure, and about it were houses of the priests, official buildings, stores,
granaries and a sacred pool or lake (p. 48A).
The Temple of Khons, Karnak (1198 B.C.) (pp. 13, 38E-H), a cult temple, may
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 37

TEMPLE PLANS.NEW IEMPI RE |PTOLEMAIC

SANCTUARY
MORTUARY
CHAPEL
AND ROWAN
uppei A
: TERRACE : QUTER AMBULATORY
{

i APELI? 0- OSIRIS HALL i 5

= HHA bc) OF KNUBIS S SANCTUARIES CHAPEL § CHAPEL
=
) RAMP E HYPOSTYLE HALL co eae ease
Se |
UTER
HYPOSTYLE HALL
No
od
w

CENTRAL TERRACE ote

* es
ike
HALL
:x
TEMPLES ELBE
Bulfeeseseceses}i. [iss 1 DER EL BAHARI *
LowERi| TERRACE ‘| FQ __50___ 10 HYPOSTYLE HALL
© | COURT é
e e

1 e aN iar e
FEET) 10am mary e Wrath @
rea TEMPLE 2SETI ‘|: ABYDOS sae a elec |
SANCTUARY 1) 50 100
TEMPLE n KUM OMBO
SH GIRDLE WALL
SMALLL |
HALLS |
LATORY

COLOSS! OF
RAMESE

ie ) ret 4340"
HYPOSTYLE HALL

ROYAL

1
PAVILION MM @ @c. coLoSsus COURT
@ @ OF RAMESEStl

FIRST COURT

167°0" “ig
GREAT PYLONS oi eae ieee
jae eee OS

pias e CREAT TEMPLE

Qt ABU-SIMBEL
THE RAMESSEUM :THEBES (ROCK CUT)
 ISLAND
(RESTORED)

0,5 10 0 FEET
rg eres fees

TEMPLE Ff AHONS .KARNAK

dt
CLEAR-STORY

LIGHT
CLEAR-STORY HOLES

uy Pye ee

S .= 5 ss

Ana —q (E) SECTIONAL VIEW

CLEAR-STORY BEYOND SACRED BOAT
——————— ==aes OF IF K KHONS

TUL alse [ar

os an 7 A. tee

(FD LONGITUDINAL SECTION

CLEAR-STORY OVER

CH) COURT From ENTRANCE

he
wot

EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 39
be taken as the usual type, characterized by entrance pylons, court, hypostyle
hall,
sanctuary, and various chapels, all enclosed by a high girdle wall. The entrance
pylons, fronted by obelisks, were approached through an imposing
avenue of
sphinxes. The portal gave on to the open court, surrounded on three sides
by a
double colonnade and leading to the hypostyle hall, to which light was
admitted by
a clear-story, formed by the increased height of the columns of the central
aisle.
Beyond was the sanctuary, with openings front and rear and a circulatin
g passage
around, and beyond this again was a four-columned hall. The smaller rooms flank-
ing the sanctuary and at its rear mostly were chapels or served for purposes of
the
ritual. The temple was protected by a great wall of the same height as the halls
themselves, and like them therefore, decreased in height towards the sanctuary end.
The examples which follow are arranged in approximate chronological order.

1. Middle Kingdom (2130-1580 B.c.).

The Temple of Mentuhetep, Dér el-Bahari, Thebes (2065 B.C.) (p. 32F) is
exceptional in that it is a mortuary temple directly related to a corridor tomb. It is
terraced in two main levels, at the base of steep cliffs. The upper terrace, faced with
double colonnades, is approached from a tree-planted forecourt by an inclined way.
On the upper terrace a small, completely solid pyramid, raised aloft on a high
podium, is wholly surrounded by a walled, hypostyle hall which has further double
colonnades outside it. The pyramid was really a cenotaph, for in the rock below it
is a dummy burial chamber, approached by an irregular passage from the forecourt.
In the rear of the temple is another pillared hall, recessed into the rock face, pre-
ceded by an open court from the centre of which a ramp leads down to Mentu-
hetep’s 500 ft-long corridor tomb. Like the Ancient Kingdom pyramids, this
temple had a causeway, shielded by walls, leading down to a Valley Building three-
quarters of a mile away.

2. New Empire (1580-332 B.C.).

The Temple of Hatshepsut, Dér el-Bahari, Thebes (1520 B.c.) (pp. 374,
42A) was built by her architect, Senmut, alongside that of Mentuhetep, of 500
years previously. It is terraced similarly, but her place of burial lay far away in a
corridor tomb in the mountains beyond, and this was solely a mortuary temple,
dedicated to Ammon and other gods. A processional way of sphinxes connected the
temple with the valley. The terraces, approached by ramps, are in three levels,
mounting towards the base of the cliffs, their faces lined with double colonnades.
The upper terrace is a walled court, lined with a further double colonnade, flanked
on the left by the queen’s mortuary chapel and on the right by a minor court con-
taining an enormous altar to the sun god Ra. The chief sanctuary lies axially in the
rear of the upper court, cut deep in the rock. To right and left of the face of the
middle terrace are sanctuaries of Hathor and Anubis. The wall reliefs in this
temple are exceptionally fine, and include representations of the queen’s trade
expedition sent to Punt, and of her allegedly divine birth. Many of the pillars are
of the eight- or sixteen-sided types reminiscent of the Greek Doric.
The Great Temple of Ammon, Karnak, Thebes (1530-323 B.C.) (pp. 6, 13,
40, 4A), the grandest of all Egyptian temples, was not built upon one complete plan,
but owes its size, disposition and magnificence to the work of many kings. Origin-
ally it consisted of a modest shrine constructed early in the Middle Kingdom,
about 2000 B.c.; the first considerable enlargement was made by Thothmes I (1530
B.C.). It occupies a site of 1,200 ft by 360 ft, and is placed in an immense enclosure
along with other temples and a sacred lake, surrounded by a girdle wall 20 ft to
30 ft thick, while it was connected by an avenue of sphinxes with the temple at
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

GREAT TEM PLE, OF AMMON nM:

:KARNAK

Sameer oi {i er qs
AA A eesroren VIEW a:
PIERCED

= ie
ime

(C)ENTRANCE PYLONS (ss exer) | ;

of i

7
AUXILIAR Y
LIGHT-HOLES
(BATHE GLEARSTORY
=
3S te of = ZA '\ | ‘ay mat

TAT IHU

i =a iL Fi :
nig (i
qi
ES ae
aif
Fly
a 2 a |
4 a

WM A :
: iL

(F)SECTIONAL VIEW OF HYPOSTYLE HALL ONa-a

YAM oP Tin

NR—K“@}

sCOURT
CENTRAL
=

EGG THOTHMES |. C:BC.15S30 BSS}RAMESESIII. C-BC.1198

TEMPLE OFIl E==

RAMESES § iv FEET 50 SCALE FOR PLAN [SUTHOTHMESIII.C-BC.ISO4MIDSHISHAK |. BC 950
EEEEAMENOPHISIILC:B.C.408 rapOLENA 0.5
A METRES 0 0 0 0 ISSSRAMESES |, CBCI3I¢ PERIOD
PLAN a(S" 1 CB.CI3I2
RAMESESII,C-B.C.130I
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 41

A. Great Temple of Ammon, Karnak: Hypostyle Hall (restored model)

(c. 1312-1301 B.C.). See p. 39

B. Temple of Seti I, Abydos: second Hypostyle Hall

(c. 1312 B.C.). See p. 43
42 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

B. Temple of Ammon, Luxor (c, 1408-1300 B.c.). See p. 43

 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 43
Luxor. The temple had six pairs of pylons, added by successiv
e rulers, and con-
sists of various courts and halls leading to the sanctuary, and
a large ceremonial
hall by Thothmes III in the rear. A great court, 338 ft by 275
ft deep, gives en-
trance to the vast hypostyle hall, by Seti I and Rameses II, some 338
ft by 170 ft
internally. The roof of enormous slabs of stone is supported by 134
columns in
sixteen rows; the central avenues are about 78 ft in height and have columns,
69 ft
high and 11 ft 9 ins in diameter, with capitals of the papyrus-flower or
bell type,
while, in order to admit light through the clear-story, the side avenues are
lower,
with columns 42 ft 6 ins high and 8 ft 9 ins in diameter, with papyrus-bud capitals
(pp. 40B-F, 55A)—a method of clear-story lighting more fully developed during
the Gothic period in Europe. The effect produced by this forest of columns is most
awe-inspiring; the eye is led from the smaller columns of the side avenues, which
gradually vanish into semi-darkness and give an idea of unlimited extent, to the
larger columns of the central avenues. Incised inscriptions and reliefs in colour,
which cover the walls, column shafts and architraves, give the names and exploits
of the royal personages who contributed to its grandeur, and praise the gods to
whom it was dedicated. In these ancient carvings we find the germ of the idea
which, centuries later, led in Christian churches to the employment of coloured
mosaics and frescoes, stained-glass windows and mural statues to record the inci-
dents of Bible history and the lives of saints and heroes. Thus have the exponents
of successive and diverse religions had recourse to an appeal to the eye for mani-
festing their authority and for setting their religious tenets before the common
people.
The Temple at Luxor, Thebes (1408-1300B.c.) (pp. 13, 42B) though
founded on an older sanctuary, and like most temples, altered and repaired sub-
sequently, is substantially the work of Amenophis III, apart from a great fore-
court, with pylons, added by Rameses II. It was dedicated to the Theban triad,
Ammon, Mut and Khons. The illustration shows remains of the forecourt, with
papyrus-bud capitals and a seated colossus of Rameses, connected by twin colon-
nades, 174 ft long, to a lesser court by Amenophis in the distance. The twin colon-
nades of bell-capital columns, 42 ft high, were the only part ever built of a grand
hypostyle hall projected by Amenophis, or by the last king of his dynasty, Horem-
heb. Amenophis III also built a mortuary temple on the west bank at Thebes, but
little survives except the twin seated statues of himself, originally 68 ft high,
famous from ancient times as the Colossi of Memnon.
The Temple, Island of Elephantine (1408 B.c.) (p. 38), destroyed in A.D.
1922, was one of the small so-called Mammisi temples or Birth Houses which
often stood in the outer enclosures of large temples and were subsidiary to them.
They were sanctuaries perpetuating the tradition of the divine birth of a Pharaoh
from a union of the god Horus and a mortal mother, and Hathor, the mother-
goddess, or the god Bes, protector of the newly born, usually attended the event.
The Birth Houses comprise a single room, or little more, surrounded by a portico
of pillars or columns and sometimes stand on a raised podium, approached by a
flight of steps from one end. Design for external effect is not typical of Egyptian
buildings, but there are instances from the early Eighteenth Dynasty onwards, and
the tendency increases in the Ptolemaic and Roman periods.
The Temple of Seti I, Abydos (1312 B.C.) (pp. 37B, 41B) has two pylons, two
forecourts and two hypostyle halls, and is unique in that it has seven sanctuaries
side by side, each roofed with stone, corbelled courses cut in the shape of a segmen-
tal archon the underside. Another unusual feature of the temple is a wing of chambers
projecting at right angles to the main structure, following the shape of the eminence
on which the temple stands. The historical reliefs on the walls of close-grained
44 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE
limestone are among the finest in Egypt. Seti I built a second mortuary temple on
the west bank at Thebes, his successor, Rameses II, adding the finishing touches
to both.
The Ramesseum, Thebes (1301 B.C.) (pp. 37D, 54H) by Rameses II, is as
typical of the New Empire mortuary temples as is that of Khons, Karnak, of the
cult type, though the differences of principle are not very great. In such temples
the Pharaoh was worshipped and offerings were made, while his tomb lay far in
the mountains behind. The front pylons were 220 ft wide, and led to two columned
courts, the second having Osiris pillars on the front and rear walls; and so to a
grand hypostyle hall, succeeded by three smaller columned halls, which preceded
the sanctuary at the far end of the building. There are no arrangements for proces-
sional circulation around the sanctuaries of mortuary temples. The hypostyle hall
is much smaller than that at Karnak (98 ft by 196 ft), possessing only 48 columns,
including 12 with bell capitals, but like it had an elevated roof over the three axial
avenues and an equally well-developed clear-story. Around the temple, ruins of
the temenos walls and the brick-built priests’ houses, granaries, stores, etc., still
survive. There are fragmentary remains of another mortuary temple by Rameses II
at Abydos; and one by Rameses III (1198 B.c.) at Medinet-Habu which closely
resembles the Ramesseum, and similarly still has evidences of its temenos and
brick-built subsidiary buildings surviving (p. 48A).
The Great Temple, Abu-Simbel (c. I30I B.C.) (pp. 37E, 45A, B) is one of
two rock-hewn temples at this place commanded by the indefatigable Rameses II,
and quite the most stupendous and impressive of its class. An entrance forecourt
leads to the imposing facade, 119 ft wide and 105 ft high, formed as a pylon, imme-
diately in front of which are four rock-cut seated colossal statues of Rameses, over
65 ft high. The hall beyond, 30 ft high, has eight Osiris pillars and vividly-coloured
wall reliefs. Eight smaller chambers open off unsymmetrically to right and left,
while on the main axis is a smaller hall with four pillars, leading to a vestibule serv-
ing three apartments, the central one being the sanctuary and containing four
statues of gods (including Rameses) and a support for a sacred boat.
The Small Temple, Abu-Simbel (c. 1301 B.C.) (p. 45C), by Rameses II, close
to the Great Temple, was dedicated to his deified Queen, Nefertari, and the god-
dess Hathor. The facade here is 90 ft wide and 40 ft high, and comprises six niches
recessed in the face of the rock and containing six colossal statues, 33 ft high; two
represent Rameses and one Nefertari on each side of the portal, which leads to a
vestibule and a hall, 34 ft by 27 ft, with six pillars bearing the sculptured head of
Hathor.
The Rock-cut Temple at Gerf Hosein (c. 1301 B.C.) (p. 37C), is still another
example due to Rameses II. It is of interest in that it retains quite a little of its fore-
court, the walls of which are in part rock-cut.

3. Ptolemaic and Roman Period (332 B.C.-A.D. Ist cent.).

The Temple of Isis, on the island of Philae (pp. 46, 47) marks a
very ancient sacred site. Minor parts of the surviving buildings belong to the
Thirtieth Dynasty (378-341 B.C.) but most are by the Ptolemies II-XIII (283-47
B.C.). The irregularities of the plan are due to piecemeal building. The principle of
arrangement, however, remains much the same as at the height of the New Empire
period, a thousand years earlier—a progressive concentration of effect from outer
and inner courts and pylons to the ultimate sanctuary in the temple nucleus. Such
changes as there are, largely concern details. Column capitals are coarser and more
ornate, varied in design from column to column, and have very deep abacus
blocks; colonnades appear more frequently on the exterior of buildings, their
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 45

i
Abu-Simbel. c. Small Temple, A bu-Simbel
ae “oe S 44 (c. 1301 B.C.). See p. 44
46 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

A. Island of Philae: aerial view from E. when not submerged: Kiosk in fore-
ground (c. A.D. 96); Pylons, Temple of Isis and Mammisi Temple on farther
side of island (283-47 B.c.). See p. 44

B, Temple of Isis, Philae: colonnade in forecourt

 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 47

A. Temple of Isis, Philae (283-47 B.C.), with Kiosk (c. A.D. 96) partly submerged

showing Pylons. See p. 44

B. Temple of Isis, Philae: entrance court,
48 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

A. Mortuary Temple of Rameses III, Medinet-Habu (1198 B.c.) showing

surrounding brick-built buildings in temenos. See p. 44

SiS di aetsas =
SESE atte Se

B. Temple of Hathor, Dendera (110 B.c.-a.D. 68). See p. 49

 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 49
columns linked by screen walls reaching some half-way up the height. Such char-
acteristics are notable in the ‘Birth House’ or Mammisi temple on the west side of
the inner court. Also, in a pavilion known as the ‘Kiosk’ or ‘Pharaoh’s Bed’, stand-
ing on the east side of the island; though this is of Roman date (c. A.D. 96) (pp.
46, 47A). It is roofless, and has four columns on the ends and five on the flanks.
The two portals axial on the short sides are designed without a central part to the
lintels, so as to permit the passage of banners and effigies carried in procession.
The whole island nowadays is submerged during a part of the year, leaving only
the tops of the buildings visible.
The Temple of Horus, Edfu (237-57 B.c.) (pp. 37G, 514, B), is a fine, well-pre-
served example of the period. It was built in three stages, with protracted intervals
between; first the temple proper by Ptolemy III, then the outer hypostyle hall
(140-124 B.C.), and finally the perimeter wall and pylons. It is plainly a processional
cult temple. There is a passage surrounding the sanctuary, which serves also to give
access to thirteen small chapels, and another completing the entire circuit of the
enclosing wall. All the inner rooms were completely dark and windowless. The
grand pylons are some 205 ft across and Ioo ft high. Though in the main the
temple demonstrates the tenacity of the ancient traditions, there are here again
those distinguishing features of the period, particularly notable in the main hypo-
style hall; the foliated or palm capitals, varying in design in pairs astride the axis,
the deep abaci, the screen walls between the columns, and the ‘broken’ lintel of the
central portal.
The Mammisi Temple, Edfu (116 8.c.) (p. 52A), in the outer enclosure of
the Temple of Horus, is typical of all externally-colonnaded birth-houses, and
similar to others at Elephantine, Philae (see above) and Dendera, where there are
two, one Ptolemaic and the other Roman.
The Temple of Hathor, Dendera (110 B.C.-A.D. 68) (p. 48B) is most imposing,
standing in a brick-walled temenos 951 ft by 918 ft wide. Except in lacking pylons, it
closely resembles that at Edfu, and, as there, the hypostyle hall was added to the
Ptolemaic nucleus in Roman times, along with the peripheral wall, which stands
sufficiently clear of the temple to allow a complete processional circuit. The four-
sided, Hathor-headed capitals of the hypostyle hall, carrying a conventional repre-
sentation of the birth-house on the deep abaci above, are typical of the period.
Many narrow chambers are concealed in the thickness of the massive outer walls,
and stairs lead to the roof, where ceremonies took place.
The Temple of Sebek and Haroeris at K6m Ombo (145 B.C.-A.D. 14) (p. 37F)
is peculiar in having a double approach to its twin sanctuaries and two peripheral
processional circuits.

OBELISKS
s, and
The Obelisks, originating in the sacred symbol of the sun god of Heliopoli
monoliths, square
which usually stood in pairs astride temple entrances, are huge
pyramidi on at the summit, which was
on plan and tapering to an electrum-capped
They have a height of nine or ten times the diameter at the base,
the sacred part.
for obelisks was quarried
and the four sides are cut with hieroglyphs. The granite
method of pounding trenches around the tremendous block
by the very laborious
more normal method of splitting
with balls of dolerite, a very hard stone, as the
after soaking,
from the parent rock by means of timber wedges, which expanded trans-
show that obelisks were
was too hazardous for so long a unit. Mural reliefs
river-bar ges, and erected on their foundations by hauling
ported on sledges and
position. Many were removed
them up earthen ramps, and then tilting them into
, and there are at least twelve in Rome alone.
from Egypt by the Roman Emperors
50 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

The Obelisk in the Piazza of S. Giovanni in Laterano (p. 664) was brought to
Rome from the Temple of Ammon at Karnak (Thebes), where it was originally
erected by Thothmes III, and is the largest known. It is a monolith of red granite
from Aswan, 105 ft high without the added pedestal, 9 ft square at the base and
6 ft 2 ins at the top, and weighs about 230 tons.
‘Cleopatra’s Needle’, the obelisk on the Thames Embankment, London, origi-
nally at Heliopolis, was brought to England from Alexandria in 1878. It bears
inscriptions of Thothmes III and Rameses II. It is 68 ft 6 ins high, 8 ft by 7 ft 6 ins
at the base, and weighs 180 tons.

DWELLINGS
Clay models deposited in tombs indicate that ordinary dwellings were of
crude brick, one or two storeys high, with flat or arched ceilings and a parapeted
roof partly occupied by a loggia. Rooms looked towards a north-facing court.
Remains of barrack-like dwellings for workers exist at the pyramid sites of Cheph-
ren at Gizeh (Fourth Dynasty) and of Sesostris II at Kahun (Twelfth Dynasty) on
the eastern edge of the Fayum; and again at Tell el-Amarna, where the Pharaoh
Akhnaten (Eighteenth Dynasty) built his ephemeral new town, occupied only for
about fifteen years (c. 1366-1351 B.c.). Each workers’ establishment constituted a
considerable village, laid out on rigidly formal lines. More freely planned was
a village at Dér el-Medina, constructed for those engaged upon the Theban
royal corridor-tombs, and which endured for four centuries. Though in the
towns even the better houses were on constricted plots and therefore might be
three or four storeys high, where space allowed mansions stood in their own
grounds, laid out formally with groves, gardens, pools and minor structures sur-
rounding the rectangular, crude-brick dwelling, this having its door and window
openings dressed around in stone (p. 52B). Columns and beams, doors and window
frames were of precious timber. Typically, there was a central hall or living room,
raised sufficiently high with the help of columns to allow clear-story light on one
or more sides, for first floors were only partial. Regularly there were three funda-
mental parts; a reception suite, on the cooler, north side of the house; service; and
private quarters. Archaic palaces were faced with overlapping vertical timbers, giv-
ing the so-called ‘palace facade’ effect which left its decorative impress upon fune-
rary stone architecture for some time. Not much is known about later dynastic
palaces, apart from the remains of Akhnaten’s palace at Tell el-Amarna and of
that of Meneptah at Memphis and from what can be gleaned from wall reliefs.
Being largely of crude brick, they have left little trace. Except in size, they re-
sembled the mansions.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. Royal pyramids of the Ancient Kingdom stood in a walled enclosure,
normally containing a much smaller pyramid or mastaba at the south end, and an
offering-chapel on the east side which eventually was embodied in the mortuary
temple which also stood on the east side. A long, enclosed causeway connected the
mortuary temple with a Valley Building where initial burial rites were conducted.
The developed, independent temples of the New Empire and later periods were of
two types, the mortuary type, descended from its predecessor in the pyramid com-
plex, and the cult or processional type, which had its own unbroken history from
the earliest times. The two types had very much in common, and they differed in
many respects from the Greek temple. An imposing avenue of sphinxes led to
the main entrance, flanked by slender obelisks which contrasted strongly with the
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 51

B. Temple of Horus, Edfu: portico with screen between columns

52 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

A. Mammisi Temple, Edfu (restored model)

(c. 116 B.C.). See p. 49

B. A typical Egyptian mansion, Tell el-Amarna (c. 1366 B.C.): restored model.
1. Main entrance. 2. Porter’s lodge. 3. Avenue of small trees in outer court.
4. Private chapel. 5. Inner court. 6. Porch. 7. Room over North Hall. 8. Central
room (clear-story lighting). 8A. Staircase. 9. Women’s quarters. 10. Master’s
bedroom. 10A. Bath room and closet. 11. West Hall. 12. Guests’ chambers.
13. Formal garden. 14 Well. 15. Byres. 16. Dog kennels. 17. Kitchen. 18.
Steward’s quarters. 19. Servants’ quarters. 20. Stables. 21. Store (harness, etc.).
22. Chariots. 23. Tradesmen’s entrance. 24. Granary court, with conical grain
bins. See p. 50
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE
53
massive pylons. Courts and halls alike were design
ed to produce an impressive
internal effect, and the hypostyle hall, crowded with column
s and lit mysteriously
from above, was the grandest achievement
of Egyptian planning (pp. 6, 41).
Temples frequently were rebuilt many times
on ancient sites, or resulted from a
Series of additions over many centuries. In
the latter respect they resemble the
growth of English cathedrals. Symmetry about
the main axis was most strongly
marked, except in such cases as the temple
on the Island of Philae, where the
nature of the site and the process of accretion led
to distortion of the customary
arrangements (p. 46). Temples had large outer
enclosures, containing sub-
sidiary temples and ‘birth-houses’ in the more import
ant instances, and sacred
lakes and groves; also—in crude brick—priests’
houses, stables, granaries and
many stores, all encompassed in a mighty brick wall.
WALLS. Temple walls were very thick, immense in
the Ancient Kingdom, of
limestone, sandstone, or more rarely of granite. Mortar,
when employed, was used
as a lubricant rather than as an adhesive. The walls sloped
inwards towards the
top, giving a massive appearance (p. 48B). This practice arose
from the use of sun-
dried brick for buildings on land liable to movement from the
annual inundation,
though stone buildings were in fact mostly constructed on rocky
sites. Columns,
which are the leading external features of Greek architecture,
are not often used
externally in Egyptian buildings, which normally have a massive
blank wall
crowned with the characteristic ‘gorge’ cornice of roll and hollow mouldin
g (p.
55J). Walls, even when of granite, were generally carved in low relief. sometim
es
coated with a thin skin of stucco, about the thickness of a sheet of paper, to receive
the colour (p. 57). Simplicity, solidity and grandeur, obtained by broad masses
of
unbroken walling, are the chief characteristics of Egyptian architecture.
OPENINGS. Colonnades (p. 468) and doorways (Pp. 47B, 54J) were spanned by
massive lintels—not arches—in this essentially trabeated architecture of Ancient
Egypt. Windows are seldom found in the outer walls of temples—there is a rare
example at Medinet-Habu (p. 54k)—as such light as was needed was admitted
through clear-story screens in New Empire architecture, or, in the Ptolemaic and
Roman periods, over walls rising half-way up the facade columns, as at Philae,
Edfu, Dendera and K6m Ombo. Stone window-gratings of various patterns have
been found (p. 40B) and small slit-openings were also used in walls and roofs to
light rooms and staircases (p. 40D, E).
ROoFs. For religious buildings, heavy stone slabs were placed side by side, either
spanning a narrow apartment directly, or resting upon paired architrave-beams
passing from column to column in the case of pillared halls (pp. 28c, 408). In the
Ancient Kingdom, the limestones then employed were not capable of spans greater
than about nine feet, and granite then had to be used, though corbelled or pent
roofs could be put over pyramid corridors and chambers. It was only when sand-
stone from Silsila or higher up the Nile came to be quarried that the mighty
temples of the New Empire became practicable. With this, clear spans could be
much increased. South of the Delta, rain was infrequent, but even so, roof slabs
were cut so as to guide rainwater away from roof joints and eject it from water-
spouts. Temple roofs served for ceremonies and processions, and sometimes had
pavilions and chapels upon them. The Egyptians knew of the true arched principle,
but did not normally employ it in stone buildings, though they utilized arches fre-
quently in crude-brick buildings from the Third Dynasty onwards. The arch rings
were seldom single, but laid one on top of the other up to a number of nine; and
the arches were sloped backwards so as to evade the need of temporary timberwork.
COLUMNS. The simplest form of support was (a) the square pillar, in regular use
until the later New Empire. Pillars or columns seldom exceeded six times their
 54 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

Oe
COIL SPIRAL ORNAMENT
Oe
a. XI

ca
os
ROPE & FEATHER
ORNAMENT ae BOAT :THEBES

S cs cS.
7 :
-
OSIRIS PILLARS
RAMESSEUM : THEBES WINDOW :
eel HABU
ic coef
Ee py
amp

ltt
wut
; ae ay , aniN
iyhi .o
ae at
‘
ety ino® Ren
ae SA, y

esA
age
7

a
te >

—,—
>
asl Ceci nN = “,. ae
= a

(qr — “
cm Me=a

ee
GRANITE SPHINX :LOUVRE
:PARIS
B INCISED WALL SCULPTURE
S : KARNAK
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 55

J COLUMN _WITH
BUD. CAPITAL

NN
NN Lila
ZL
Lite

; M

A tila
F FiTli7

‘
ir

U
COMPOSITE CAP: ESNA VOLUTE CAPt:PHILA HATHOR
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

B. Wall sculptures, Temple of Seti I, Abydos (c. 1312 B.C.). See p. 57

 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 37
own diameter in height, and commonly were elaborated with painting and low-
relief carving. Columns had an abacus, tremendously high in Ptolemaic times, and
a wide-spreading disc-shaped base with a rounded upper edge. Shafts tapered a
little towards the top, but there was no ‘entasis’ or outward swelling of the profile.
(6) Polygonal columns, used only in the Middle Kingdom and New Empire, had
either eight or sixteen sides. There were also shallow-fluted columns, not used
after the Eighteenth Dynasty, and solitary instances of reeded shafts in King
Zoser’s pyramid complex at Sakkara (p. 28c). (c) The Palm type, in continuous
use till Roman times, had a simple cylindrical shaft (p. 55R). The (d) Bud and
(e) Bell columns derive from bundles of papyrus reeds, with lashings underneath
the capitals; and the shafts are gathered in a little above the base. The bud type,
first used in the Fifth Dynasty, shows eight papyrus stems, these reflected upwards
into the capital (p. 55J); until, in the Eighteenth Dynasty, both capital and shaft
were made smooth (p. 55K, L). Very occasionally, chiefly in the Ancient Kingdom,
the lotus was used as a model for the bud capital instead of the papyrus. These
plants, lotus and papyrus, were respectively the emblems of Upper and Lower
Egypt (p. 55H). The bell type almost invariably has a plain circular capital and
shaft (p. 55M), until the Ptolemaic period when the shaft acquired a reeded neck-
ing. (f) Foliated capitals, of various ornate types (p. 55A, N, P), are typical of the
Ptolemaic and Roman periods, different designs being used side by side, inter-
spersed with the palm type. (g) Hathor-headed capitals, supporting models of the
birth-house of Horus, are generally of similarly late date (p. 55Q). (A) The Osiris
pillar (p. 54H), forerunner of the caryatid of the Greeks, occurs principally in the
New Empire period. After the Ancient Kingdom, when monoliths were some-
times employed, columns were invariably built-up in coursed stone blocks, many
pieces being needed for the larger capitals (p. 42B).
MOULDINGS. Mouldings were few, and consisted of the torus or roll-moulding
for the angles of buildings, and the hollow, generally used in conjunction with the
roll of the ‘gorge’ moulding to crown the upper parts of pylons and walls (p. 55)).
This is sometimes either capped or substituted by the ‘cobra’ or the ‘kheker’ crest-
ing (p. 28D).
ORNAMENT (p. 54). This important element in the style was often symbolical,
including such features as the solar disc and vulture with outspread wings as a
symbol of protection; while diaper patterns, spirals (p. 54A, B, E, G) and the
feather ornament were largely used. The scarab, or sacred beetle, obtained its
mystical virtue as the symbol of resurrection probably because of its habit of
allowing the sun to hatch its eggs in the desert sand. The decoration of temple
walls consisted largely of representations of acts of adoration of the monarch to his
gods, to whom he ascribed all his success in war. The Egyptians, masters in the
use of colour, carried out their schemes of decoration chiefly in blue, red and
yellow. The wall to be decorated was probably prepared as follows: (a) the surface
was first chiselled smooth and rubbed down; (b) the figures or hieroglyphs were
then drawn with a red line by an artist and corrected with a black line by the chief
artist; (c) the sculptor made his carvings in low relief or incised the outline, slightly
was
rounding the enclosed form towards its boundaries; (d) a thin coat of stucco
colour, and the painter carried on his work in the strong
then applied to receive the
incised
hues of the primary colours. The hieroglyphs (p. 56B) were sometimes
direct on the stone or granite and then coloured, as may be seen in the sculptures
them
at the British Museum. They are instructive as well as decorative, and from
(pp. 54N,
is learnt a great deal of what is known of Egyptian history and society
objects
56). The Egyptians possessed great power of conventionalizing natural
were nature
and they took the papyrus, lotus and palm as motifs for design. These
58 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE

symbols of the fertility given to the country by the over-flowing Nile, and as such
they continually appear both in construction and ornament.

REFERENCE BOOKS
BADAWY,A. A History of Egyptian Architecture, vol. i. Giza, 1954.
BLACKMAN, A.M. Luxor and its Temples. London, 1923.
BORCHARDT, L. Das Grabdenkmal des Kénigs Sahu-Ré. Leipzig, 1910-13.
—. Die Entstehung der Pyramide an der Baugeschichte der Pyramide bei Mejdum nach-
gewitesen. Berlin, 1928.
BREASTED, J.H. A History of Egypt. New York, 1905.
—. Ancient Records of Egypt. 4 vols. Chicago, 1906-7.
CAPART, J. L’ Art égyptien. 2 vols. Bruxelles, 1909-11.
—. Thebes. London, 1926.
CARTER, H., and MACE, A.C. The Tomb of Tut-ankh-Amen. 3 vols. London, 1923-33.
CHOISY, A. L’ Art de batir chez les égyptiens. Paris, 1904.
CLARKE, G. SOMERS, and ENGELBACH,R. Ancient Egyptian Masonry. London, 1930.
Description de I’Egypte (known as ‘Napoleon’s Egypt’). 23 vols. Paris, 1809-22.
DRIOTON,E., and LAUER, J. P. Sakkarah. The Monuments of Zoser. Cairo, 1939.
DRIOTON, £., and VANDIER, J. Les Peuples de l’orient mediterranéen (l’Egypte). Paris,
1952.
EDWARDS,I.E.S. The Pyramids of Egypt. Penguin Books, Harmondsworth [1947].
EMERY, W.B. The Tomb of Hor-Aha. Cairo, 1939.
EMERY, W.B., and others. Great Tombs of the First Dynasty. 2 vols. 1949, 1954.
FAIRMAN, H. W. “Town Planning in Pharaonic Egypt,’ Town Planning Review, vol. xx,
no. I. 1949.
—. ‘Worship and Festivals in an Egyptian Temple,’ Bulletin of the Ffohn Rylands Library,
vol. 37, no. I. 1954.
FIRTH, C.M., QUIBELL,J.E., and LAUER, J.P. The Step Pyramid. Cairo, 1935.
GARDINER, A.H. The Temple of King Sethos I at Abydos, vols. i-iii. London and Chicago,
1933-8.
“Les grandes découvertes archéologiques de 1954,’ La Revue de Caire, vol. xxxiii, no. 175,
Numero Spécial.
GARSTANG, J. Mahasna and Bét-Khallaf. London, 1902.
HOLSCHER, UVO. Das Grabdenkmal des Kénigs Chrephren. Leipzig, 1912.
—. The Excavation of Medinet Habu. Chicago, 1934.
JEQUIER, G. L’architecture et la décoration de l’ancienne Egypte. 3 vols. Paris,
I919-24.
—. Manuel d’archéologie égyptienne. Paris, 1924.
LANGE, K., and HIRMER, M., trans. Boothroyd, R. H. Egypt. London, 1956.
LAUER, J.-P. La pyramide a degrés. Cairo, 1936-9.
—. Sakkarah. Les Monuments de Zoser. Cairo, 1939.
LEPSIUS, R. Denkmaeler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien. 12 vols. plates, and 1 vol. text.
Berlin, 1849-59.
LUCAS, A. Ancient Egyptian Materials and Industries. London, 1948.
MASPERO,G. Artin Egypt. New York, 1912.
—. Manual of Egyptian Archaeology. New York and London, 1914.
MURRAY, M.A. Egyptian Sculpture. London, 1930.
—. Egyptian Temples. London, 1931.
NAVILLE, E., and CLARKE, SOMERS. The XIth Dynasty Temple at Deir el-Bahari, Parts
I and II. London, 1907, 1910.
PERROT and CHIPIEZ. History of Artin Ancient Egypt. London, 1883.
PETRIE, W. M. FLINDERS. Egyptian Architecture. London, 1938.
—. The Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh. London, 1883.
—. Social Life in Ancient Egypt. London, 1923.
PORTER, B., and MOSS, R. L. B. Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hiero-
glyphic Texts, Reliefs, and Paintings. 7 vols. Oxford, 1927-51.
 EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE 59
REISNER, G.A. A History of the Giza Necropolis. Cambridge, Mass., 1931.
—. The development of the Egyptian Tomb down to the accession of Cheops. Cambridge
(Mass.), and London, 1935.
STEINDORFF, G., and SEELE,K.C. When Egypt ruled the East. Chicago, 1942.
SMITH, W. STEPHENSON. The History of Egyptian Sculpture and Painting in the Old
Kingdom. London, 1946.
VYSE, H., and PERRING, J. S. Operations carried on at the Pyramid of Gizeh. 3 vols.
London, 1840-2.
WHITE, MANCHIPJ.C. Ancient Egypt. London, 1952.
Publications of: the Archaeological Survey of Egypt; Egypt Exploration Fund; Annales
du Service des Antiquités de l’Egypte.

Tomb of Tutankhamen, Thebes: entrance to sepulchral hall

showing the shrine (c. 1340 B.C.). See p. 18
 HITTITE
Alaja ,* Bogh:
HOMELAND:

e Sinjer Liss Sakje-geujr

' Carchemish
Antioch’, Leppo
1¢
se

? Land over 6,000 feet

Mues

The Western Asiatic Empires

Il. WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE

(Circa 3000-331 B.C.)

IN West Asia, Mesopotamia was the primary centre and the following account is
chiefly concerned with the architecture of the peoples successively dominant there
prior to the time of Alexander in the late fourth century B.c.; but an outline is
appended of the later architecture of the region up to the Muslim conquest,
c. A.D. 642, and—to represent the rest of West Asia—of that of the ancient Hittites
in Asia Minor (c. 1750-1200 B.C.) and of architecture in old Syria (c. 2000-700 B.C.).

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. The earliest civilization of Western Asia flourished in the fertile
plains of the twin rivers, Tigris and Euphrates. To this district is given the name of
Mesopotamia (Gk. mesos =middle + potamos =river). In ancient times the rivers
entered the Persian Gulf separately, though now joined in a single mouth, and the
Gulf extended some one hundred and thirty miles farther north than at present.
The courses followed by the rivers in their lower reaches too have changed con-
siderably. Unlike Egypt, Mesopotamia lacks natural defensive boundaries. On the
west it shades gradually through downlands into the undulating steppes of the
Arabian desert, and while on the east the Zagros mountain range turns in an arc
to embrace it, the valleys and folds of the mountains were sufficiently fertile to
 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE 61
nurture neighbouring peoples watchfully envious of the richer living offered by the
_ lush Mesopotamian plains. Eastward again of the Zagros range is the vast Persian
plateau. To the north-west, the river plains join with Syria, and Syria and Pales-
tine, facing the Mediterranean, together afford a link with Egypt; the whole con-
stituting the ‘Fertile Crescent’, containing the majority of worth-while land in the
_ Near East. Syria and Palestine thus were liable to incursions of imperialists from
either hand, offering the more tempting prey in that they commanded trade com-
munications from all quarters, including those from the high table-lands of
Anatolia (Asia Minor and Armenia). From beyond Anatolia came those successive
hordes of northern invaders who were so often to disturb and disrupt the settled
peoples, and it was in central Anatolia that one group of invaders, the Hittites,
developed an important civilization in the second millennium B.c. The cultures of
these western regions, from Anatolia in the north to Palestine in the south, though
very old, were not so much indigenous as derived from one or more of the three
main civilizations of the western world, Egypt, Mesopotamia and Crete. The
last of these is reviewed in Chapter III (p. 89). The Mesopotamian twin rivers
rise in the mountains of Armenia, reinforced in their courses by other rivers and
streams. Their head waters rush down the mountain valleys and after the melting
of the snows, rise to flood volume in May. To check the inundations and to irrigate
the plains, the ancient Mesopotamian peoples constructed a network of canals,
storage basins and ditches which besides conserving the rivers in their courses gave
a marvellous fertility to the alluvial land. The abundant harvests of grain, fruit and
vegetables, the fish and the fowl and the animal husbandry were a source of
astonishment to visiting travellers and writers. The canals and the rivers served as
waterways too, and made roads largely unnecessary.
GEOLOGICAL. The Mesopotamian plain is mostly alluvial, and before systematic
control of the flood waters from the mountain sources, contained a very great deal
of marshland. Reeds and rushes always could be had in profusion, but for building
timber, although the ubiquitous palm could be made to serve, the ancients had to
rely almost wholly on imports, either from the slopes of the eastern or northern
mountains or, for the finest supplies, from Lebanon, on the Syrian coast, where
grew the cedars so famous in early historical times. Apart from occasional boulders
carried down by bygone floods, stone too was lacking, and the small amount of
limestone and alabaster that was employed had to be transported laboriously from
the uplands. So also had the minerals; iron, copper, tin and lead. The one building
material universally available was the clay from the soil itself, well suited for the
making of bricks, which were either sun-dried or, when intended for the facing of
important structures, kiln-burnt and for decorative purposes glazed in different
colours. Chopped straw was mixed with the sun-dried bricks to improve their
cohesion. Burnt bricks sometimes were laid in lime mortar, but more often in
bitumen, a natural material, readily available. On the Persian plateau, ample stone
was forthcoming.
CLIMATIC. Mesopotamia suffers very considerable climatic extremes, a scorching
sun in the summer, particularly in the southern half, and in the winter, cold,
searching blasts from the northern mountains. There is little rainfall, except in the
northern districts, and crops wither without ample moisture. Had it not been for
the complex and efficient irrigation system, which while draining the marshes dis-
tributed the river waters and lent such high fertility to the alluvial soil, the ancient
civilization would never have attained the high pitch that it did. In adjacent Persia,
while the climate similarly ranges to extremes, the higher elevation gives a dry and
exhilarating air and accounts for the frequency of light, columned halls and por-
ticoes in the Persian royal buildings.
62 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE

RELIGIOUS. The polytheism of the ancient peoples of the plains was of much the
same character throughout the entire region at any given time. Religion reflected
the way of life, of which agriculture was the mainstay, precariously and painstak-
ingly maintained under the ever-present threat of disastrous flood, drought or
marsh fire. Thus the gods were conceived as awful beings of uncertain temper
whom mortals existed to serve. The part played by the distant mountains in deter-
mining the fortunes of the plains was clearly seen, so the gods were thought to
reside in the heights and to approach them, temples were built on great, elevated
artificial platforms, often provided with ‘ziggurats’ or holy mountains, with a
shrine at the apex. Religion dominated daily life; it produced a sombre outlook, for
there was an ever-present apprehension that the will of the gods might have been
imperfectly foreseen. Signs and portents were sought at every move and in what-
ever activity. Spells were woven and magic practised, and the need for the higher
skills in medicine, divination, mystic interpretation and religious ritual produced a
powerful class of astrologer priests, in whom reposed all the wisdom of the age.
Each city had its chief presiding deity who was deemed to rule the city as its over-
lord. The chief gods were Anu, the sky god; Enlil (Bel), the earth god; and Ea, god
of the waters. These formed a triad, such as was noted also in Egypt. Of them, Anu
was the greatest, but he at length gave way in importance to Bel-Marduk, who
came to usurp the place of Enlil in this primary triad. Marduk in his turn was sup-
planted by Ashur, the national god of the Assyrians. A second triad comprised
Shamash, the sun god; Nannar (later, Sin), the moon god; and Ishtar, goddess of
passion and war. Besides the gods there were heroes, born of a divine father and a
human mother, and a host of genies or demons, some good but mostly monstrous,
deformed and evil, representing the powers of darkness. Symbolism and super-
stition prevailed everywhere. Unlike the Egyptians, the Mesopotamians were not
great tomb builders, as they had not the same strong belief in a future life. As to
the Persians of the eastern plateau, their religion at first reflected that of the plains
people, but some time prior to their ascendancy they adapted it to embrace the
religion of Zoroaster, a system of ethical forces representing good and evil at war
from the beginning of time. The two protagonists were Ahuramazda, the sky god
and creator of good and, opposed to him, Ahriman, the destructive spirit,
or power of evil. There was thus a strong tendency towards monotheism,
Ahuramazda being supreme, but the popular religion if not the official continued
to recognize lesser, supporting gods, among whom Mithras, the sun god, became
the most famous. Others worshipped were those of the moon, earth, fire, water
and wind. Temples were simple, one-roomed square towers, where the Magi, a
priestly class, tended the sacred fire; there were no public ceremonies there, as.
these were carried on in the neighbouring open countryside, sacrifices being made
before altars again carrying the sacred fire. Religion had little effect upon Persian
architecture.
SocIAL. In Ancient Mesopotamia it was the needs of agriculture that shaped the
form of the social structure and conditioned the nature of labour, commerce, art,
science and religion. The complexities of irrigation enforced communal effort; land
had to be scrupulously divided, so surveying and mathematics arose; boundary dis-
putes needed to be settled, so law developed; the seasons had to be predicted and a
calendar established, so astronomy came into being. These several pursuits, con-
ducted in the service of mysterious gods, produced astrology, medicine and the
practice of divination and magic, besides exorcism and other defensive rites against
evil powers. Though rich in agricultural produce the land was devoid of minerals
and many other needful commodities, hence trading became a major activity.
Great skills were developed in metal working, weaving, and pottery making; the
 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE 63
potter’s wheel was known as early as 3000 B.c. A host of minor vocations filled
out
the fundamental social structure. So high a social organization demanded
records
and a means of indirect communication, to which the art of writing,
the mark of a
civilized people, was the response. Cuneiform or wedge-shaped characters
on clay
tablets or cylinders have proved more lasting than the Egyptian records on
perish-
able papyrus, and among them are accounts of all kinds of ecclesiastical,
royal and
legal enactments and transactions, and endless business documents. They gave
employment to great numbers of scribes. The deciphering of the ‘Code of Laws’
on the stele of Hammurabi (c. 1792-1750 B.c.) has allowed us a wonderful insight
into habits, customs and private life prior to his time. Well-drawn laws governed
urban and country life, commerce and the rights of buyer and seller, land tenure,
feudal service, taxation and the organization of labour. The vast undertakings in
irrigation, aqueducts, military fortifications, temples and palaces largely were the
work of the people themselves, in the off-seasons for agriculture, rather than of slaves.
In Assyria, a military autocracy with a conscript army was the dominating class,
and the Assyrians were fighters rather than traders. Between bitter and cruel wars
their leaders exercised their lethal skills by the trap-hunting of wild animals. From
this epoch there are very many fine wall sculptures surviving which portray social
conditions and form an illustrated history of the battles and exploits of monarchs;
the emphasis of these delicately-incised reliefs is upon war and the chase; there is
little reference to religion. Yet society in general continued much the same way of
life as before, and in the towns were carpenters, sculptors, smiths, makers of
musical instruments, engineers, scientists, mathematicians, poets, musicians and
the like, each in the correct stratum of the complex economy.
The Persian domination was due to the military superiority of this hardy upland
race, who imposed their rule over the countries of Western Asia through the
agency of ‘satraps’, these being governors or viceroys of the twenty satrapies into
which the empire was divided. The rule was not harsh, and the customs and reli-
gions of the various conquered peoples were respected. Craftsmen of many races,
including Greeks and Egyptians, emigrated to the heart of this new world empire,
ruled from Babylon at its foundation but afterwards from Susa, and other places
more suitably located. The successive kings and their courts often resided at their
summer palaces in nearer Persia; at Ecbatana, which had served as the capital of
Cyrus the Great before his conquest of Babylon in 539 B.C.; at Pasargadae, the
place of coronation of all the Persian monarchs; and Persepolis, which came to
supplant Pasargadae in the royal favour. The erection of these and other splendid
‘palaces gave ample opportunity for the development of Persian architecture and
decorative art.
' HISTORICAL. The historical period is taken to begin c. 3000 B.C. with the bringing
to perfection of the art of writing and the full development of urban life; but as in
the case of Egypt, the Mesopotamian civilization had been shaping many cen-
turies previously. There are remains of important buildings that can be ascribed to
an ‘Archaic’ stage, c. 3500-3000 B.C. There are four main historical periods.
(a) Babylonian period (c. 3000-1250 B.C.). This is a customary title for the phase,
but is actually a misnomer, as Babylon did not rise to prominence until the time of
its king Hammurabi (c. 1792-1750 B.C.). The civilization grew in the south, where
we find the Sumerians, an ‘Asianic’ people, occupying city states ruled by dynasties
of local kings who might for a time dominate their neighbours. Mingled with the
Sumerians and exceeding them numerically in the central region and the north
was a Semitic people, the Akkadians, organized in a corresponding fashion. The
first comprehensive kingdom in Mesopotamia was established by Sargon I, of
Akkad, c. 2340 B.c. Already by this time the influence of the civilization was being
64 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE

transmitted to surrounding countries, and its splendour attracting their envy. The
kingdom of ‘Sumer and Akkad’ suffered invasions from the eastern mountains but
they had not much permanent effect upon the character of the culture. Prominent
among the cities was Ur, whose king Urnammu (2125 B.C.) again established a
united realm which lasted for a hundred years. Babylon at length appeared as a
dominant power under the great king Hammurabi (c. 1792-1750 B.c.). The dynasty
he founded was brought to a close by the invasion of a foreign power, the Hittites,
who, under their king Mursilis I captured Babylon in c. 1595 B.c. The Hittites
were an important people centred in Anatolia, about whom some account will be
given later (p. 81). They withdrew almost immediately, leaving the realm open to
seizure by the Kassites, mountaineers from the central region of the Zagros range,
whose very long but increasingly supine rule lasted until 1171 B.c.
(6) Assyrian period (c. 1250-612 B.Cc.). Meanwhile, the Assyrians, who were
Semitic Akkadians, by incessant battles developed an independent state in the
upper Tigris region. Tukulti-Ninurta I (c. 1250-1210 B.C.) overcame the Baby-
lonians and ruled over the whole realm, but this was by no means the end of a
bitter struggle for supremacy, which lasted for centuries. Both states declined
greatly in the late second millennium, due to foreign incursions, and it was not
until the reign of Tukulti-Ninurta II (890-884 B.c.) that the greatest period of
Assyrian history really began. His son, Ashurnasirpal II (883-859 B.c.) waged war
on every side, and removed the government from Ashur to Nimroud (Calah),
where he built a palace and patronized art. His son, Shalmaneser III (859-824 B.c.)
made himself master of western Asia from the Persian Gulf to the Anatolian
mountains and from the Zagros range to the Mediterranean. Tiglath Pileser III
(742-727 B.C.) extended the empire to the borders of Egypt. Sargon II (722-705
B.C.), most famous of Assyrian kings, warred against the Medes, occupying north-
west Persia, and also against Elam, and was the first to defeat the Egyptians, in a
battle near their own frontier. He was a great builder, as is testified by his new
residential city and magnificent palace at Khorsabad (p. 73). Sennacherib (705-
681 B.C.), the able son of Sargon, was chiefly occupied in putting down revolts and
sustaining the frontiers of the Empire, but found time to build a mighty palace and
other works at Nineveh. Esarhaddon, his son (681-669 B.c.), conquered Lower
Egypt in 671 B.c. He too, undertook great palaces at Nimroud and Nineveh and
built temples to the gods. Ashurbanipal (668-626 B.c.) fought three campaigns in
Egypt and sacked Thebes (663 B.c.). He extended the boundaries of his kingdom
on the north and east, and the records of his last campaign were sculptured on the
wall slabs of his palace at Nineveh, which are now in the British Museum. The
Empire was then at its zenith; but in 634 B.c., with the incursions of the Medes,
decline set in, until in 612 B.c. Nineveh was captured and destroyed, and the
Assyrian Empire divided. The northern part came under the sway of the Medes,
while the southern part fell to the Babylonians, who for a century or two had been
receiving strong infusions of Chaldeans, a Semitic people moving in from the
south-west.
(c) Neo-Babylonian period (612-539 B.c.). The Babylonian leader was Nabo-
polassar, a Chaldean. He was succeeded by his son, Nebuchadnezzar II (605-563
B.C.), of Bible fame, despoiler of Jerusalem and responsible for the captivity of the
Children of Israel (597-538 B.c.); he is lastingly associated with the wonders of
Babylon, its palaces, hanging gardens and towered walls. The dynasty ended with
Nabonidus, defeated by the Persian king, Cyrus, in 539 B.c.
(d) Persian period (539-331 B.c.). From a relatively small state in south-west
Persia, Cyrus the Great, founder of the Achaemenian dynasty, achieved an enor-
mous empire. Beginning with the establishment of his leadership over Media and
 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE 65
Assyria, Cyrus overcame Croesus, king of Lydia, and
completed the subjugation
of the Greek colonists of western Asia Minor with the capture
of Sardis in 546 B.c.
He then returned to secure his north-eastern frontier
on the line of the river
Jaxartes. Babylon was next in turn (539 B.c.), and with it
fell the Babylonian pos-
sessions in Palestine. Cyrus gave the Jews in Babylonia their
freedom and allowed
them to return to the Promised Land. Cambyses II (529-52
1 B.c.), his son, ex-
tended the Persian conquests to Egypt (525 B.c.), and the impress
ion produced by
the marvellous buildings of Memphis and Thebes, no less than
the sight of the
wonders of the Greek cities of the western Asia Minor coast, popular
ized columnar
architecture among the Persians. Next came Darius I (522-486 B.c.),
a capable and
enterprising administrator. He built a network of arterial roads. In Egypt
he carried
out a scheme for a canal between the Red Sea and the Nile original
ly projected by
the Pharaoh Necho. With him, Persian arms were carried still farther
eastwards to
the river Indus, and in the west he pushed into Europe as far as the Danube.
He
also hankered after Greece, and his ambitions in that direction stirred up a
revolt of
the Asia Minor Greeks (499-494 B.C.) and led to his sack of Miletus, where
he des-
troyed the famous Ionic temple (p. 131). He was, however, defeated by the Greeks
at Marathon (490 B.c.). Xerxes I (486-465 B.C.), who pursued the same ambition
,
also met with defeat by the Greeks, not only in the sea battle of Salamis (480 B.c.)
but also in the land battle of Plataea (479 B.c.). Several other Persian kings followed.
With the battle of Gaugamela, in Assyria, in 331 B.c., Alexander the Great (336-
323 B.C.) crushed Darius III, the last king of the Achaemenian dynasty, and
all west Asia became a Greek province. After Alexander’s death, Persia passed
successively under the Seleucid (312-247 B.c.), Parthian (247 B.C.-A.D. 226)
and Sassanian (A.D. 226-641) dynasties (p. 78), and towards the end of the
latter period, was in process of defeat by the Muslims, who next assumed power
(Ch. XXXIII).

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
Ancient architecture in Mesopotamia and Persia was in course of historical
development from about 3000 B.c. to the conquest of Alexander the Great in the
late fourth century before Christ.
In the alluvial plains of the Tigris and Euphrates, stone and timber suitable for
building were rare. There was, however, abundance of clay, which, compressed in
moulds and either dried in the sun or kiln-burnt, provided bricks for every kind of
structure. Besides massive, towered fortifications, temple-complexes and palaces
were the outstanding constructions, temples being typical of Babylonian architec-
ture and palaces of Assyrian. Buildings were raised on crude-brick platforms, each
according to its importance, and the chief temples had sacred ‘ziggurats,’ artificial
mountains made up of tiered, rectangular stages which rose in number from one to
seven in the course of Mesopotamian history. Apart from the fortifications and the
ziggurats, buildings of all types were arranged around large and small courts, the
rooms narrow and thick-walled, carrying brick barrel vaults and sometimes domes.
The roofs were usually flat outside, except where domes protruded. Alternatively,
in early or commonplace buildings, palm logs supporting rushes and packed clay
served for coverings, or, for the best work, cedar or other fine timber was drawn
from the uplands or laboriously imported. Burnt brick was used sparingly for fac-
ings or where special stress was expected. Walls were whitewashed, or, as in the
case of the developed ziggurat, painted in colour. Essentially, architecture was
arcuated, the true arch with radiating voussoirs having been known by the third
millennium B.c. For want of stone, columns were not used, except for a few
Cc HOA,
66 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE

instances in late Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian work. Towers or flat buttress strips
served to relieve the bare walls, which in Assyrian architecture commonly were
vertically panelled and finished in stepped battlements above and stone plinths
below, with colossal winged bulls guarding chief portals; in palaces the alabaster
plinths or dadoes of state courts and chambers bore low-relief carving, the walls
above them internally being painted with bands of continuous friezes on the thin-
plaster coverings. Facing in polychrome glazed bricks, introduced by the Assyrians,
was another mode of decoration for arches and walls, especially favoured by the
Neo-Babylonians, in lieu of sculptured stone slabs, since in Babylonia stone was
scarcer than in Assyria.
The architecture of the Persians was columnar, and thus vastly different from
the massive arcuated architecture of the Mesopotamian peoples they conquered.
Its light and airy character was due to the nomadic origin of the Persians and the
climate of their native table-lands. Flat, timber roofs rather than vaults served for
coverings, which allowed columns to be slender and graceful; while with their help,
rooms could be large where necessary, and of square proportions rather than
elongated as the Mesopotamian brick vaults demanded. For ceilings, wooden
brackets and beams carried by the columns supported a covering of clay on a bed-
ding of reeds on logs or planks (p. 76A). The use of double (crude-brick) walls for
stability, as at Persepolis (p. 76c), may have allowed small windows just below
ceiling level without their appearing on the severe external facades. Stone was
plentiful on the upland sites, but was used sparingly for such as fire-temples and
palace platforms, for door and window surrounds, richly-ornate columns and relief
sculpture. The Persians were at first relatively inexperienced craftsmen, and drew
upon the superior skills of the peoples of the empire; many of the usages and
features evidence derivation from Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Syrian, Ionian Greek
and other sources.

EXAMPLES
Ancient architecture in Mesopotamia and Persia is considered under three head-
ings (brief accounts of three other cultures in the West Asiatic area follow
thereafter):
Babylonian and Neo-Babylonian (c. 3000-1250 B.C. and 612-539 B.C.).
Assyrian (c. 1250-612 B.C.).
Persian (539-331 B.C.).

BABYLONIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN ARCHITECTURE

The earliest architectural remains belong to an ‘archaic’ stage preceding the true
historical period; towns already were walled and were a maze of streets and crude-
brick buildings elevated above threat of flood upon the spoils of the buildings of
many bygone generations. The chief buildings of the Babylonians were temples,
palaces at first being relatively unimportant; and as the social system was theo-
cratic, the temple complexes provided for civic, commercial and even industrial
activities as well as for religious needs. They were raised upon great platforms,
usually near the centre of a town. The ancillary buildings formed forecourts to the
temple court, wherein the temple stood as a climax, the courts rising in terraces
towards it. Great cities acquired several prime temple groups, and in the most
important of them, the mound supporting the temple-shrine reached such a height
as to form a ‘ziggurat’ or holy mountain, its ‘upper temple’ then supplemented
 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE 67

p. 70
B. The Temple Complex at Ishchali. Early Second Millennium B.c. See
 >
68 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE

= q) Q co RA ” =
t
TANK

nninnn
(\ \\\
AN
\ \\ \

Mh \\
\\"

WHITE TEMPLE 5]
|IiRAMP 7
io
PLATFORM &
VIEW FROM WEST
RESTORED

THE WHITE TEMPLE & ZIGGURAT, i

AT WARKA
ARCHAIC PERIOD BC. 3500-3000

VIEW FROM EAST

RESTORED

LOWEST TIER Z
50 FT HIGH th:
FF

HEIGHT 174 FT.

VIEW
FROM SOUTH
RESTORED
B.C. 13TH CENT,
THE ZIGGURAT AT TCHOGA-ZANBIL,
ELAM PLAN
 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE 69
by a ‘lower temple’ near the ziggurat base. Regularly, the corners of
temple-
complexes and ziggurats were orientated towards the cardinal points.
The
ordinary or terrace type of temple continued to be built throughout Babylonia
n
history, as well as those with enormous ziggurats. The archaic ziggurat had only
one flat-topped rectangular mound carrying the upper temple (p. 68a). In the late
third millennium two or more stages had become usual, each tier strongly battered
and ornamented with broad pilaster strips (p. 68B). The plan was rectangular, not
Square, and the ascent was made from one of the longer sides by three very
steep single-flight stairways, two adjacent to the ziggurat and one on the axis, all
meeting at a single landing. In the second millennium B.c. the plan became square
and the number of tiers increased to four or five, now vertical but still carrying
buttress strips, while the total proportions became less squat (p. 68c). These
tendencies continued, and in Neo-Babylonian times there were as many as seven
stages below the crowning temple. Meanwhile the Assyrians developed their own
imitative version, a seven-staged square-based ziggurat of tall proportions, ascended
by a continuous ramp, circulating the sides in turn (p. 72A). This reacted upon the
southern type, producing instances with mixed characteristics.
The White Temple, Warka (Uruk; the Biblical Erech) (Archaic period, c. 3500-
3000 B.C.) (p. 684) was raised upon the earliest form of Babylonian ziggurat, flat-
topped, of one stage only, 42 ft 6 ins high. The sloping sides, except the south-east,
were decorated with flat buttresses. A subsidiary broad, square platform, of similar
height, overlapped the north corner, served by a long flight of easy steps from which
a circuitous ramp led off from an intermediate landing. The temple, originally
white-washed, had an end-to-end hall of 15 ft span, flanked on both sides by a series
of smaller rooms, three of which contained stairways leading to the roof. Of four
entrances, the chief was placed asymmetrically on one long side, giving a ‘bent-
axis’ approach to the sanctuary, marked by an altar platform, 4 ft high, in the
north corner of the hall. Centrally nearby was a brick offering table, adjoined by a
low, semicircular hearth. Shallow buttresses formed the principal decoration of the
hall and of the external walls. That this temple was of a common type is indicated
by several others of earlier or similar date, though standing on raised terraces, not
ziggurats.
The Temple Oval at Khafaje (p. 67A) was one of a small number of temple
complexes contained in an oval enclosure, all of the third millennium B.c. Here,
there was one enclosure within another, 328 ft by 230 ft overall. Despite the un-
orthodox shape, the group affords an excellent illustration of the parts of a temple
complex of the terrace type normal in the early historical period. Within the ovals
the lay-out was rectilinear, the corners orientated N.E.S.W. Of three ascending
terrace levels, the lowest made a forecourt approached through an arched and
towered gateway from the town and having a many-roomed building on one side
which was either an administrative building or a dwelling for the arch-priest. The
second terrace, wholly surrounded by rooms used as workshops and stores, had at
its farther end the temple platform, about 12 ft high. Near its staircase, against the
side of the temple terrace, was an external sacrificial altar, while elsewhere in the
court were a well and two basins for ritual ablutions.
The Ziggurat and Precinct, Ur (p. 688), already old, were extensively re-
modelled by Urnammu and others of the third dynasty of its kings (c. 2125-2025
B.C.). Comprising the complex were the ziggurat and its court; a secondary court
attached to it; and two great temples and a palace, all raised on a great rectangular
platform at the heart of an oval-shaped, walled city of tight-packed houses, itself
standing 20 ft above the plain. The ziggurat, 205 ft by 141 ft on base and about
70 ft high, carried the usual ‘upper temple’ and had the normal orientation. The
70 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE
of
restoration (p. 68B) serves to illustrate the features of the Babylonian type,
which there are substantial remains on numerous sites in southern Mesopotam ia
and in some of the more northerly cities too. The Ur ziggurat had a solid core of
sun-dried brick, covered with a skin of burnt brickwork, 8 ft thick, laid in bitumen
and with layers of matting at intervals to improve cohesion.
The Temple Complex at Ishchali (early second millennium B.C.) (p. 67B)
was of the terrace type, without a ziggurat. It was rectangular in plan, but other-
wise its arrangements were not unlike those of the Temple Oval in the neighbour-
ing town of Khafaje. It had a large main terrace court and an upper one in which
the temple lay at right angles to the chief axis. On the corresponding side of the
main court there were two minor courts, and all were lined with rooms.
The Ziggurat at Tchoga-Zanbil, near Susa, Elam (13th cent. B.C.) (p. 68C),
built by King Untash-Gal, stands in the rival state east of Babylonia. The remark-
ably complete remains, recently exposed, give fuller and more authentic particulars
of the upper parts of a ziggurat than hitherto have been forthcoming. There were
five tiers, the lowest shallower than the rest, each mounted on a plinth. The base is
350 ft square and the total height was about 174 ft. Flights of stairs, recessed in the
mass, led to the top of the first tier on the centre of each front, but only that on the
south-west led to the second tier, while the rest of the height had to be accom-
plished on the south-east, principal, side.
The City of Babylon, famous in history and legend, was rebuilt by Nebuchad-
nezzar II (605-563 B.c.), for it had been comprehensively destroyed by the Assy-
rian king, Sennacherib, in 689 B.c. It had an inner and outer part, each heavily
fortified. The inner town was approximately square in plan, of about 1,450 yards
side, containing the principal buildings, the Euphrates river forming the west side.
The few main streets intersected starkly at right angles, terminating in tower-
framed bronze gates where they met the walls. Between the main streets, tiered
dwellings, business houses, temples, chapels and shrines jostled in lively disarray.
The principal sites lined the river front, and behind them ran a grand, processional]
bricks, patterned with yellow and white bulls and dragons in relief upon a blue
way, its vista closed on the north by the Ishtar Gate, glowing in coloured glazed
ground (p. 71C). Hereabouts there were palace-citadels, and connected with Nebu-
chadnezzar’s great palace complex on the waterside, 900 ft by 600 ft overall, was
that marvel of the ancient world, the Hanging Gardens; among its maze of rooms
was a vast throne room, 170 ft by 56 ft, its long fagade decorated with polychrome
glazed bricks. The central sites on the river front were occupied by the chief temple
of the god of the city, Marduk, and, to the north of it, the expansive precinct where
rose the associated ziggurat, the “Tower of Babel’. Of these, the illustration on p.
88 gives an imaginative view, looking south-east. The celebrated ziggurat appears
to have been one combining the triple stairway approach and massive lower tier
customary in old Babylonia with upper stages arranged spirally according to Assy-
rian developed practice. The plan was square, of 295 ft side, and there were seven
stages in all, the summit temple being faced with blue glazed bricks.

ASSYRIAN ARCHITECTURE
In the earlier part of the period, Babylonian practice was closely followed. There
were temples both with and without ziggurats; but palaces were much more fre-
quent and important. The Assyrians introduced polychrome ornamental brickwork
—so popular with the Neo-Babylonians later on—and also high plinths or dadoes
made of great stone slabs placed on edge, usually carved with low-relief sculpture.
 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE af

A. Palaces of Esarhaddon (680-669 B.c.) and Ashurnasirpal II (883-859 B.c.),

Nimroud (imaginative view). See p. 73

B, Wall painting, Palace of Sargon II, c. TheIshtar Gate, Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar

Khorsabad (722-705 B.C.). See p. 73 II (605-563 B.C.). See p. 70
 72 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE

Z GG LLL

©, DRAIN i} eee
-tol
aee
So |
NDER PALAC! E PLATFORM = 4
KHORSABAD ({evevaric PORTAL IN SE. CITY
ELEVATION GaTEWAY 3. KHORSABAD

0 50 180-250 FEET
a
METRES

LARGE BIT-HILANI
REPLACED LATER

ae ar ene
ll — (Se Th —=

i Wh ih)

1 MAIN GATE ae 3-7

2 INNER GATE Ml BIT-HILANI PALACES
XX AREAS AWAITING
8 BARRACKS
EXCAVATION
F CITADEL, SINJERLLI irestoreo) CITADEL, SINJERLI. PLAN
(BEFORE FULL EXCAVATION) (c.BC. 8™ CENT.) FINAL PHASE carter Further excavation)
 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE 73

Continuous decorative friezes of stone, polychrome brickwork or painted on the

plastered walls (p. 71B), were a characteristic feature of their interior decoration.
The City of Ashur of c. 1000 B.c. had in its chief precinct two ziggurat temples,
one to Ashur and another to the gods Anu-Adad, the latter having twin ziggurat-
towers with the related temples spanning between them. There were also two
further temples without ziggurats and two enormous palaces, one being primarily
for administrative purposes. The increasing importance of palaces as demonstrated
here is significant, for in the second half of the Assyrian period they became
dominant, temples and their ziggurats taking a decidedly subsidiary place.
The City of Nineveh (Kouyunjik) first became a capital about 1100 B.c., suc-
ceeded in turn by Ashur, Nimroud (Calah) and Khorsabad. Sennacherib (705-681
B.C.) restored its status, encircled it with mighty walls and built palaces and other
structures. More palaces were built there by his immediate successors, Esarhaddon
and Ashurbanipal. Relief sculptures recovered from the site and now in the British
Museum show not only warlike pursuits but also building operations (pp. 72B, 84J).
The City of Nimroud (Calah) had a rectangular raised temenos carrying the
chief buildings. In one angle was an ancient ziggurat, and elsewhere on the plat-
form were two or more temples and four or five palaces by kings from Ashurna-
sirpal II (883-859 B.c.) to Esarhaddon (680-669 B.c.). The restoration (p. 71A)
gives an imaginative impression of the original appearance of the west side of the
temenos. From Ashurnasirpal’s palace came some remarkable wall slabs now in the
British Museum (p. 844, E, F, G, H).
The City of Khorsabad, built by Sargon II (722-705 B.c.), was abandoned at
his death. It was square-planned, defensively-walled, and covered nearly a square
mile (p. 74c). There were two gateways spaced on each tower-serrated wall,
except that the place of one of the gates on the north-west wall was taken by an
extensive citadel enclosure, containing all but one of the town’s chief buildings.
These comprised a palace for the king’s brother, who was his vizier; a temple to
Nabu; several official buildings; and, dominating all, the Palace of Sargon him-
self, a complex of large and small courts, corridors and rooms, covering twenty-
three acres (p. 74). Each of the buildings was raised upon a terrace, that of the
Palace of Sargon reaching to the level of the town walls, which the palace site
bestrode. It was approached by broad ramps from the citadel court, which allowed
access equally to pedestrians, horses and chariots. The main entrance to the palace
grand court was flanked by great towers and guarded by man-headed winged bulls,
12 ft 6 ins high, supporting a bold, semicircular arch decorated with brilliantly-
coloured glazed bricks. The palace had three main parts, each abutting the grand
court. On the left on entering was a group of three large and three small temples;
on the right, service quarters and administrative offices; and opposite, the private
and residential apartments, with the state chambers behind. The state chambers
from
had their own court, almost as large as the first, which could be approached
digni-
the grand court or from an independent gateway. Here, foreign and other
slabs,
taries would be impressively received. All around the state court were dado
towards the
over 7 ft high, bearing reliefs of the king and his courtiers, facing
the inner long side of the court, with a
throne room, a grand apartment flanking
flank entrances guarded by sculptured, man-headed winged bulls.
main and two
ft, was the outermost of a state suite
The lofty throne room, about 160 ft by 35
its own internal court. It probably was one of the few apartments
planned around
costly. The plastered
to have a flat timber ceiling, for fine timber was rare and
of a triple band of friezes, framed in running orna-
walls bore a painted decoration
a stone dado of reliefs
ment, about 18 ft high overall, circulating the room above
20 ft. In the Grand
(p. 71B). In general, walls were thick; on the average, about
 74 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE

PALACE OF SARGON : KHORSABAD

Gai

tat
Py.

mies att
| R = on
ACE (RESTORED)
Arne PAL

pone

bitthabe! a Nn }
ahem |)
2)
:
1 \ sor
ia tn mi TUR RY QAI)

Ast ve a] T
CRESTING, =} Se
bees

TEMPLE
ILDINGS :;
ae! 4

Pee = gol

Geet pe eete
pa
s
So=o
<I!
 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE 75
and Temple Courts, decoration was contrived by sunken vertical panelling on
the
whitewashed walls and towers, finishing in stepped battlements above
and stone
plinths below, plain or carved (p. 74D). Within the mud-brick platforms
of the
palace there were jointed terra-cotta drains to carry away rainwater, joining
larger
drains of burnt brick covered with vaults which were slightly pointed and
im which
the brick courses were laid obliquely, so that wood centering might be avoided
(p.
72C). This device was well-known to the Egyptians too. Only stone dadoes
so far
have been mentioned; at the approach to the three chief temples there were high
plinths projecting from the wall, faced in polychrome glazed bricks portraying
sacred motifs and serving as pedestals for high cedar masts ringed with ornamental
bronze bands (p. 74F). The wall behind was panelled with a series of abutted half-
columns, a revival of an ancient motif originating in the imitation of palm logs. It
is remarkable to find that the only ziggurat of the city is associated with the palace
temples and not with the large Nabu temple nearby. On a square base of 148 ft
side, the seven-tiered ziggurat rose to the same height (148 ft—including the shrine
at the top), ascended by a winding ramp, 6 ft wide. The successive tiers were
panelled and battlemented and were painted in different colours on the plastered
faces (p. 74A, G).

PERSIAN ARCHITECTURE
Palaces and tombs of the Persians show that many features of their remarkable
columnar architecture were derived from the older civilizations; the gorge mould-
ing from Egypt; the raised platforms, sculptured monsters, relief slabs and poly-
chrome brickwork from Mesopotamia.
The Palace of Cyrus the Great at Pasargadae (c. 550 B.c.—before Cyrus came
to full power), indicates that the Persians were still at this time more accustomed to
nomadic than to urban life, for the few scattered buildings resembled pavilions,
dispersed in a parkland enclosure, the latter serving for assembly on special occa-
sions. Widely separated, a gatehouse, audience hall and residence were of quite
new character, comprising many-columned rooms and external double porticoes.
South-west of the palace was the Tomb of Cyrus (d. 529 B.c.), a simple box-like
monument of limestone Io ft 6 ins by 7 ft 6 ins, gabled and standing on a platform
of six steps.
Susa, ancient city of Elam, became the Persian capital in succession to Babylon
with the building there of a citadel and palace complex by Darius I (522-486 B.c.).
A most illuminating building inscription tells how the resources and skills of the
whole empire were utilized in the construction of the palace buildings. Cedar was
brought from Lebanon, teak from the Zagros mountains and southern Persia,
while the baked bricks were made by the Babylonian method. Most significant of
all, craftsmen were drawn from the Assyrians, Babylonians, Egyptians and Ionian
Greeks. The remarkable compound of features which constitute the unique and
gracious architecture of Persia is thus explained. From this palace and a later one
by Artaxerxes II (404-358 B.C.) come the famous glazed-brick decorations, por-
traying processions of archers, lions, bulls or dragons (p. 76F, G).
The Palace of Persepolis (p. 76A-E), begun in 518 B.c. by Darius I, was
mostly executed by Xerxes I (486-465 B.c.) and finished by Artaxerxes I about
460 B.c. The various buildings stood on a platform, partly built up and partly
excavated, faced in well-laid local stone bound with iron cramps, about 1,500 ft by
900 ft in extent and rising 50 ft above the plain at the base of a rocky spur. The
approach on the north-west was by a magnificent flight of steps, 22 ft wide, shallow
enough for horses to ascend. A gatehouse by Xerxes had mud-brick walls, faced
 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE

Se

ene ee

A. Persepolis: Hall of the Hundred Columns (restored) (c. 518-460 B.c.). See p. 78.
Other details of the palaces at Persepolis are given below

eep
~
C

ve 2)

m te
a,
LON
ke
Se

ee TRIPYLON DOUBLE
"UNICORN" CAP:
STAIRWAY TO
Buu 2.|, GATEHOUSE OF XERXES HAREM
(B)oouste
CAP. APADANA
APADANA
3. APADANA OF DARIUS | TREASURY
4. PALACE OF DARIUS | HALL OF 100 COLUMNS
OF XERXES 5, PALACE OF XERXES 'S
OSes
INNER GATEHOUSE
eo O_o Boo 800 yo 8 —FeeT
METRES OF XERXES
(pian OF PALACE PLATFORM.

wi ODO
VAAALAA

f-
-
7:J0"—
-—--+
-AB?
———
4.0—-+4
--ABT
++
LION FRIEZE :SUSA.
PERSEPOLIS.
 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE Wi

B. Tomb of Darius, Naksh-i-Rustam c. Fire Temple, Naksh-i-Rustam.

(485 B.c.). See p. 78 See p. 78
78 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE

with polychrome bricks, and front and rear portals guarded by stone bulls. A third
doorway on the south led towards the ‘Apadana’, a grand audience hall, 250 ft
square and with thirty-six columns within its 20 ft-thick walls, begun by Darius
but completed by his two successors. It stood on its own terrace, 10 ft high; had
three porticoes, each with double colonnades; stately stairways on the north and
east sides; and minor rooms across the south side and in the four angle towers.
The Palace of Darius, small by comparison, lay immediately south of the Apadana,
near the west terrace wall. This might have been finished in his lifetime, as also the
terraced ‘Tripylon’, which lay centrally among the buildings and acted as a recep-
tion chamber and guard-room for the more private quarters of the palace group.
Also by Darius was the ‘Treasury’, in the south-east angle of the site, a double-
walled administrative and storehouse building with columned halls of different
sizes and only a single doorway. The buildings of Darius were arranged in the
loose fashion of earlier times. Xerxes added his in between. He built his own palace
near the south-west angle, connected with an L-shaped building, identified as the
women’s quarters (harim) which completed the enclosure of a court south of the
Tripylon. He also commenced the famous ‘Hall of the Hundred Columns’ (finished
by Artaxerxes I), this a Throne Hall, 225 ft square, with columns 37 ft high, sup-
porting a flat, cedar roof (p. 76A, C). The walls were double, except on the north side,
where a portico faced a forecourt, with its own gate-house, separated from the
Apadana forecourt by a stout wall. The Throne Hall had two doorways and seven
windows on the entrance wall, matched on the other three sides except that niches
substituted the windows. All were framed in stone surrounds in the 11-ft thick
brick wall. From Persepolis have been recovered many wonderful architectural
sculptures. All the monumental stairs were lined with reliefs, as also the Apadana
terrace, where they were arranged in triple tiers or ‘registers’, separated by bands
of rosettes. Nobles, courtiers, chieftains, tribute-bearers and guardsmen advanced
in dignified procession, and traditional subjects filled the awkward angles of the
stairways and the deep jambs of the doorways (p. 76E£). Stepped battlements
crowned the parapet walls. All these sculptures were originally in brilliant colour.
Columns of the lesser apartments had wooden shafts, thickly plastered and deco-
ratively painted, but those of the Halls were of stone throughout. They have a
character all their own, with moulded bases, fluted shafts and curious, complex
capitals with vertical Ionic-like volutes and twin bulls or dragons supporting the
roof beams (p. 76B, D).
The Tomb of Darius, Naksh-i-Rustam, (485 B.C.) (p. 77B), eight miles north
of Persepolis, is one of four rock-hewn sepulchres of the great Achaemenian kings.
Its facade, 60 ft wide, appears to reproduce the south front of Darius’ palace at
Persepolis, with four columns of the double-bull type, central doorway with Egyp-
tian-like cornice, and upper compartment in which an elaborate throne, 9 ft high,
is supported by two rows of figures, above which the king stands before a fire
altar, Ahuramazda floating overhead. A little distance in front of the tomb stands
a Fire Temple, a stone, square tower containing a single room, approached by an
outside stairway (p.77C).

SELEUCID, PARTHIAN AND SASSANIAN ARCHITECTURE

(312 B.C.-A.D. 641)
The architecture which succeeded that of the Achaemenian Persian phase is inter-
esting, though not of great importance.
The Seleucid Empire, founded in 312 B.c. after the death of Alexander, began
to disintegrate about 247 B.c., and after 140 B.c. was confined to the region west of
 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE 79
the Euphrates, finally giving way to the Romans in 64 B.c. Meanwhile there was a
considerable influx of Macedonian and Greek settlers, who built many new towns,
including Seleucia, near Babylon, and Antioch, in Syria. In Bactria, on the eastern
border, they spread Greek civilization to India; but in general, their influence was
uneven, and in art and architecture it was sometimes the Hellenistic and some-
times the local Persian character that prevailed. The Parthians, who wrested the
eastern and Mesopotamian territories piecemeal from the Seleucids, respected the
Hellenistic culture and institutions and under their long rule the new Greek cities
flourished. Yet as integration proceeded, the arts profoundly declined. With the
Sassanian dynasty (A.D. 226-642), when the principal city was Ctesiphon, near
Babylon, vigour sprang anew and a number of fine buildings were erected which
form a connecting link between the old Mesopotamian architecture on the one
hand and Byzantine on the other. Palaces were the dominant type.
The Palace, Feruz-abad (south of Persepolis) (c. A.D. 250) (p. 80), built of
stone rubble faced with plaster, has a deep, open-fronted arched entrance leading
to three domed halls, forming a reception suite, beyond which is a court sur-
rounded by private chambers. The domes are seated over the three square halls
with the help of ‘squinch’ arches thrown across the angles (p. 80c), while the in-
ternal walls below them are ornamented with niches having plaster archivolts and
enframements of a classical complexion but capped with cornices of the Egyptian
‘gorge’ type (p. 80C, F).
The Palace of Shapur I, Bishapur, (west of Persepolis) (c. A.D. 260), was a
remarkable building built of plastered stone rubble, with a cruciform plan, domi-
nated by a central dome of elliptical section springing from floor level. The
coloured-plaster wall-decoration of modelled architectural features again had a
classical character.
The Palace, Sarvistan, (vicinity of Persepolis) (c. A.D. 350) (p. 80) was fronted
by the typical deep barrel-vaulted porches, behind which rose a bee-hive dome,
carried on squinch arches (p. 80H), marking the principal apartment. The dome
was pierced with openings for light and ventilation. Two long side chambers had
barrel vaults supported on massive piers which themselves stood on pairs of stumpy
columns (p. 80K), a most ingenious method of reducing the effective span and
obtaining powerful abutment to the vaults.
At Feruz-abad and Bishapur there were towered fire-temples, used in connec-
tion with open-air ceremonies, similar to that at Naksh-i-Rustam, of the Achae-
menian Persian period, mentioned opposite.
The Palace, Ctesiphon (p. 80) is usually attributed to Chosroes I (A.D. §31-
579) but is probably of the fourth century A.D. As it is in the Mesopotamian plain,
it is of brick. The principal part surviving is a vast banqueting hall, open-fronted
like the reception tents of tribal sheiks in nomadic days, with flanking private
wings screened by an enormous wall, 112 ft 6 ins high. The latter is ornamented
ence. One wing of the facade fell in 1909 after an exceptional Tigris flood. The
with tiers of attached columns and arcades, an arrangement betraying Roman influ-
elliptical barrel vault over the hall, 24 ft thick at the base and rising 120 ft from the
floor to cover the 83 ft span, equalled if it did not surpass the mightiest structural
achievements of Ancient Rome. The lower part of the vault is constructed in hori-
zontal courses—Sassanian domes were usually constructed wholly in this manner—
but substantially the vault is made up of arch rings sloped against an end wall, so
as to avoid the necessity of temporary wood centering. This is a practice which we
have seen to have been adopted for brick vaults equally in Ancient Egyptian and in
Assyrian architecture.
An account of Muslim Architecture in Persia is given in Chapter XXXIII,
 80 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITEGTURE

: PALACE * PERUZ -“ABAD)

ia 40
__,SOALE FoR
ee ee
t SECTION|

rm

Borns, eee

Le
10“hb
4g SCALE FOR PLAN

TRANSVERSE SECTION (D)PLAN CONSTRUCTION

ECE SARVISTAN
mn eT wom

4
yyy
Ay
ia
WHey)

==

:
ies ee

ihe
wl AU :
mins
k--- 2-0-4 ==
1
vole IN HALL‘Y” an Risse IN HALL ar'X"
PALACE # CTESIPHON

—
}e-----~-—-~~—-~~jj2'¢'
b>

L RESTORATION. 170:0"
+-—
---
ONE BAY
 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE 81

HITTITE ARCHITECTURE
(Circa 1750-1200 B.C.)
While the Mesopotamian civilization proceeded, numerous petty states grew up in
Anatolia. One group coalesced in the central upland of Asia Minor to form the
powerful kingdom of the Hittites, with its principal city at Boghazkéy (ancient
Hattusas). The ‘Old Kingdom’ gave way to ‘The Empire’ about 1460 B.c. In the
former period, the redoubtable Mursilis I raided Syria and even captured Babylon
(1595 B.c.), though he almost immediately withdrew; in the latter, the Hittites
firmly established their supremacy over neighbouring states and in Syria clashed
with their imperialist rivals, the Egyptians. A trial of strength with Rameses II
(1301-1235 B.C.) led to a treaty between the two powers c. 1280 B.c. The Hittite
Empire collapsed suddenly about 1200 B.c., due to the same overwhelming inva-
sion that produced the prodigious onslaught of the ‘Peoples of the Sea’ upon Egypt,
repelled by Rameses II (1198-1166 B.c.).
Mesopotamian influences were strong in Hittite architecture, but there was much
in it that was individual. In important structures, massive stone masonry was a
feature, though the upper parts of walls, even of highland town fortifications, were
commonly of sun-dried bricks in timber-framing: wood is still used for building in
the mountains of Anatolia, and in ancient times was undoubtedly more plentiful
than now. The chief remains are of town walls, palaces and temples. There survive
also many impressive rock sculptures of a sacred character, widely distributed in
isolated highland sites.
The outer Town Walls, BoghazkG6y (Hattusas) (c. 1360 B.C.) (p. 834, B) en-
closed an area of some 300 acres. They were double, like those of Mesopotamia,
connected by cross-walls, the compartments thus formed being packed with rubble.
Square towers projected at frequent intervals, and some 20 ft in front was a lesser
wall, with its own minor towers. The outer shell of the main wall was particularly
strong, built of large, rock-faced, close-jointed stones up to 5 ft long, varying in
shape from the rectangular to the polygonal. The upper parts of the walls were of
brick, towers and walls finishing in crenellations similar to the Mesopotamian. Five
gateways partially survive. These were flanked by great towers and had peculiar
elliptical openings of which the corbelled upper parts stood on pairs of enormous
monolithic stone jambs (p. 83A). Broad archivolts surrounded the portals, and
ornamenting the jambs of three of the gates were boldly-projecting sculptures. On
the ‘King’s Gate’ was an armed warrior on the reveal; on the ‘Lion Gate’, fore-
parts of lions on the face of the jambs; and on the ‘Sphinx Gate’, sphinxes not only
project forwards but show the full body-length on the reveals, thus anticipating
the similar monsters of Assyrian times by some five centuries. At Alaja, 20 miles
north-east of Boghazkéy, is another Sphinx Gate, and from thereabouts also come
some dado slabs in relief, which again are prototypes of the splendid mural sculptures
of the Assyrians.
Temple 1, Boghazkéy (Empire period) (p. 83£) is the largest and oldest of
five identified there, which have no regular orientation but show other principal
features in common. They consist of a number of rooms arranged around a central
court, with cloister or corridor access on two or more sides. These rooms presum-
ably were administrative offices for the control of the agricultural lands of the
temples, for in the case of Temple 1, the building is girdled by a paved road beyond
and
which are numerous magazines, many still filled with great earthenware jars
one containing cuneiform tablets constituting the temple records. Asymmetrically
placed was a special unit of several rooms, the largest of all being a sanctuary, only
82 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE

to be reached circuitously through adjacent smaller rooms. The sanctuary pro-

jected at one end, so that windows might give side illumination to the cult-statue.
Unlike Mesopotamian temples, light to most rooms came from deep windows on
the external walls. The entrance also was asymmetrical, whether through a simple
recessed porch on the flank, or, as in Temple 1, on the front opposite the sanctuary
unit. To one side of the court in Temple 1 stood a cell built of granite, as was the
sanctuary unit, the building elsewhere being of limestone. At Alaja was a similar
temple.
The Open-air Sanctuary, Yazilikaya (Empire period) (p. 83D), about two
miles north-east of Boghazkéy, is a deep re-entrant in an almost sheer limestone
face, with processions of some seventy religious figures, about 3 ft high, carved at
eye-level on the faces, converging on a rear panel. A minor grotto adjoined on the
east. Screening the groves was a temple, comprising three buildings in series,
linked by walls; a deep propylaeum (see Glossary); the temple proper, with rooms
on three sides of a court in which stood a walled cell and from which a left-hand
turn was made towards the sacred groves through a second, pillared propylaeum;
and a large sanctuary, independently approached. The propylaeum unit, as twice
encountered here, is frequent in the contemporary ‘Aegean’ architecture of main-
land Greece (p. 99B, C).

ARCHITECTURE IN SYRIA
(Circa 2000-700 B.C.)
Syria, which in ancient times included the Palestine extension, was geographically
poorly circumstanced to develop a homogeneous architecture, being elongated and
extremely diverse physically, whilst constantly liable to interference or invasion
from the great powers around it as well as to the incursion of migrant peoples in
search of living space. Its history is scarcely less long than that of Egypt or Meso-
potamia, but while it was almost continuously influenced by them, its culture was
relatively retarded due to these conditions. Mostly it was politically subdivided
into numerous small states, even when under foreign domination. Nevertheless it
played a great part in history in transmitting or transmuting the cultures of its
progressive neighbours. Already before the chariots of the Hyksos had swept into
Egypt about 1750B.c., the port of Byblos had become virtually an outpost of
Egypt, whose requirements of timber led to the commercial hegemony which the
latter held in the country. Egypt expelled the Hyksos and returned to Syria, and
then battled with the Hittites, dividing the country with them by the treaty of c.
1280 B.C. Meanwhile the Phoenicians, occupying the central coastal strip, developed
their Mediterranean trade apace. The further tremendous upheaval caused by the
‘Peoples of the Sea’ and other invaders about 1200 B.c., seriously preoccupied or,
in the case of the Hittites, destroyed, the established neighbouring powers, and in
the following centuries Syrian states were able to move towards independence.
The Philistines, residue of the Peoples of the Sea, settled ‘Palestine’ in the south;
Israel emerged; and Phoenicia, with its famous cities of Tyre and Sidon, nurtured
seafarers who succeeded the ‘Aegean’ mariners as the supreme traders of the
Mediterranean (see p. 89); among their many colonies and trading-stations was
Carthage, founded c. 814 B.c., later to become the bitter enemy of Rome. After
c. 700 B.C., Syria succumbed in turn to Assyria, Egypt, Neo-Babylonia, Persia and
Alexander.
Architecturally, a phase of some importance was that in North Syria in the
period c. 900-700 B.c., often known as the ‘Syro-Hittite’, for among the mixed
peoples of that region strong elements of the Hittites still survived: we see from the
 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE 83

ec,
KINGS GATE, BOGHAZKOY
:OUTER SIDE (cB.C.13G0
a
a CORY Zp
Ya
Mee =

ae

ple
COLUMN BASETELL
TAYANAT(B.C. 8am)

ir
Be
Bes
eT
CEL

|
zt TEMPLE | ¢ MAGAZINES, BOGHAZKOY
) OPEN AIR SANCTUARY « TEMPLE
YASILIKAYA (B.C. 13™ CENT) (cB.C.14™-13™ CENTS.)
 84 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE

“BEE Laebd f
‘ | BB) Eb eabeae CapGapeee Gp EG5 Eas Em SapEas
eto ae Sx UNUM ME
WINGED GLOBE | BATA NUMAN DAN
MARBLE PAVEMENT SLAB
Ome NINEVEH

Sei py a
y ae Zs set
| oe Lee Oa
4 “ig XA ees CH
Altay cA "Al
BNA WS San (a f {
“W
a) (oon
7a)
ie iN SSSI |p J

‘Ai I\\\
al
ee
ING
oSeoo

HEAD OFA LION

IN WHITE LIMESTONE

a6

oD
i tay pS
aw
=|:

“Bry
Sa

+4
PT
YO
eh

—
VG
t SRT
Ay = —=_
Retirees
¢
--------
he) cee aed
TH tS. ol - KI

WALL SLAB: KING ON THRONE AND ATT

~

m
i
i}
|
!
|
'
|
|
i
1
Wigs
oie
SOSA
ee
a
ee
Sng Q = if i}
il L ! ¥

WINGED DEITY : NMRoup TRANSPORT OF ABULL: NINEVEH — EGYPTIAN KINGIN IVORY

 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE 85
Bible that in their own time they gave their name to the populace there. A feature
repeatedly appearing in the palaces of the local monarchs was the ‘bit-hilani? or
porched house, a standard reception unit that already had been developing in
north Syria at a much earlier time.
The Citadel, Sinjerli, (p. 72F, G) was of oval plan, standing centrally on a
mound in a walled town which, like so many in ancient West Asia, was completely
circular. The construction of the citadel walls was typical of the period in being of
timber-framed, sun-dried brick, standing on a couple of courses of cut masonry on
rubble foundations. Internally, the citadel was divided into defensive zones by
cross walls, securing the approaches to an ‘Upper’ and a ‘Lower’ Palace (c. 8th
cent. B.c.). Each comprised bit-hilani units, two of which are particularly plain in
the plan of the Lower Palace !(p. 72G). They stood on opposite sides of a large,
cloistered court. Each had a two-columned porch, with a stair on the right, leading
to a transverse hall or throne room, beyond which was a range of smaller rooms
including bedroom and bathroom. In front of the throne was a circular hearth (a
hall in the Upper Palace had a movable iron hearth on bronze wheels). The porch
columns were of wood, with stone bases shaped either as a pair of lions or monsters,
or in triple, ornamented stone cushions having some likeness to the earliest versions
of the base of the classical Greek Ionic Order (p. 125). Instances of both occur at
Tell Tayanat, west of Antioch (p. 83c). Following the old Hittite tradition and
contemporary Assyrian practice, gates were protected by stone monsters and had
‘orthostates’ (plinth or dado vertical slabs) carved in relief. Typically Syro-Hittite is
the lavish use of timber in the reinforcement of upper, sun-dried brick walls, above
the stone dadoes. Other notable Syro-Hittite towns were Carchemish and
Sakjegeuzi.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
(Mesopotamia and Persia, circa 3000-331 B.C.)
PLANS. The Mesopotamians, in which term are included Babylonians and Assy-
rians, erected terraced temples and palaces on high, artificial platforms in towns
and cities which were themselves amply raised above the surrounding alluvial plains.
Halls and rooms grouped around quadrangles and courts were long and narrow, so
as to be easy to vault (p. 74H). The ziggurats (p. 68) associated with the chief
temples, which rose tower-like in diminishing terraces to a crowning upper temple
or shrine, had their angles towards the cardinal points, unlike Egyptian pyramids
whose sides were so placed. Mesopotamian buildings were designed for both in-
ternal and external effect, contrasting with Egyptian temples which, apart from
the frontal pylons were wholly plain outside. The Persians imitated the Mesopo-
tamians in the use of platforms and terraces, but faced the former in stone ashlar
and the latter with low-relief slabs (pp. 76E, 77A). Timber roofs, supported by
numerous columns, allowed rooms to be large and of square proportions compared
with the corridor-like vaulted apartments of the Babylonians and Assyrians.
WALLS. In the Mesopotamian plains, the sun-dried brick walls were very thick,
sometimes with a deep facing of baked bricks in bitumen jointing, which contrast
with the stone, massive walls of the Egyptians and the spare, fine-jointed ashlar
constructions of the Greeks. External walls were plainly treated, apart from but-
tress strips or projecting towers (p. 74A, B, D), the mud-wall faces being protected
by tinted washes. The Assyrians employed battlemented cresting and stone or
alabaster dadoes or plinths, ornamented with reliefs portraying military and sport-
ing events; they also introduced mural decoration in polychrome bricks and internal
painting of continuous friezes on plaster (p. 71B). Persian palace walls similarly
86 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE

were of sun-dried brick, whitewashed or tinted externally, and had the same types
of cresting, mural decoration in polychrome bricks (p. 476F, G) and dado relief
slabs as the Assyrians, but they used massive stone surrounds to door and window
openings and elaborate monumental stairways lined with relief sculptures (p. 774).
OPENINGS. Mesopotamian doorways were spanned by double semicircular
arches, sometimes ornamented with polychrome glazed bricks in developed Assyrian
architecture (pp. 72D, E; 74B, D). Instances of the pointed arch occur at Susa and
Khorsabad in aqueducts and gateways, and in drains under the palace platform at
the latter place (p. 72C) (c. 722 B.c.). Windows were rare, square-headed and high
up the walls; tall doorways normally sufficed to admit light. Ventilation was con-
trived by terracotta pipes carried through the vaults. Persian doorways and win-
dows in the Persepolis Throne Hall were square-headed and of stone set in the
sun-dried brick walls, the doorways having a cornice cresting resembling the Egyp-
tian gorge. The Tomb of Darius shows a typical doorway (p. 77B).
Rooks. Babylonian roofs were at first spanned by poles or logs carrying packed-
clay coverings on reeds, but the typical Mesopotamian roof for the better buildings
was the brick barrel vault, of two or more arch-rings, made flat on top, and doubt-
less protected by bitumen (p. 74J). Domes also became a frequent form of cover-
ing for square apartments of modest dimensions, as is shown by Assyrian wall
slabs, and these sometimes were egg-shaped with an aperture at the top (p. 72B).
Persian palace buildings were roofed in timber, with columns supporting brackets
and beams and thus panels of plates or poles carrying a packed-clay covering on
reeds (p. 76A).
COLUMNS. These are rare in earlier Mesopotamian architecture, but occasional
instances are known in Assyrian and in Neo-Babylonian works. The Persians, on
the contrary, used columns extensively, widely-spaced and comparatively slender as
they had only to support the timber and clay roofs, instead of ponderous stone
beams and slabs as in Egypt (p. 76A, B,D). The Persians invented a most dis-
tinctive type of column, with a high moulded base, fluted shaft and a capital of
recurring vertical scrolls, echoing developments also taking place about the same
time in the eastern Mediterranean, including Ionian Greece (p. 126A—-N). The bracket
form of the topmost part, with a socket for a supported beam, together with the
column as a whole, may well have sprung from a forked pole such as still is used to
support roof beams in Persian houses to-day. The brackets were fashioned variously
as the foreparts of twin bulls (sometimes human-headed), or dragons. Column
shafts in some of the lesser buildings at Persepolis were of wood, on stone bases,
covered with a very thick coat of plaster and decoratively painted.
MOULDINGS. The buildings of Mesopotamia, like those of Egypt, were gener-
ally of too vast a scale to need mouldings; or, as in Assyrian architecture, broad
areas of ornament served a corresponding function (p. 74£, G). It was the Greeks
who developed mouldings so highly, in relation to their comparatively small but
most refined buildings. The Persians, however, shared in the evolution, as is seen
in the elements introduced into column bases and capitals (p. 76B, D), and above
all, in the cornices carried by palace porticoes, as reproduced in the rock carving of
the Tomb of Darius, Naksh-i-Rustam (p. 77B), which may be compared with the
similar cornice of the Temple of Artemis, Ephesus (p. 130A). Also, a gorge mould-
ing of the Egyptian type is found over Persian doorways as, again, at Naksh-i-
Rustam.
ORNAMENT. The old Babylonians do not appear to have used architectural
ornament extensively, though in their later wall-treatments we see the beginnings
of the Assyrian systems. The Assyrians used as their chief form of mural decora-
tion stone dado-slabs with relief carving which shows an extraordinary refinement
 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE 87

of treatment (p. 84). These slabs, some of which are in the British Museum, form
an illustrated record of Assyrian pursuits (p. 84A, G, J). Pavement slabs (p. 84c),
with patterns derived from carpets, comprise bands of rosettes, palmettes and lotus
buds, demonstrating the influence of Egypt, just as do similar patterns found in
Greek art. The Assyrians were also skilled craftsmen in bronze. Flanking the
entrances to palaces were guardian, sculptured monsters, partly built into the walls.
The invention in Egypt of polychrome glazing was turned to account by the
Assyrians in the eleventh cent. B.c. in the form of enamelled bricks, blue, white,
yellow and green, used as a form of mural art. It became very popular with the
Neo-Babylonians, but in Assyria, where stone could be obtained more readily, was
later largely replaced by the dado reliefs. The Persians inherited all three types of
ornament; the monsters flanking entrance portals, as in the Gate-House of Xerxes
at Persepolis; mural decoration by polychrome bricks, as in the ‘Archer’ and ‘Lion’
panels from Susa, now in the Louvre, Paris (p. 76F, G); and low-relief slabs applied
to stair-walls and parapets and terrace platforms (p. 77A). Persian, like Assyrian
surface ornament, was concentrated around the lower portions of buildings, unlike
the Egyptian, which was distributed uniformly over pylons, column shafts and
inner walls.

REFERENCE BOOKS
ALBRIGHT, W.E. The Archaeology of Palestine. Pelican Books, Harmondsworth, 1949.
ARIK, R. O. Les Fouilles d’ Alaga-Hiiyitk. Ankara, 1937.
BELL, E. Early Architecture in Western Asia. London, 1924.
BITTEL, K. Reports of excavations at Boghazkéy, in Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-
gesellschaft, 1xx-Ixxvili, 1932-9.
BOTTA, P.E. et FLANDIN, E. Monuments de Ninive. 5 vols., Paris, 1849-50.
CHILDE, V. G. New Light on the Most Ancient East. 4th Ed. New York, 1953.
CONTENAU, G. Everyday Life in Babylon and Assyria, trans. K. R. and A. R. Maxwell-
Hyslop. London and New York, 1954.
—. Manuel d’archéologie orientale. 4 vols., Paris, 1947.
DIEULAFOY, M.L’ Art antique de la Perse. 5 vols., Paris, 1884-9.
FERGUSSON, J. The Palaces of Nineveh and Persepolis Restored. London, 1851.
FRANKFORT, H. The Art and Architecture of the Ancient Orient. Harmondsworth, 1954.
—. The Birth of Civilisation in the Near East. London, 1954.
GHIRSHMAN,R. Iran. Pelican Books, Harmondsworth, 1954.
—. Report on the Ziggurat at Tchoga-Zanbil. Illustrated London News, Sept. 8, 1956.
GURNEY, O-R. The Hittites. Pelican Books, Harmondsworth, 1952.
KELLER, W. The Bible as History. London, 1956.
LAYARD, A. H. Monuments of Nineveh. 2 vols., London, 1849.
—. Nineveh and its Palaces. 2 vols., London, 1849.
LLOYD, SETON. Early Anatolia. Pelican Books, Harmondsworth, 1956.
—. Ruined Cities of Iraq. 3rd ed., London, 1946.
LOUD, GORDON. Khorsabad. 2 vols., Chicago, 1936-8.
1893-1943,
LUSCHAN, F., and others. Ausgrabungen in Sendschirli. 5 vols., Berlin,
MALLOWAN, M.E. L. Twenty-five years of Mesopotamian Discovery. Brochure. London,
1956.
ee A. T. History of Palestine and Syria to the Macedonian Conquest. London and
New York, 1931.
—. History of the Persian Empire—Achaemenid Period. Chicago, 1948.
PARROT, A. Archéologie mésopotamienne. Paris, 1946.
, : :
—. Ziggurats et Tour de Babel. Paris, 1949.
Persia, Phrygia and
PERROT, G., and CHIPIEZ. History of Art in Chaldaea and Assyria;
Judaea. § vols., London and New York, 1884-92.
PLACE, VICTOR. Nineve et l’Assyrie. 3 vols., Paris, 1867-70.
PUCHSTEIN, 0. Boghazkéy. Die Bauwerke. Leipzig, 1912.
88 WEST ASIATIC ARCHITECTURE

SCHMIDT,E. F. Persepolis I. Chicago, 1953.

SMITH, S. Alalakh and Chronology. Brochure. London, 1940.
SPIERS,R.P. Architecture East and West. London, 1905.
TEXIER, C. L’ Arménie, la Perse, et la Mesopotamie. 2 vols., Paris, 1842-52.
WOOLLEY, SIR L. A Forgotten Kingdom. Pelican Books, Harmondsworth, 1953.
—. Ur of the Chaldees. Pelican Books, Harmondsworth, 1954.
WRIGHT, G.E. Biblical Archaeology. Philadelphia and London, 1957.

Babylon (conjectural restoration) in the sixth century B.c. See p. 70

 ADRIATIC

SEA

Land over 1500 ft.

Miles 100

The Central Lands of the Greek World

III. GREEK ARCHITECTURE

(650-30 B.C.; preceded by Aegean, circa 3000-1100 B.C.)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. It was upon the island of Crete that arose the first great sea-
power of the Mediterranean, which flourished a thousand years before the Greek
civilization reached its peak. This ‘Aegean’ culture extended to Greece and her
islands, and was founded on trade around the whole eastern Mediterranean sea-
board, with Asia Minor, Cyprus, Syria, Palestine, Egypt and Libya. Trading vessels
also reached South Italy and Sicily. Routes were thus established which, when the
Aegean civilization had crumbled, were followed by swarming colonists who were
to help to found the Greece of classical times, which comprised not only the mother-
land itself and the neighbouring islands, but settlements in South Italy and Sicily,
western Asia Minor, Cyrenaica and others distributed sporadically elsewhere around
the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. Geography determined the fortunes of both
the Aegean and the Greek cultures, for the rugged nature of the Greek peninsula
and its islands, with mountainous hinterlands which rendered internal communica-
tion difficult, made the sea the inevitable means of intercourse, fostering maritime
activity and producing hardy and adventurous seamen. Also, the mountains of
inland Greece separated the inhabitants into groups or clans, and thus arose that
rivalry which characterized the Greek states, whether in peace or war. In the Greek
period, two phases can be determined, for after the true ‘Hellenic’ civilization had
flowered, the conquests of Alexander extended Greek culture thinly over vast terri-
tories in western Asia, Egypt and Libya, and to this latter phase the term ‘Hellen-
istic’ is applied.
90 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

GEOLOGICAL. Greece and her domains had ample supplies of good building-
stone, but the mineral of greatest importance to her architecture was her unrivalled
marble, the most beautiful and monumental of all building materials, and one
which facilitates exactness of line and refinement of detail. This marble is found in
abundance, notably in the mountains of Hymettus and Pentelicus near Athens, and
in the islands of Paros and Naxos. The Greeks attached so much importance to the
quality of fine-grained marble for producing exact outlines and smooth surfaces
that, as in the Temples at Paestum, Italy, they even coated coarse-grained limestone
with a layer of marble ‘stucco’ in order to secure this effect, which is the great
characteristic of their architecture.
CLIMATIC. The climate was intermediate between rigorous cold and relaxing
heat; hence the Greek character, combining the energy of the north with the
lethargy of the south, produced a unique civilization. The clear atmosphere and
intensity of light, largely resulting from the rocky nature of the country and the
sparsity of forests, was conducive to the development of that love of precise and
exact forms which are special attributes of Greek architecture. The climate favoured
an outdoor life, and consequently the administration of justice, dramatic representa-
tions, and most public ceremonies took place in the open air, even in winter, and to
this is largely due the limited variety of public buildings other than temples. The
hot summer sun and sudden winter showers, together with the Greek love of con-
versation, were probably answerable for the porticoes and colonnades which were
such important features.
RELIGIOUS. The religion of the ‘Aegeans’ was a nature worship which went
through a series of primitive stages. Though eventually divinities were conceived
in human form, and represented by small idols, rocks and stone pillars and all sorts
of trees and animals continued to be venerated. Mysteries of masculine force were
represented by the sacred bull, symbolized by the ‘horns of consecration’, and the
shield and the sacrificial double axe also had mystical virtues. The supreme deity was
the fertility- or mother-goddess, Rhea, later identified with Hera by the Greeks.
Priestesses, rather than priests, conducted the religious rites. Worship centred on
sacrificial altars, in open-air enclosures, caves, small chapels or household shrines.
Temples were not needed until after the collapse of the Aegean civilization, when
the Greeks began to represent their deities by large statues. The religious cere-
monies and festivals of the Aegeans included sacred games and ritual dances,
establishing traditions upon which the classical Greek athletic contests and arts of
the theatre were founded.
The Greek religion also was in the main a worship of natural phenomena, but
more highly developed. The gods were personifications of particular elements, or
were deified heroes, and each town or district had its own local preferences, cere-
monies and traditions. There was no regular priesthood. The priests and priestesses
were not members of an exclusive class but led the normal community life.
The principal Greek deities with their attributes and Roman names are as
follows:

GREEK (The twelve Olympians) ROMAN

Zeus The supreme god, and ruler of the sky Jupiter (Jove)
Hera Wife of Zeus, and goddess of marriage Juno
Apollo God of law and reason, art, music and poetry;
founder of cities Apollo
Athena Goddess of wisdom and learning Minerva
Poseidon The sea god Neptune
Dionysos God of wine, feasting and revelry Bacchus
Demeter Goddess of earth and agriculture Ceres
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 91
GREEK (The twelve Olympians) ROMAN
Artemis Goddess of the chase Diana
Hermes Messenger of the gods. God of commerce Mercury
Aphrodite Goddess of love and beauty Venus
Hephaestus God of fire, flame and forge. God of handicrafts Vulcan
Ares God of war Mars
Also: Hestia (Vesta), goddess of the hearth (sacred fire); Helios (Sol), the sun
god; Selene (Luna), the moon goddess; Pan (Pan), god of the flocks. Two mortals
who became gods were Heracles (Hercules), god of strength and labour, and
Asclepius (Aesculapius), god of healing.
SociaL. The high degree of civilization reached in Crete during the Bronze Age
was due to the immensely long period of security the island enjoyed to pursue its
thriving trade with the countries surrounding the eastern Mediterranean. This was
a ‘thalassocracy’—a naval empire. The Greek mainland, however, though partici-
pating in the Aegean culture, suffered repeated incursions of northern peoples. The
racial stock there became increasingly different, and life centred in politically-
independent, stronghold towns, such as Mycenae and Tiryns. In Crete there were
ninety or more cities within its compass of 3,300 square miles. They early became
politically united, first under Phaestos, on the south coast, then under Knossos,
on the north. Complex palaces existed at both these populous places, as also in the
lesser towns such as Gournia; whilst at Hagia Triada, near Phaestos, was a royal
villa. Commerce was the mainstay, but Crete was also an originating cenire in the
decorative arts and minor crafts, and its pottery was widely exported. Chief diver-
sions were music and dancing, wrestling, boxing, gymnastics and bull-leaping,
often in a religious connection. Women took an important part in social life, and
participated even in hunting and the more strenuous games, as well as in craftwork.
In the Hellenic civilization which next emerged, in Greece, centuries later, the
various Greek states, despite political dissensions, were united by a similar devo-
tion to their religion, and by religious festivals, as well as by their love of music,
the drama, and the fine arts, and also by national games and by emulation in those
manly sports and contests for which they were so distinguished. The Greeks were
essentially democratic, despite the assumption of power in some instances by
eminent families or by ‘tyrants’. Normally, the citizens shared in all affairs of state
in greater or less degree. Palaces, the dominant type of building in the Aegean age,
scarcely appear in Greek architecture.
HISTORICAL. The Aegean civilization was initiated, about 3000 B.c., by a
movement of peoples from Asia Minor to Crete, where they mingled with the
original inhabitants, who were of ancient Mediterranean stock. The civilization
grew and expanded, penetrating the mainland some five hundred years later; but
about 2000 B.c. the mainland suffered an incursion of northern invaders. Recovery
followed, and between 1600-1400 B.c. the whole Aegean culture reached its peak.
Then came a further invasion of a northern Greek tribe, the Achaeans, who swept
beyond the mainland to the islands and Crete itself, where they ravaged and burnt
the unprotected cities. The blow was severe, but not fatal. The final catastrophe
was due to yet another devastating northern incursion, this time of the Dorian
Greeks, by whom the civilization was almost completely destroyed (c. IIOO B.C.).
Great numbers of the Aegeans fled, settling chiefly upon the neighbouring coast of
Asia Minor instead, where, as Ionians, they at length built prosperous cities anew.
In course of time, about the eighth and seventh centuries B.c., subsistence proved
too meagre for the Dorians themselves, and having learnt the arts of the sea they
became ardent colonists too, though turning mainly to the West, to South Italy
and Sicily.
92 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

Thus ‘Hellenic’? Greece was born and a new civilization arose from the ashes of
the old. By 600 B.c., the cities of Greece had settled down to their several forms of
government—tyrannic, aristocratic or democratic—and most of their colonies had
been founded. The Ionians of Asia Minor were to find themselves involved politi-
cally with the Persian monarchy. Cyrus won a decisive victory at Sardis (546 B.C.)
and the Persians eventually conquered the Greek cities in Asia Minor. These
Ionian Greeks revolted (499-493 B.C.) but were reconquered by the Persians.
Under Darius I, the Persians later invaded Greece itself, but were defeated at
Marathon (490 B.c.). A second Persian invasion by Xerxes was terminated by the
naval victory of Salamis (480 B.c.) and the land battle of Plataea (479 B.c.). The
national exultation over these victories is largely responsible for the fact that the
most important temples were built in the fifty years which followed the battles of
Salamis and Plataea. The rule of Pericles (444-429 B.c.) marks the climax of
Athenian prosperity, but the wonderfully rapid growth of Athens excited the
jealousy of the slower Spartans, and this brought about the Peloponnesian war
(431-404 B.c.), which ultimately established the supremacy of Sparta, but her
arbitrary and high-handed conduct roused other states against her, and the leader-
ship passed successively to Thebes and Macedonia. The latter had hitherto been
considered a half-barbarian state; but thanks to the ability of Philip, king of
Macedonia, and of his son Alexander the Great, it rose to a leading position in
Greece. In 334 B.c. Alexander set out on his great expedition, and in six years he
subdued the Persian Empire, having besieged and taken Tyre en route and received
the submission of Egypt, where he founded the famous city of Alexandria, on a site
to the east of the Egyptian town of Rhacotis. His conquests extended to northern
India, and Greek art and civilization thus spread through western Asia.
On Alexander’s death at Babylon (323 B.C.) the empire he had created was split
up among his generals and Egypt fell to Ptolemy, who founded a dynasty (p. 19);
while in Greece an unsuccessful attempt was made to start leagues between cities,
such as the Achaean and Aetolian Leagues. The natural isolation and mutual
animosity of the Greek communities afforded all too good an opportunity for the
intrusion of the centralized and united power of Rome, and thus Roman interfer-
ence gradually increased until Greece became a Roman province (146 B.C.).
Already the Romans had entered Asia Minor, and between 190-133 B.c., the Greek
states there came piecemeal within her control. Syria followed suit in 64 B.c. and
Egypt in 30 B.c.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
AEGEAN ARCHITECTURE
(Circa 3000-1100 B.C.)
The architecture of Crete and the other islands differed from that of the mainland,
although in the minor arts, practice was common. The island peoples were partly
Asiatic in origin, and their buildings had the flat roofs typical of eastern countries.
The flat roofs allowed buildings to be drawn together, when necessary, in large
blocks, two, three or even four storeys high, light-wells being used to admit natural
light to the inner parts of the blocks. Spacious stairways were developed, in return
flights, and the flat roofs formed part of the serviceable accommodation. The main-
land peoples, on the other hand, brought their northern practices with them, and
used low-pitched roofs, so that, apart from exceptions due to Island influence, their
buildings were single-storeyed, and allowance had to be made between the com-
paratively small units for the removal of rain-water. The characteristic mainland
domestic unit was the megaron, which had a deep plan, comprising an entrance
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 93
porch, the living-apartment or megaron proper (p. 99c, 6, 8), and normally, a
thalamus or sleeping-room behind. The powerful Cretan navy made fortifications
largely unnecessary on the islands, and gave freedom in the selection of town sites;
on the mainland the liability to hostile irruption made it essential to choose elevated
sites, encircled by massive defensive walls. As a whole, houses and palaces are the
principal building-types representative of Aegean architecture, with, chiefly on the
mainland, an important class of underground tomb. Buildings were constructed of
rubble or cut stonework to dado height, the upper parts having a heavy, double
frame of timber, the panels being infilled with sun-dried brick or stone rubble. The
walls were coated with stucco outside, and either tinted, or, on the islands, painted
with patterns inspired by the framed construction which lay behind. Gypsum,
plentiful in Crete, also served to make hard, polished floors and roof-deckings
carried on rounded logs, or was used in slabs for similar purposes. Masonry tech-
nique was well-developed, and particularly on the mainland, ranged from a ‘cyclo-
pean’ type comprised of great boulder-like stones, used in fortifications, to coarse
or fine ashlar of heavy blocks (p. 99G). No mortar was ever employed, though clay
sometimes served for bedding in rubble or cyclopean work. Polygonal walling, an
advanced technique, was not invented until Hellenic times. False arches of heavy
blocks, or of corbels advanced course by course until a triangular head had been
formed, covered the openings in stone walls (p. 100H), and the corbel method was
normal too for vaults or pointed domes, as in the Treasury of Atreus, Mycenae (p.
100). Square, masonry pillars, with a bracket form of capital, sometimes gave inter-
mediate support on lower floors, but the distinctive type of column was of cypress
wood, with a downward-tapering, cylindrical shaft, a slight, disc-like base and a
widely-projecting capital with two main parts, a square abacus above, and a cir-
cular, bulbous echinus below (p. 100D); not unlike the Doric capital of later times,
except that there are here additional small mouldings above and below the echinus.
This broad-topped form of column was necessary to collect the weight of the thick,
supported walls (p. 99F).

GREEK ARCHITECTURE
(650-30 B.C.)
There are two principal phases, the Hellenic and the Hellenistic.
1. The Hellenic Period (650-323 B.c.). Greek culture naturally owed much to
preceding civilizations, but the Hellenic Greeks, by reason of their innate artistic
sense, so profoundly influenced the development of European art that Greece must
be regarded as the veritable source of literary and artistic inspiration, and it has
been said, ‘Whate’er we hold of beauty, half is hers’.
The ‘Dark Age’ which followed the Aegean civilization broke the continuity of
the arts and threw them back to their early beginnings; but because some of the
causative factors were similar, early Hellenic architecture had features in common
with its predecessor. Though temples were now the chief building type, the earliest
resembled the Aegean megaron in plan and in having timber-laced, sun-dried brick
walls, stucco-covered, on stone dadoes; timber-enframed portals (the origin of the
door architrave), narrowing a little towards the top; timber antae or uprights pro-
tecting the free ends of the naos walls where they embraced the pronaos or porch;
and a low-pitched roof showing pediments or gables over the narrow ends. Then
too, temple enclosures had propylaea, also found in Aegean architecture (p. 99C).
But the outstanding difference was that, almost from the first, colonnades appear,
surrounding the temple and forming an essential part of it. Greek architecture was
essentially columnar and trabeated (trabs =a beam), and this gave it that simple
94 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

straightforward character in which the constructive system is self-evident, uncom-

plicated by such devices as are involved in arch, vault and dome. From first to last
in this period, the wooden roofs were untrussed, the rafters being supported by
longitudinal beams—wall-plates, purlins and ridge-piece—laid on the walls and
colonnades themselves or propped on struts from cross-beams (p. 154B). As the prin-
ciple of triangulation was unknown, spans could not be large, unless internal lines
of columns were supplied, and these usually were in two superimposed tiers (pp.
116B; 154B). This contrast with the constructive genius of the Romans is most
marked (p. 199), and a reminder that the two architectures have to be assessed
quite differently. Greek columns and their entablatures were at first entirely of
timber, with terra-cotta decorations in the upper trabeation, but were converted
into stone quite early in the period, about 600 B.c. The translation was quite direct,
timber forms being imitated in stone with remarkable exactness. For this reason
Greek architecture sometimes has been called ‘a carpentry in marble’, though in
fact comparatively few buildings were erected comprehensively in marble before
the fifth century B.c., this material meantime being sparingly employed for the
finer details and for sculpture. The walls, too, became wholly of stone about the
same time (600 B.C.), yet the tradition of the dado always survived in the special
way the stones were arranged at the base of the wall (p. 132C, E). Ceilings, some-
times omitted, leaving an open roof, were treated decoratively with timber-panelled
coffers, or, within the colonnades around temples, were of flat, stone slabs, coffered
to imitate the timber. Almost all kinds of stone walls were used, from coursed
rubble to the finest ashlar, well-bonded but always without mortar, unless for the
smallest quantity necessary to ensure that the stones were firmly bedded. In the
best buildings, such as temples, ashlar was normal, and the greatest precautions
were taken to minimize the joints, so that they might not impair the architectural
effect. In such work, the stones were secured together by wrought-iron cramps and
dowels, protected by molten lead.
Several important refinements were practised in Greek architecture, in order to
correct optical illusions. At the peak of the period, some of these were of a most
delicate nature, and testify to a most advanced sensitivity to form. The Parthenon
is the supreme example. The long horizontal lines of such features as stylobates,
architraves, and cornices, which, if straight in reality would have appeared to the
Greek eye to sag or drop in the middle of their length, were formed with slightly
convex outlines (p. 95E, F, G). In the Parthenon, the stylobate has an upward
curvature towards its centre of 2% ins on the east and west facades, and of 433; ins
on the lateral fagades. Vertical features were also inclined inwards towards the top
to correct the appearance of falling outwards; thus the axes of the angle columns
lean inwards 2% ins and the axes of the columns, if produced, would meet at a
distance of one and a half miles above the stylobate (p. 95c). Greek columns
usually, though not invariably, have an entasis (see Glossary and p. 95H, J). The
shafts of the Parthenon have this slight convexity of silhouette—as well as the
usual upward taper, or diminution—the deviation amounting to +4 in, in a height
of 31 ft (p. 95D). Entasis is most pronounced in the Basilica at Paestum (p. 114E,
H), where it amounts to 2} ins, and at its most delicate in the North Porch of the
Erechtheion (p. 134), where it is less than } in. Angle columns of temples were not
only set closer to the adjacent columns, but were also stouter, as it was found that
they appeared thinner against the open sky than those seen against the solid back-
ground of the ‘naos’ wall (p. 968). In the case of the Parthenon, to heighten the
perspective effect induced by the narrowed spacings of the angle columns, the
large elements in the frieze, known as triglyphs (p. 110A), were spaced progressively
more closely together from the centre outwards on the two short fronts, so that
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 95

ICAL CORRECTIONS IN ARCHITECTURE. oC

a A a 5

% a
|WN SV ;

We
--44

|
eS, ae |
ee SSS
es ey Aaah w
= a eo Se Z|
oe
eK Magee
Ay it
:| ae: ag A cage lina
iO | Se eee
eS SH
S|
|
|
|
= wh

SRRECTION or APPARENT PROP ORTIONS COLOUR EFFECTonPROPORTIONS | |

OMgM AN INSCRIPTION
INSCRIPTION ON THE FACES OF THE ANTE JC THE METOPES & ' NAOS WALL BEING BLACK THE Qt |
COLUMNS APPEAR STURDIER &THE ARCHI- qi |i
TRAVE, TRIGLYPHS & CORNICE HAVE IMPORTANCE. if i
Y WITH REVERSED. COLOURING THE COLUMNS ee
Te |SEs
a
dae
yo fe 19
& HIGHER & THE ENTAB oe2-274?
34. rae
ae
ZL.
LATURE LOSES IN IMPORTANCE. MMM
THE PARTHENON
INCLINATION OF COLUMNS
THE PARTHENON ATHENS: EAST FRONT Ons ENTABLATURE

LINES,
CENTRE
PARALLEL STRAIGHT
LINES HAVING CONVEX
CURVES ON EITHER-
SIDE APPEAR WIDER
APART IN THE CENTRE

ic db
) METHOD For INCLINATION
ENTASIS OF 2°65
.cd ARE BOTTOM eTOP
METERS RESPECTIVELY.
CRIBE SEMICIRCLES ON
SSEcAT cERECT PERPEN
ULAR CUTTING LARGER
= IN3. DIVIDE SEGMENT a PARALLEL STRAIGHT
-HEIGHT OF COLUMN THE TEMPLE FRONT AS IT APPEARS IN EXECUTION LINES HAVING CONCAVE
O ANY NUMBER OF EQUAL (E)witi CURVED HORIZONTAL LINES AND INCLINED CURVES ON EITHER ~
ATS - SAY3- & NUMBER VERTICAL FEATURES AS AT G. SIDE APPEAR CLOSER
TH 1.23 FROMa. THRO TOGETHER IN THE CENTRE.
NTS 1.2.3 IN SEGMENT THE TEMPLE FRONT AS IT WOULD APPEAR IF BUILT
=CT PERPENDICULARS AS AT E. WITHOUT OPTICAL CORRECTIONS. A SIMILAR EFFECT PRO-
TTING CORRESPONDING DUCED BY INCLINED~
AXES
ISIONS OF THE HEIGHT. THE TEMPLE FRONT ARRANGED WITH VERTICAL LINES AS INDICATED IN
AVE ~
RO’ THE POINTS THUS G)ncunine & WITH CONVEX STYLOBATE, ARCHITR He J BY DOTTED LINES
ENTABLAT URE «PEDIME NT PRODUCI NG AS
RESULT AT E.
TAINED DRAW CURVE
96 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

none is precisely above a column. The intervals differ by a maximum of 4} ins.

Another correction was to make the letters of inscriptions, when raised up on
buildings, larger in the upper lines than in the lower, so that they might appear all
of one size when viewed from below (p. 95A). The finest sculpture completed the
most important buildings, and the delicate adjustment and refined treatment, alike
of the architecture and sculpture, were made possible by the hard, fine grain of the
marble. Early sculptures in stone usually were coloured all over, but when marble
came to be employed, bright colours and gilding were applied only to selected
parts, so as to emphasize the fine qualities of the material itself. Similarly, in the
best buildings, colour was restricted to the architectural detail, the broader, flat
surfaces being left plain. Most of the mouldings, particularly those with curved
profiles, had their own kind of conventional running ornament painted on, or
carved and painted. When marble-masonry was not forthcoming, a coating of hard
stucco, made with powdered marble, gave the desired quality of finish to stone-
built structures. Mural painting, as on the walls of temples and porticoes, was a
highly developed art.
From the original two ‘Orders of Architecture’, Doric and Ionic, evolved simul-
taneously by the two main branches of the Greek race, there at length arose a third,
the Corinthian, a purely decorative variant which although invented by the Hel-
lenic Greeks was only to attain its full identity in the hands of the Romans. The
Etruscans (p. 170) developed the Tuscan, inspired by the Doric and a simpler and
cruder version of it; while the last to appear was the ‘Composite’, a Roman contri-
bution which did not differ greatly from the Corinthian, and which, like it, was an
off-shoot from the Ionic. These were the ‘Five Orders of Architecture’ of classical
times. An ‘Order’ consists of the upright column or support, including the capital,
and base, if any, and the horizontal entablature or part supported. The entablature
is divided into architrave or lowest part, frieze or middle part, and cornice or upper
part. The proportions of column and entablature vary in the different ‘Orders’, as
do also mouldings and ornament (p. 160). The origin and evolution of the different
parts of the three Greek Orders are considered under their respective headings in
Examples (pp. 108, 125, 137).
The Doric style was practised chiefly in South Italy and Sicily and on the Greek
Mainland; Asia Minor was the true home of the Ionic. Cyrenaica, in North Africa,
was Doric too, but the surviving monuments there are not as fully recorded as they
are elsewhere. Though there are some important remains in Greece of the earliest
experiments in Doric Architecture, it was the western colonies that showed the
greater vigour in the archaic stages of development. Examples to show the corre-
sponding evolution in Ionic Asia Minor are decidedly fewer in number. The finest
buildings of the Hellenic period, in either style, are found on the mainland; and the
select few in Athens herself, where they mostly belong to the last sixty years of the
fifth century B.c. The reasons for the apparently odd circumstance that Athens
should bring to fruition the Ionic as well as the Doric style, have to do with her
ancient history—Athens was a stronghold in Aegean times—as well as her political
circumstances. In Greece proper, the Doric and Ionic influenced one another to
some extent in the process of formative development, but in Asia Minor the Ionic,
since it originated there, resisted the innovations introduced on the mainland until
the fourth century B.c., by which time there was a general slight decline in Greek
taste, compensated however by a progressive widening of the scope of architecture
to new types of building and more ambitious and extensive arrangements.
2. The Hellenistic Period (323-30 B.c.). In this period, due to the conquests of
Alexander, Greek culture was diffused over many Near-Eastern lands, and in
newly-founded cities, no less than in the old strongholds in Asia Minor, made
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 97
fresh and brilliant advances. Athens, despite political vicissitudes, maintained much
of her artistic prestige and renown. To this resplendent Grecian world the Romans
came as comparative novices in the arts, deeply admiring and avidly assimilating
whatever ideas and methods their practical minds deemed of value to their own
evolving systems. Roman architecture was taking its own florid shape just at this
time, and it was Greek Hellenistic architecture that provided much of the decorative
inspiration as well as the embryos of quite a few of the Roman building-types. Even
later, in the Roman Imperial age, Rome continued to draw from the art of the old
Greek territories almost as much as it gave in the way of brilliant constructional
theory and practical procedure.
Greek Hellenic architecture mostly had been of a religious character, but from
the fourth century B.c. onwards, public buildings multiplied in type and number
and passed into permanent form. Indeed, there were almost as many different
kinds as there are to-day. They were dignified and gracious structures, and a quite
new departure was that they now were related formally to one another, instead of
being disposed irregularly on undulating natural sites. Civic design developed
apace, and entire groups of buildings, themselves quite complex, were laid out on
symmetrical lines in orderly schemes, often linked by colonnaded porticoes or
‘stoas’. Town planning, an art which had originated as early as the fifth century B.c.,
became normal for new developments. Trabeated architecture still was usual, but
arches began to appear over wall-openings, and large, niche-like recesses in build-
ing-plans. Such ‘exedrae’ previously had only been employed outdoors. Stone
vaults, with radiating voussoirs, though used mostly for the coverings of tombs,
were no longer uncommon. Of the highest importance was the advent, about the
third century B.C., of the roof truss, which allowed large spaces to be covered with-
out the aid of encumbering lines of intermediate pillars; though it was the Romans
who were to secure the full advantage of this development. Due to the increased
complexity of buildings, all kinds of new situations arose to be met by the Orders
of Architecture, and they lost much of their original purity of form and simplicity
of use. Taste declined, and the ornate Corinthian gained in popularity at the ex-
pense of the Doric, which at length, according to the Roman author Vitruvius,
writing in the late first century B.c., came to be considered as unsuitable for sacred
buildings. At times, novelty was deliberately sought. Parts were interchanged be-
tween Doric and Ionic, and two Orders commonly were used in the same building.
They also were superimposed in tiers, sometimes of necessity, as when colonnaded
buildings were two storeys high, but at other times solely as a decorative caprice.
These departures from the strict canons of the Hellenic period were observed by
the Romans and led to the practices which came to be characteristic of their use of
the Orders.
EXAMPLES
AEGEAN ARCHITECTURE
In the whole epoch of Aegean art, from c. 3000-1100 B.C., followed by a “Dark
Age’ up to c. 650 B.C., a climax of achievement was reached in the two centuries
1600-1400 B.C. The architecture of Crete—the originating centre—and the neigh-
bouring Aegean islands, differed in important respects from that of the Greek
mainland, which suffered successive northern invasions, and thus had a somewhat
different racial complexion. Of the many towns in Crete, Knossos and Phaestos
were the most important, and Tiryns and Mycenae represent the mainland. Athens
and Orchomenos were other important mainland centres. The principal remains of
the period are of palaces and tombs, though quite a little is known too, about lesser
domestic buildings.
D H.O.A.
98 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

PALACES
Island towns had few defences, as they early were politically unified, and were pro-
tected by the powerful mercantile navy of Crete. Mainland settlements, on the
other hand, needed fortified strongholds to protect the agricultural villages from
which livelihood was drawn, and to which the villagers could repair in times of
danger. The elaborate palaces of the kings or local chieftains and their retinues
were the main structures of the period.
The Palace of King Minos, Knossos (p. 99B), represents the Cretan type and
was the chief upon the island, as the other towns were subject to Knossos. It was
destroyed about 1400 B.c., and had grown by stages from a series of separate build-
ings into a continuous complex arranged around an open court, 170 ft by 90 ft
wide. The whole spanned roughly 400 ft each way, and covered about four acres.
Additionally, on the west side, there was a paved market-court, and to the north of
it, a theatral area, flanked by banks of broad, shallow steps, for public displays
and sports. The town proper lay still further to the west. The site of the palace is a
slight eminence, but the ground falls more steeply to the south and south-east.
The buildings mostly were of at least two storeys, the lower merely 8 ft high,
divided into long narrow storerooms on the west wing, stocked with enormous
earthenware oil jars (p. 99E) and with storage bins cut along the centre of their
floors. At the northern end were stored the archives, comprised of thousands of
inscribed clay tablets: and facing towards the central court in this wing was a
“Throne Room’, which appears to have been a chapel for religious observance,
containing an alabaster throne for the priest-king (p. 99D) with benches on each
side for priestesses, all facing towards a colonnaded light-well or lustral tank.
Frescoed griffins on the wall behind face towards the throne. The throne room was
approached from an ante-room opening from the courtyard by four pairs of folding
doors. In general, the buildings were of cut stone or gypsum blocks in the lower
tier, but of sun-dried brick or rubble, laced with timber, in the upper. On the prin-
cipal (first) floor of the western wing were spacious state-rooms, approached by a
circuitous ceremonial approach from the west market-court, via a grand staircase
near the south end of the block. On the north or coastward side was an entrance to
the central court, protected by a massive guardroom, one of the few evidences of
defence on the whole site. To the east of this entrance were the industrial quarters,
where pottery, jewellery and other crafts were practised and where oil was refined.
Centrally in the east wing at the upper level was a further hall of state. Near the
south-east corner of the courtyard the slope was cut away for the royal domestic
apartments, three storeys high, the upper at courtyard level and the two lower fac-
ing outwards to terraced gardens. They were connected by a stately staircase, in
return flights, lighted by a ramped colonnade of wooden columns from an adjacent
light-well (p. 99F). Each floor was similar, with the queen’s suite secluded from
the rest and with no external windows, all the light proceeding from light-wells.
Most remarkable were the sanitary arrangements, the queen’s rooms having bath-
room and water closets (the latter with a flushing device), connected to a drainage
system of socketted earthenware pipes which served the royal quarters as a whole.
Stairways, light-wells and colonnades of downward-tapering cypress-wood columns
(p. 99F) are typical of Island palaces, as also are double-folding doors, arranged in
close series so that a whole length of wall could be thrown almost completely open.
Walls regularly were plastered, and decorated with splendid frescoes. The palace
at Phaestos had almost precisely similar features.
The Palace, Tiryns (c. 1300 B.C.) (p. 99C), is a hill-top citadel, surrounded by
enormous defensive walls, upwards of 24 ft thick. At points where there are storage
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 99

_THE CITADEL: MYCENAE

LION CATE

ee, A ‘VIEW FROM NW. Sram

>\LACE or KING MINOS: [THE CITADEL
Sie eee
HRONEROOM
NOSSOS.creTs | OF TIRYNS
WITH TANK \’Ui
JEST PORTICO 13. PROPYLAZUM Wa lly,
ly
ONG GALLERY WITH MAGAZINES 14. GREAT STAIR TO STATEROOMS 530 _100__\30 FT.
TAIRS UP TO MAIN FLOOR oe PROCESSIONAL CORRIDOR
I5. Sy Bs 0 20 30 40 5OMTRS.
TAIRS TO ROYAL APARTMENTS L MAIN GATEWAY
ALL OF THE COLONNADES 2. INNER GATEWAY
ALL OF THE DOUBLE AXES ae = TO PALACE
JUEENS SUITE is } L 3. GREATER
JUILT DRAINS i Zm PROPYL/EUM
Zz 4, LESSER
“yy Zz PROPYLAUM
G ZZ, 5. COURT TO CHIEF
G Zz MEGARON
y2 ZZZ 6. CHIEF MEGARON
Z 7 COURT TO
y LESSER MEGARON
8, LESSER MEGARON
9,=;BATHROOM
EE
WU. '

CENTRAL
COURT

= >

(2
ze a G

7) oD
;
F
a Ss =
alt WOR ae
MeMy @
3 Wy 2 é
EXISTING wally : “SS
3 OBLITERATED,Z LF ESSS
(C)PLAN “CB
i, CS
Z
Z
=
SS
B aN yaad —— 4 TR AW

SS
POLYGONAL.

at IN ROYAL RECTANGULAR INCLINED BLOCKS

fararigOF WALLING
STORAGE
THRONE JARS © /APARTMENTS
ALABASTER
100 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

TREASURY: ?-ATREUS

SCALE FOR PLAN AND SECTION

10 fe} 10 20 30 40 S50 60 70 860 90 100 FEET
1 Bn iE 4 te 4 4 L 1
METRES

eri tek] PORTION

D)
EW OF DROMOS RESTORED OF SHAFT

ae | _—
fiseco
eas Un

2 : NY ui
a }
oe
vl iD, = ra

‘6 ee teat ( \ x 2, al
dibs | —~ Ht pp | a
“FACADE 1h ey i i
ieee
+" s
ar nie
te, i a
TN neat i Hi | | i

| 5 x ~---==---. 16-9 al) i be (h

BEC: < anf HL cull |
——SSS— ‘i iyi
(H)scutpTu “GATE OF LIONS: MYCEN
4 Ls ee ae ae Sa i ({h
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE IOI
chambers embodied, the thickness is as much as 57 ft. The massive masonry
is of
the cyclopean type (p. 99G), except for short stretches of ashlar done at a later
stage. The palace occupies the highest part of the elongated enclosure, and to
the
north of it were the dwellings of retainers, all these being divided by a defensive
cross wall from a lower terrace, bare of buildings and intended as a place of refuge
for the villagers and their flocks and herds in times of war; for here, there was no
neighbouring town. The circuitous approach to the palace was devised so as to
facilitate defence. It led through two gateways and two propylaea before reaching
the second of two large, colonnaded courts. These propylaea, each comprising an
inner and outer columned porch, sheltering a single portal in the dividing wall,
anticipate the famous propylaea of classical Greece, such as that to the Acropolis
at Athens (p. 143). Dominant in the plan, facing south into the inner large court, is
a large megaron, 32 ft wide inside, the distinctive domestic unit of the mainland,
though here serving a ceremonial purpose as well, for to one side of the main
apartment is a throne, raised on steps, facing a fixed, central hearth. The megaron
had a low-pitched roof, and in many other features of detail and construction
resembled the early temples of Hellenic Greece. A second, smaller megaron, 20 ft
wide inside, may have served as women’s quarters. This and a third, still smaller,
megaron were cut off from the inner large court and could only be approached by
a tortuous route from the outer propylon. Though the palace was essentially one-
storey, there were parts with upper floors, due to Island influences. On the western
side of the large megaron was a bathroom with a floor of a single black stone,
measuring 13 ft by 11 ft. Of the corresponding palace at Mycenae, of about the
same date, less evidence survives, but whatever is forthcoming confirms the prin-
ciples already noted at Tiryns.
The Lion Gate, Mycenae (c. 1250 B.C.) (pp. 99A, I00H) is the principal and
most famous feature of the above palace, standing in the circuit of its massive walls,
which elsewhere are of the cyclopean type. The gateway, and the adjacent ashlar walls,
represent a later modification. It has always stood above ground. Great, upright
stone jambs support an immense lintel, spanning 10 ft 6 ins and measuring 16 ft
long, by 33 ft high in the middle, by 8 ft deep. Above is a triangular relieving open-
ing, formed by advancing stone courses, trimmed to shape and filled with a stone
slab, 2 ins thick, bearing a relief carving of two rampant lions facing a central
column. This device had a religious meaning. The sculpture records for us the
nature of the typical downward-tapering timber column of the Aegeans. It is
shown carrying a lintel made up of timber plates trapping rounded logs between
them.

TOMBS
Of the several forms of tomb used by the Aegeans, two types offer architectural
interest. They are found principally on the mainland. One is the rock-cut or
chamber tomb, in which a rectangular chamber, about 12-20 ft cube, is cut within
the slope of a convenient hillside and approached by a passage or ‘dromos’, open
to the sky, leading to a doorway in the rock fagade. Similar, but far more elaborate
is the ‘tholos’ type of tomb, a subterranean stone-vaulted construction shaped like
an old-fashioned skip beehive.
The ‘Treasury of Atreus’, Mycenae (c. 1325 B.C.) (p. 100), also known as the
‘Tomb of Agamemnon’, is the finest of these. It is 48 ft in diameter and 44 ft high
inside, made up of 34 rings of masonry, capped by a single stone, dressed after
completion to the form of a pointed dome. The courses are laid on flat beds, so no
centering was needed. There were three metal friezes decorating the lower courses,
and metal rosettes studded the vault face elsewhere. The whole construction was
102 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

built within a cylindrical pit, upon a rammed clay floor, the apex just reaching the
ground level of a hillside. A lateral, rock-cut, chamber, 27 ft square and 19 ft high,
probably lined with heavy marble slabs originally, was the actual place of burial.
The approach to the tomb was by a dromos, open to the sky, 21 ft wide and 115 ft
long, its masonry walls rising with the hillside to a maximum of 45 ft. These walls
were up to 10 ft thick, and behind them were further very thick walls of sun-dried
brick, to protect them from damp. The impressive fagade stood 24 feet in front of
the chamber, and its portal, 9 ft wide and 18 ft high, narrowing by 1 ft towards the
top, required two enormous lintels in the depth, one of them weighing more than
100 tons. There were triangular relieving openings over this and the side-chamber
portals. The facade was embellished with architectural dressings in green, red and
white stones, including the relieving opening, and flanking the door were single,
green alabaster attached columns, of typical Aegean form, 20 ft high, tapering
downwards from 22 ins to 204 ins, decorated with bands of chevron ornament in
relief. One of these columns is now in the British Museum.
Of anumber of other such tombs, showing progressive stages of advance, the finest
are the ‘Tomb of Clytemnestra’, Mycenae, and the “Treasury of Minyas’ at Orcho-
menos, Boeotia. The flanking columns of the former had fluted shafts. Portals in
most cases were walled-up between burials, but some had actual doors, turning in
pivots in lintel and threshold.

GREEK ARCHITECTURE
In Greek cities there was a place apart, usually upon the highest part, for the
‘temenos’ or sacred enclosure, as at Delphi (p. 106A). Often, topography
allowed this to be a citadel too, an Acropolis or upper city, where the principal
sacred buildings might stand, both for dignity and safety. These were walled,
like the city itself, and sometimes were very irregular in shape, due to the lie of the
land.
The Acropolis, Athens (pp. 103B, 104), is the supreme example, foremost
among world-famous building-sites. A general idea of the original appearance of
the Acropolis can be obtained from the restoration (p. 103B).
Normally, a city temenos contained a principal temple and maybe one or two
subsidiary temples or shrines, together with treasuries in which were stored the
offerings and processional regalia of other cities that held the presiding deity in
esteem. There were also stoas, or colonnaded shelters; altars; statues or votive
columns set up in honour of heroes, benefactors or victors in the games; exedrae,
i.e. semi-circular seats or walled recesses for rest and contemplation; and sacred
groves of trees. Olympia (p. 105B), Delphi (p. 106A), Epidauros (p. 1068),
Corinth, Eleusis and Delos were further towns having a temenos famous in Doric
Greece. But temples and shrines were to be found too, adjacent to the Agora, the
city square or market place, the focus of Greek political, social, business and
economic life. About it were the Prytaneion or Civic Hall; the Bouleuterion or
Council House, a covered place of assembly; market enclosures of various types
and stoas facing towards the Agora and serving miscellaneous functions. Colon-
nades sheltered the public fountains, and the vital importance of clear, pure water
gave the fountain building a high civic prestige. At first, the Agora also served for
open-air public meetings, religious assemblies and as a theatral area for contests,
games and spectacles, but by Hellenistic times a number of the former uses of
the Agora had been relegated to specially designed buildings. There were very
fine, formal civic squares at Priene (p. 132G), Miletus and Ephesus, all in Asia
Minor.
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 103

EFERENCES
THE PROPYLEA
. PINACOTHECA
. STATUE OF ATHENA PROMACHOS
THE ERECHTHEION
OLD TEMPLE OF ATHENA
THE PARTHENON
7, THEATRE OF DIONYSOS
STOA OF EUMENES
ODEION OF HERODES ATTICU:
ee NIKE AP

B. The Acropolis, Athens (restored) : aerial view from S.W.

(c. A.D. 161). See p. 102
 104 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

: ATHENS
THE ACROPOLISWillies lap

THE ERECHTHEION TLE —the parTHeNnon

WALL OF
\ “oy KIMON
\\ ATRENS RC

( QC etsy
(A) secTION FROM NORTH TO SOUTH
WAZA
PRC eg eae —
se PPA mu

+
NG _ — |
(B) SECTION FROM EAST TO WEST

ow
Sa,
_ NORTH
_CAVE OF APOLLO PLS ete eo
CLEPSYDPAGS#54,CAVE OFPANS —— , A
3 if ie Vie — j OB, aa 4iy
PINACOTHECA\* [ROMAN CISTERN ae —e
Hee | ag 2} SITE OF THE STATUE OF TT Fetne Nese
: . _, ATHENA PROMACHOS |ERECHTHEIONN. |
= h F BE 1 *
SL
a | ga
ied oo oe ee
THE TEMPLEZLY 4
NIKE APTEROS
te =
,
Se
aS
ee ne =
—<
Har
va "3
iN WM - bd ape

EE
Se | THE ODEION OF ‘ Aa
3A THE PARTHENON
tne er a iy
UT net
pre = mh Ww
~ mies...

oe mee et S As : we UR
TEN

wan INDICATES EXISTING REMAINS.

wzza INDICATES PARTS DESTROYED. ©

|90 50. (0 100 200 500 400 500

SCAN ae i rr
050 08 20 BH 40 50 & 7 80 90 100 II0 120 METRES
~~.

GREEK ARCHITECTURE 105

re Statue of
thena Promachos Bouleuteri Areopagus
The Parthenon Propylaea | ae

2a
A)
Bs
a
a

theEponymoi
Stoa
of

SEliaivs
UE
MIVA

Stoa Poikilé Tholos Bema Metroon

A. The Agora (market-place) at Athens (restored), with Acropolis beyond. See p. 147

Valley of the Arcadian Kronos Me- State Valley of the

Kladeos River Mountains saa in ae Treasuries Alpheios River

Stadium

&AAwAtiw
AS
WANT
PeJVERSO
t

Stoa
Poikilé
ee

t 1! t {
i le of Zeus Bouleuterion
The olepctepe dares ha Processional Gateway

B. The Altis, Olympia (restored). See p. 147

106 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

A. Delphi: sacred precinct (restored model). See pp. 102, 147

(centre) Temple of Apollo; (top left) Theatre; (foreground) Treasuries ;
(right) Stoas

B. The Hieron, Epidauros, from S. (restored model). See pp. 102, 147
1. Tholos 3. Temple of Asclepius 5. Propylaea
2. Stoas for the sick 4. Temple of Artemis 6. Stadium
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 107

TEMPLES
Temples were the chief class of building in the Hellenic period, and we now
describe their purpose and the different types in use. They were built with special
regard to outward effect, since they were not intended for internal worship and the
altar stood opposite the east front. They were adorned with fine sculpture in order
to form fitting shrines to the deities to whom they were dedicated. They generally
stood upon a crepidoma (see Glossary) of three or more steps. The ‘naos’, containing
the statue of the god or goddess, was the kernel of the plan, and there was some-
times a treasury chamber, as well as front and rear porticoes, respectively known
as the pronaos and opisthodomos (epinaos). Colonnades wholly surrounded all but
the smallest buildings. It will thus be seen that Greek temples differ materially in
purpose and design from the large temples of Egypt, though they somewhat
resemble the relatively small ‘Mammisi’ temples of the Egyptians (p. 49).
With one or two exceptions, Greek temples were not large, but even so, as the
principle of the roof truss was not understood before the Hellenistic period,
internal double-tiered colonnades were often needed to help support the roof. On
the two short ends of the temple, a triangular-shaped pediment, usually filled with
sculpture, terminated the simple span roof (pp. 116A, 118A). These roofs were
constructed of timber members, boarded and covered with terra-cotta or marble
tiles, overlapping one another and finished off at the eaves with antefixes (p. 110H)
or, in the case of Ionic temples, stopping behind a crowning moulding ornamented
with lion-head sculptured masks which served to eject rainwater (p. 132J). The
entrance doors normally were within the pronaos on the east front, and as they
were tall, reaching about two-thirds the height of the lofty naos, when open they
would allow ample light to illuminate the statue in the naos. Even when closed,
metal grilles in the panels of the doors would admit sufficient light for ordinary
purposes. Windows were rare in temple buildings, and consequently it was at one
time thought that quite a few temples must have been ‘hypaethral’, i.e. partly
open to the sky. One or two large ones were, such as the Temple of Apollo at
Didyma, near Miletus (p. 131), but rarely, and due rather to incompletion than
intention, as was, apparently, the case at the Heraeum, Samos (p. 128) and the
Temples of Zeus Olympius at Agrigentum (pp. 109G, II 5) and Athens (p. 140) at
the time when the latter was seen by Vitruvius. Surviving fragments of marble
roof tiles from a dozen sites show that light was quite often admitted to roof spaces
through holes cut in specially large tiles.
The comparative plans (p. 109) show the different types of temple employed by
the Greeks. Rectangular temples are described (a) according to the number of
columns on the entrance front and (6) by the arrangement of the exterior columns
of the temple in relation to the naos, as below:
(a) Henostyle—one column Heptastyle—seven columns
Distyle—two columns Octastyle—eight columns
Tristyle—three columns Enneastyle—nine columns
Tetrastyle—four columns Decastyle—ten columns
Pentastyle—five columns Dodecastyle—twelve columns.
Hexastyle —six columns
the
(b) ‘In antis’ temples have from one to four columns between antae at
.
front. Two is the usual number.
between antae at front
‘Amphi-antis’ temples have from one to four columns
and rear. Two is the usual number.
‘Prostyle’ temples have a portico of columns at the front.
108 GREEK ARCHITECTURE
and rear.
‘Amphi-prostyle’ temples have a portico of columns at front
the naos.
‘Peripteral’ temples have a single line of columns surrounding
wall.
‘Pseudo-peripteral’ temples have flank columns attached to the naos
naos.
‘Dipteral’ temples have a double line of columns surrounding the
is
‘Pseudo-dipteral’ temples are like the last, but the inner range of columns
omitted on the flanks of the naos.
Examples are:
(i) Distyle in antis—The Temple of Nemesis, Rhamnus. Doric (p. 109A).
(ii) Amphi-antis distylk—No surviving example, but the type is shown at p.
IOOB.
(iii) Prostyle tetrastyle—Temple ‘B’ at Selinus, Sicily. Doric (p. 109C).
(iv) Amphi-prostyle tetrastyle—Temple on the Ilissus, Athens. Ionic (p. 109D).
(v) Peripteral hexastyle—Theseion, Athens. Doric (pp. I109J, I20L).
(vi) Pseudo-peripteral heptastyle—-Temple of Zeus Olympius, Agrigentum.
Doric (pp. 109G, I14K).
(vii) Peripteral octastyle—Parthenon, Athens. Doric (pp. IOQM, 122G).
(viii) Dipteral octastyle—Olympieion, Athens. Corinthian (p. I09H).
(ix) Pseudo-dipteral octastyle—Temple ‘G.T.’, Selinus, Sicily. Doric (p. 109L).
(x) Peripteral enneastyle—‘Basilica’, Paestum. Doric (pp. 109K; I 14H).
(xi) Dipteral decastyle—Temple of Apollo at Didyma, near Miletus. Tonic (p.
IOQN).
Types (i) and (iii), above, often served too as treasuries. The larger temples in
the Doric style are usually hexastyle or octastyle. Pseudo-peripteral arrangements
are very rare before the Hellenistic period, but became the favourite with the
Romans. The more important Ionic temples of Asia Minor nearly always are
dipteral or pseudo-dipteral and of a more variable and ostentatious nature than the
Doric; they normally have a deep pronaos, and a shallow opisthodomos or none at
all. The use of the Corinthian Order for the whole of a temple is not common
until later Hellenistic times. The Erechtheion, Athens (p. 134F) is an exceptional
instance of irregular planning. Greek circular temples usually were peripteral, as
the Philippeion, Olympia (pp. 105B, IO9F), and the Tholos, Epidauros (p. 106B,
IOQE).

THE DORIC ORDER

Though at one time the question was debated, there is now no doubt that the Order
had a timber origin (p. 110F). Whilst there are certain resemblances between the
Aegean megaron and the earliest temples (see p. 93), these do not concern the
peristyles, which are distinctively Greek, and in any case there is evidence that
between the Aegean and the Greek periods temple structure goes back to very
primitive beginnings and virtually begins anew. Simple structures like those illus-
trated on p. IIOC, D, doubtless continued to be built even while those of a sacred
character were being progressively refined for their very special purpose, and
indeed close counterparts can still be found among rustic structures to-day.
Evidently, Greek columns began as tapered tree trunks, the function of the square
abacus and circular echinus comprising the capital being to gather and transmit
the load of the entablature to the column shaft. The architrave is readily identifi-
able as a lintel—in fact, pairs of lintels, plated together—spanning from column
to column and sustaining cross beams showing their ends as triglyphs in the frieze.
Cross beams were heavy and numerous for the reason already seen; roof trusses
were unknown and the beams had to support struts to prop up the sloping roofs.
The lowest member of the cornice represents a wooden plate across the tops of
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE H (eo)\o

aaa
1)
|\Vy| PLAN Trdfse
ANS ? GREEK r
TEMPLESrma
MRWIDT

Td F- coe og wo
ibes Bt Hh YP a x ae @ 5 al

|
|
TEMPLE or \OWNO EXAMPLES |!,
: a@Wd@aaama ge

NEMESIS:RHAMNUS SURVIVING ©|g! a

| DISTYLE IN ANTIS (DORIC) AMPHI-ANTIS DISTYLE |||_ y

vit = -O* aa k

oT Ao a\ ao
! < Sak a rk 7 a one) ie @ @)

: ©, EMPLE. a“B”: D head ——*" gt FE SNe

rf, EMPLE ON THE asi a Z a DB
“eo PROSTYLE. TETRASTYLE(QORIC) soe pee 3 aj ae
- —-- Olea Sas (IONIC) are : - @)
sol, 29
i 1 @)|
- | @ @ o
2 oO @ @)

| POLYCLEITOS: s\e 8 a @ B|
EPIDAUROS = [f; : fia © So
Pi ‘ COAaaoa Ss

TEMPLE of ZEUS OLYMPIUS

/AGRIGENTUM FSGHRO-Pr RIERA
_ =
7
ie! e
THE OLYMPIEION: ATHENS
DIPTERAL OCTASTYLE (CORINTH AN)

= {
RO
es G
Ae
Ho «
ee00ee 0 60 i ie 74 iis =.
i | may 2
@ ~~ LOM mio! ee Q\| im

PpRe
e! y ne . A ell UI @'2@ORO@ OAS @ oO) il

silo eeeoedas
e
eey 8)
e ( ))
LAY (K*Pty |
|eogemmame
iii2:2
a
at @,@ @|
@ © |THESEION:ATHENS BASILICA:PESTUM ono I
e 8 (oon) eos LEA Sas aia aad :

@ . is @||' tea era ® Qa |||

e = oO e : le ry ae Hy
° ° FI 1 10 @ Gea hs |

e ° ° fo) I !
: p e i. i i Coe Z

® ro td mo . is al We @
e ax: @\ “d lle e ie @
- “a || | 2 Ono
. Si *Ife 1° ala, oe
° ql; i e td pe s CL
| a is 3 q= OCA

e e @ e.| f° ° |@.o f aaaal @©o

eo eoecce e| ‘| | d sy Gael ee
» eo ithae.ed] |@e@oeen dag!
aero ! Matela Sets ¢ a ae eeaeaeaneaagi
je oi
2 HE PARTHENON:ATHENS ||US =a |
TEMPLE GT: SELINUSEERERE Goie)_PERFTERAL ceTASTYLE (Gone) = RE E ST
won
| 10 20 30 40 30
2
60
2 0
spor
30 METR
N)LEMPLEPAROLLO# DIDYMA
*MILETUS (IONIC)
 110 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

EVOLUTION OF £4 DORIC ORDER

PEDINENT — Se

cp : 1 1 t z = [ GU) - E
CAPITA eI 5| ANNULETSTig, fn Fite S|
pal a ar TATA ECHINUS ETT TRACHELION eee TT eol. |
ine | MA Hi i yaa La
FLUTINGS/T 7) 4 i li a |
etHiagmgil hTPHENTASIS
at ere MAXIMUM Hl
TH WE
fun i iT O75 2
=
us MEASURED HH inn IY com) Ee
5 Ht} SAT THIS HALT HR HH HW of &
1
eae mt

smeared SHES 2t6 i

Ht POINT).

tN
A
i

WiLL
itl Hil i
aWU
tH Of0

ols.4
my
-aepi-
TTT 77 aa
Yj Yj), Yj
(Arar ELEVATION OF PARTHENON (B) HALF SECTION THRO PORTICO
= ac SS a : ae Sa en re ae

SS Sw = = = SS ee

FORMOFHUT |
Vr * AWA
(D)LATER FORM OF HUT
A Qs
SS SS

ff fy

| i ae :
SUGG ESTED Tl MBER ENTABLATURE ©, OINTING OF COLUMNS ADancte OF PARTHENON eeesror
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE III

the triglyphs to receive the wide, flat rafters, recognizable in stone architecture as
mutules, which always retain a slope echoing the pitch of the roof. On their under-
sides are seen the guttae, stone replicas of wooden pins driven through the mutules
to secure the roof boarding, on which were laid terra-cotta tiles bedded on mud or
clay. The eaves tiles were specially made so that flanges could droop over the rafter
ends to conceal them and present a continuous fascia which survives in stone archi-
tecture as the corona, the principal projecting member of the cornice. Just before
wooden colonnades were converted into stone, the terra-cotta eaves crestings were
very ornate and differed quite a little in design from place to place. There were
also decorative terra-cotta plates slotted into the interspaces (metopes) between
the triglyphs. These terra-cottas, of which quite a few survive, were richly painted
in dark colours. The earliest stone colonnades, from about 600 B.c., had very
clumsy proportions, as the capacities of stone were imperfectly known. The
Temple of Apollo, Syracuse, Sicily (c. 565 B.c.) had columns little more than four
times their own diameter in height and a ponderous stone entablature about half
the height of the column. All the details were similarly crude. Afterwards, the
Doric Order underwent a progressive lightening of parts which did not halt when
the style had been perfected, but went on continuously throughout the two Greek
periods. In the case of the Parthenon, the entablature is about one-third the height
of the columns. Typical arrangements will now be described.
The Doric Column (pp. II0A, 113) stands without a base directly on a crepi-
doma, usually of three steps, and has a height, including the capital, of from 4 to
6 times the diameter at the base in the Hellenic period and up to 7} in the Hellen-
istic. The circular shaft, diminishing at the top from ? to 2 of this diameter, is
divided as a rule into 20 shallow flutes or channels separated by sharp “arrises’,
but sometimes there are 12, 16, 18, or, as at Paestum, 24 (p. 113c). With the
normal 20, a projection or arris came under the angles of the square abacus above,
while a flute lay astride each of the main, rectangular axes. The shaft has normally
a slightly convex profile called the entasis, discussed earlier (p. 94), to counteract
the hollow appearance which results from straight-sided columns (p. 95D). The
shaft terminates in the ‘hypotrachelion’, usually formed of three grooves in archaic
examples and later of one groove, and immediately above it is the continuation of
the fluted shaft known as the ‘trachelion’ or necking. The distinctive capital con-
sists of abacus and echinus. Near the base of the echinus are ‘annulets’ or horizontal
fillets, from three to five in number, which stop the vertical lines of the arrises
and flutes of the shaft. The form of the echinus varies with the date of the building.
In the earlier temples at Paestum (p. I13B, C) it has considerable projection, and
is fuller in outline, approximating to a parabolic section; whereas in mature
examples such as the Theseion (p. 113E) and the Parthenon (p. 113F) the projec-
tion is less and the profile more subtle, approximating to a hyperbolic curve. In
Hellenistic work, when the column has become slender, the whole capital is
shallower and the curve of the echinus approaches a straight line. The abacus,
which forms the upper member of the capital, is a square slab, unmoulded until
very late Greek times, when it begins to acquire a small moulding at the top.
The Doric entablature (p. 110A, E) which, in the case of the Parthenon, is 1}
times the lower diameter of the column in height, varies between the earliest and
latest examples from 2} to as little as 13, by the same kind of internal measure.
An entablature has three main divisions: (a) The architrave or principal beam
usually is made up of two or three slabs in the depth, the outermost showing a
vertical face in one plane. Capping it is a flat projecting band called the taenia,
and under this, at intervals corresponding to the triglyphs, are strips each known
as a regula, with six guttae or small conical drops below. (6) The frieze is formed
 12 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

of triglyphs with three upright channels which alternate with metopes or square
spaces, often ornamented with fine relief sculpture, as in the Parthenon (p. 123).
A triglyph is aligned over each column and there is usually one over each inter-
columniation. At the angles of the temple, however, two triglyphs meet with a
bevelled edge, and the intercolumniation is less by about half a triglyph in width
than that of the others. Where extra convenience was needed, as in the Propylaea,
Athens (p. 142A), a central intercolumniation sometimes was made three metopes
wide. Also, when in the Hellenistic period the proportions of the Order became
very light, it was necessary regularly to increase the number of metopes in each
intercolumniation. At Cora, Italy, a Roman temple built under Hellenistic influ-
ence, four metopes were needed to each intercolumniation (p. 160B). (c) The cornice,
the upper or crowning part, has at the top a cymatium or gutter moulding resting
on a bird’s beak moulding, and below this is the corona or vertical face. The soffit
or underside of the cornice has an inclination approximating to the slope of the
roof, and has flat blocks or mutules, which suggest the ends of sloping rafters. A
mutule occurs over each triglyph and each metope, and is usually ornamented
with eighteen guttae, in three rows of six each.
The principal Doric temples were in Greece, Sicily and South Italy, as set forth
below.

Doric Temples in Greece

Cc. 590 B.C. The Heraion, Olympia (below)
c. 540 B.C. Temple of Apollo, Corinth
c. SIOB.C. Temple of Apollo, Delphi (p. 106A)
c. 490 B.C. Temple of Aphaia, Aegina (p. 115)
c. 460 B.C. Temple of Zeus, Olympia (p. 119)
449-444B.c. The Theseion (Temple of Hephaestus), Athens (p. 119)
c. 450-4258B.c. Temple of Apollo Epicurius, Bassae (p. 123)
447-432 B.c. The Parthenon, Athens (p. 119)
444-440B.c. Temple of Poseidon, Sunium
C2 35015.C The Tholos, Epidauros (p. 109E)
436-432B.c. Temple of Nemesis, Rhamnus (p. 109A)
c. 380 B.C. Temple of Asclepius, Epidauros (p. 106B)
C. 300 B.C. Temple of Apollo, Delos (p. 113G)

Doric Temples in Sicily and South Italy

c. 565 B.C. Temple of Apollo, Syracuse (p. 111)
c. 5§0-530B.Cc. Temple ‘C’, Selinus
C. 530 B.C. The ‘Basilica’, Paestum (p. 115)
c. §20-450B.c. The Great Temple of Apollo (G.T.), Selinus (p. 109L)
c. SIOB.C. Temple of Demeter, Paestum (p. 115)
c. §10-409B.c. ‘Temple of Zeus Olympius, Agrigentum (p. 115)
480 B.C. Temple of Athena, Syracuse (p. 262)
c. 460 B.C. Temple of Hera Lacinia, Agrigentum
c. 460 B.C. Temple of Poseidon, Paestum (p. 115)
C. 430 B.C. Temple of Concord, Agrigentum
c.424-416B.c. ‘Temple at Segesta, Sicily

The Heraion, Olympia (c. 590 B.c.) (p. 114C, F), dedicated to Hera, is most
interesting as it illustrates the process of transition from timber construction to
stone. It stands on a platform of two steps, measuring 168 ft by 64 ft 6 ins. As
usual with early Doric temples, the plan has long proportions. The thick naos
walls are of ashlar stone to a height of 3 ft 6 ins, but all the upper walls were of
sun-dried brick, strengthened with wooden framing, a method of construction
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 113

Tit DORIC (ORDER_

9: DIAS
PYCNOSTYLE @- DIAMS: &
Qo 8-@ DIASTYLE
EUSTYL
9. DIAMS:a) aS @.« laa @
SY
ote (ADINTER-COLUMNIATINS
<5, SOFFITE OF | sy
yy,CORNICE |
NU,
Nomen of

:
x oe
SOFFITE OF ”
SOFFITE

: Tar
OF CORNICE

Soy ! ph z (a)a £Q
Or, ArtSp an og 10M.
20P------
On un

SR
ae

KEY ELEV. | 4,
CA

3) TEMPLE2 Ks TEMPLE PAPHAIA

EMETER: PESTU AISLAND
? AGINA _

SOFFITE OF
CORNICE

oY
SETTING-OUT
OF FLUTE

34!
3'—
BL
_ TA
KEY ELEV.
|
HE THESEION: ATHENS THE PARTHENON: ATHENS TEMPLE 2APOLLO: DELOS
SCALE FOR KEY ELEVATIONS
SCALE FOR PROFILES FEET I 30 40 50 SCALE OF MODULES
| (O) all 4 INS. 20°10" | 4
METRES‘. I |
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

TEMPLE zseee PABST" UPL.

al Yi ti 4 ‘i

leeeecevececeers @@@0000000

E THE HERAION:: oLyMPIA G) PLAN

TEMPLE OF ZEUS
OLYMIPIUS :
AGRIGENTUME
[I] A
a palgalisn

ii
iB

ATLANTA Berti) St | UOPLID

325zeEai=

Z J SECTION (RESTORED)

Oi
SONY
siete
ee
aee

PLAN L ELEVATION (res) PARTHENON

SCALE FOR PLANS ocr FOR ELEVATIONS
10 0 10 20 30 40 5060 70 8090100 150 200 FEET 050 10 30.40 50 60 7 80 9 IO0FEET
5 " 5 10 2 30 40 % GOMETRES I I 2 2 30 METRES
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 115
reminiscent of Aegean practice. Inside the temple, alternate columns of a range of
eight on each side were attached by spur walls to the naos walls. The internal
columns and all those in the colonnades outside were originally of wood, but were
replaced with stone from time to time over a period of centuries. Thus they vary
very much in their details, and are either monolithic or built-up in a varying
number of courses or ‘drums’. The entablature remained always of timber, and the
antae and the door casings were also of wood.
The ‘Basilica’, Paestum (c. 530 B.C.) (p. II4E, H), in reality a temple, is unusual
in being enneastyle, the central line of eight columns in the naos assisting to divide
the width of the temple into four parts, to allow easy support for the roof timbers.
For this reason too, the ambulatory is very wide at the sides and the temple con-
sequently almost pseudo-dipteral, while the pronaos is tristyle in antis. The
columns have a pronounced diminution and entasis, and the capitals are heavy
and wide-spreading. A peculiarity of this temple and the neighbouring Temple
of Demeter (Ceres) (c. 510 B.c.) is the decorative treatment of the trachelion (p.
113B), showing Ionic influence.
The Temple of Zeus Olympius, Agrigentum (c. 510-409 B.C.) (pp. 109G,
114) also is of archaic, unusual design, with a heptastyle, pseudo-peripteral
arrangement and a plan comprising a central naos and two slightly narrower flank-
ing apartments. At the west a portion of the naos was cut off to form a sanctuary.
The temple is now in a ruinous condition, but measured 173 ft by 361 ft over the
stylobate, so large that its roofing appears never to have been completed. That
there were pediments over the short ends is clear from an ancient description and
from surviving fragments. The enormous attached, external columns, 13 ft 3 ins
diameter and over 56 ft high, show traces of Ionic influence in having mouldings
across the base. In the upper portion of the screen wall, between the outer columns,
were giant ‘Atlantes’, sculptured figures, 25 ft high, giving intermediate support
to the massive entablature. Some authorities place the Atlantes in the naos (p. II 4J).
Because of the great scale, the Order had to be made up of many stone pieces. The
coarse stone was finished with a thin coating of fine marble stucco.
The Temple of Poseidon, Paestum (c. 460 B.C.) (pp. II3C; II4A, B, D, G; 116),
is one of the best preserved of all early Greek temples. Though more mature than
the three last-named temples from Doric western territory—the two at Paestum
and that at Agrigentum—and now approaching the perfected type, the plan is
still rather long and the Order heavy. The columns are about 29 ft high and thus
4:3 times their lower diameter of 6 ft 9 ins. The temple is peripteral hexastyle,
with fourteen columns on the flanks, and has the normal crepidoma of three steps,
pronaos, naos and opisthodomos. Near the entrance, steps led to the roof space.
The columns in the naos, preserved almost intact, are in a double tier, the upper
separated from the lower solely by a stone architrave, and not a full entablature.
The number of flutes varies; the columns of the outer colonnade have 24, the
lower, inner Order the normal 20, and the upper range only 16.
The Temple of Aphaia, Aegina (c. 490 B.C.) (pp. II7, 154B), on an island
about twenty-five miles from Athens, like the last example represents the almost
perfected temple type, but its appreciably earlier date indicates that mainland
Greece by this time was showing the greater initiative. It is hexastyle, with all
the normal parts and arrangement, including a shortened plan, requiring only
twelve flanking columns. The off-centre doorway to the opisthodomos, though
contemporary, was an afterthought. This temple, like the last, possessed a double
range of interior columns, separated simply by an architrave. It now seems unlikely
that the temple was hypaethral, as sometimes had been thought. All the exterior
columns had monolithic shafts, except three adjacent ones on the north side,
116 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

nei hig AB

B. Temple of Poseidon, Paestum, showing superimposed columns

 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 117

x9 TEMPLE § APHAIA: AGINA (RESTORED)

THE UPPER sg Gay g (PQ THE LOWER #2
ACROTERION ANY AS (HID JacroTERION ©
(RESTORED ) st1¢ " (RESTORED)
ara

Poi i }
|
SOLFT
a4
5,
- ee U E

if
* . eee ts
ae a

|)
wo i
Ar 15
[ |

| (i
: =
| I |

L777 7 7 Or—Oeses we
|

Wy Vj Us Ya

. LONGITUDINAL SECTION

= WU

E*1
ahd

~5-=-744-II'9-----
5“1034-8-6

S)\ ANTE FIXA AT (H) PLAN

J/ END OF EAVES TILE
118 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

B. The Theseion, Athens (c. 449-444 B.c.). See p. 119

 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 119
which were built up in drums after the naos had been completed. The pediment
sculptures, the elaborately-carved acroteria, the antefixae and the roof slabs over
the pediments and eaves were in Parian marble, the rest of the roof tiles being in
terra-cotta (p. II7A, B, C, G, J). The entablature was painted in glowing colours.
The pediments contained remarkable sculptures belonging to the latest phase of
archaic Greek art, dating from c. 490 B.c., like the temple itself. These sculptures,
now in Munich, are shown as disposed in Cockerell’s restorations, but later autho-
rities have suggested different arrangements of the figures. The majority of the
temple was of local limestone, treated usually with a coat of marble stucco.
The Temple of Zeus, Olympia (c. 460 B.C.) (pp. I05B, 118A), designed by
Libon of Elis, belongs to the best phase of Greek architecture. It was normal in
arrangement but grand in its dimensions, being go ft by 210 ft over the stylobate.
Mostly, it was built of limestone, faced with marble stucco, but had Parian marble
for the sculptured pediments, the carved metopes over the inner porches, the
cymatium and all the roof slabs. The splendid architectural effect was heightened
by picking out the mouldings and ornament in blue, red and gold, the main sur-
faces being left white. The acroteria were of bronze. About 448 B.c., the temple
received the colossal gold-and-ivory statue, 40 ft high above its base, by Pheidias,
most famous sculptor of all time. Inside the naos, once again, were double-tiered
colonnades. Fragments of large, marble tiles, with elliptical holes cut within them,
through which light was admitted to the roof space, were found on this site, so
the temple does not appear to have been hypaethral.
The Theseion, Athens (449-444 B.C.) (pp. I18B, 120), is now thought to be a
temple to Hephaestus. It is very well preserved externally, owing to its having
been converted into a church by the Byzantine Greeks, who however, gutted the
naos and constructed an apse at the east end. The plan is normal, except for a
roomier arrangement within the east front and a crepidoma of only two steps; also,
the double tier of inner columns, which hitherto ran the whole length of the naos,
here returns across the west end. The building was almost wholly of marble. Relief
sculptures once existed in the pediments, but otherwise were limited to friezes
over the pronaos and opisthodomos porches, and to metopes across the east front
and the neighbouring four on each flank. Much survives of the stone coffered
ceilings over the ambulatory, with some traces of the original colouring.
The Parthenon, Athens (447-432 B.C.) (pp. 103,104, I10, 113F, 122, 144B), erected
on the Acropolis, south of the old Temple of Athena (p. 104), in the time of
Pericles, was dedicated to Athena Parthenos, the virgin Athena. Ictinus and
Callicrates were the architects, and Pheidias was the master sculptor. The temple
is peripteral octastyle in plan, with seventeen columns on the flanks, and stands on
a crepidoma of three steps, which measures 101 ft 4 ins by 228 ft along the top, i.e.,
a relation of breadth to length of about 4 to 9. Each of the steps is about 1 ft 8 ins
high and 2 ft 4 ins wide, and as these were too steep to ascend with comfort, inter-
mediate steps were provided at the centre of the east and west ends (p. 122A). The
principal doorway on the east led into the naos, known as the “‘Hecatompedon’,
after an archaic temple which had stood upon the site and was so named because
its naos had measured 100 Attic feet long. This eastern chamber, 63 ft wide and
98 ft long, had Doric colonnades on three sides, forming an ambulatory. They
were in two tiers, separated by an architrave, and gave support to the roof timbers.
There were ten columns on each side, and five across the west end, counting the
angle columns twice. Near the western end stood the famous statue of Athena
Parthenos, one of the most marvellous works of Pheidias, representing Athena
fully armed with spear, helmet, aegis and shield, supporting a winged Victory in
her right hand (p. 122H). It was a ‘chryselephantine’ or gold and ivory statue,
 120 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

| THE THESEION: ce SCALE

FEET |O
FOR
5
ELEVATIONS
e
AND
ae aloe :
rarely
20 |

| ii
eam
miwieimiaimieie oe
or eee 4 J: a fr y

=I
Ya ki ia, :
~ My hi, 4
; | i i bit uty
yk 1, i}

ii Mii i i} H i
S|. i |
) ys z bE i ie 1. =:
ole 4 ys | : | ey mr m Muetnareggt EMM
eoLT] ee z= et = \

A 3 METOPES ON (Byexrerion FR
FROM SQUTH "WEST C)z METOPES ON
‘OU NORTH SIDE

(E)wesrem fA f TRANSVERSE SECTION: E.PORTICO

gat eal
a
HY =
=ti
eT
x

qo I

i =I — 5 —= =

GiHALF SOUTH SEEN IMEI AMBULATORY 3) HALF LONGITUDINAL SECTION

= oO ‘eit @ ata) eum oa Sina : OF AMBULATORY
fay i y

za | \- REET MTRSe Say

= =) aie ie Z SECTION OF
(Law t le OSA tol ee 50115 ENTABLATURE
(K)PLAN oF
OF EXISTING LACUNARIA sok
ere
e eee e gece lio
We 30}
@@@'®@ 7 nt
4S | 39-9 I 16-5 i>

| atatacalan | | 0 +?
@oeceeeececooe
10@ @ © |
scareé PLAN LOOKING UP AT Qa
PLAN Ae M) oe Tails OF ENTABLATURE
a Sy
De Le x
Sa p= 2
aN oa
Foo
OG = AUR
r yy $F
Bin
e
« eo —

. 22
is 4 PEN
b ER Se > : xz
ES yva
Aes
PIL 2S ps SAI PN
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 121
about 42 ft high including pedestal, and the gold plates which
formed the drapery,
armour and accessories over the wooden core were detachab
le, so that they could
be removed in case of danger. The face, hands and feet were of
ivory, and the eyes
of precious stones. The ceiling of the naos was of wood, decorativ
ely painted,
ornamented with sunken ‘lacunaria’ or coffers. Various suggesti
ons have been
made as to how the naos was lighted (p. 122], K), but the very large
double doors,
when open, might have been the sole means of admitting natural
light. To the
west of the naos was the Parthenon or virgin’s chamber, from which the
temple
took its name. This was entered from the opisthodomos by a large doorway
corre-
sponding to the eastern one, and its roof was supported by four Ionic columns
(p.
122E, F). As this chamber was shallow and high, a double tier of Doric columns
would have appeared exceptionally clumsy, while a single range would have en-
cumbered the floor space unduly. So Ionic columns were used instead, and both
Orders are found in the one building, a practice increasingly prevalent from this
time onwards. Numerous other evidences of Ionic influence are found in this
essentially Doric building. The naos and virgin’s chamber were enclosed by walls
about 4 ft thick, and the whole temple was encircled by an ambulatory 9 ft wide
on the sides and 11 ft in the front and rear. The pronaos and opisthodomos, each
about 60 ft by 12 ft, were arranged in a somewhat unusual manner with six columns
about 53 ft in diameter and 33 ft high, forming a prostyle portico on an upper
platform of two steps. Both pronaos and opisthodomos were used as treasuries,
and, in order to render them secure, lofty metal grilles extending from top to
bottom were fixed between the columns, with the entrance gates in the central
intercolumniation.
Externally, the dominant feature is the stately peristyle of fluted marble columns
(pp. 95C, 113F). The columns are about 6 ft 2 ins in diameter at the base and 34 ft
3 ins high: or, to express their proportions directly, they are nearly 54 times their
own lower diameter in height. The angle columns are a little larger in diameter;
6 ft 33 ins. All diminish at the top of the shaft to a little more than three-quarters
the lower diameter. The columns support an entablature about 11 ft high (p. 95c),
which has the usual divisions of architrave, frieze and cornice (pp. IIOA, 122C, 144B).
The architrave was ornamented with bronze shields, probably presented by Alex-
ander the Great in 334 B.c., and with dedicatory inscriptions in bronze letters. The
joints of the marble roof-slabs above the cornice were masked by carved antefixae,
which formed an ornamental cresting along the sides of the building (pp. 110H,
122C). The pediments, which have an inclination of 134 degrees, terminated the
roof at each end of the temple, and had large floral acroteria, about 9 ft high, at
the apex and lower angles (pp. IIOA, 122B, D). The peristyle ceiling was enriched
with lacunaria and marble beams. The optical refinements used in the different
parts of the Parthenon have already been described (p. 94). The tympana in the
pediments were filled with the finest sculpture of Pheidias. That of the eastern
pediment represented the birth of Athena and of the west, the contest of Athena
and Poseidon for the soil of Attica. The use of sculptured friezes, both inside and
outside the temple, is another evidence of Ionic influence. The celebrated Pan-
athenaic frieze was carved along the top of the naos wall just below the peristyle
ceiling, and was taken across the east and west ends above the six columns of the
pronaos and opisthodomos. It is 3 ft 4 ins high, in very slight relief of about 12 ins,
and the sculpture is treated in such a way as to be seen effectively by the light
reflected up from the white marble pavement below, the shadow being thrown
upwards (p. 122A). It represents the Panathenaic procession (p. 163H), which went
every fourth year to the Acropolis to present the ‘peplos’ to the goddess Athena,
and it portrays the preparations of Athenian knights, and the great procession of
 122 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

ie I",
2
dl

i e ALF TRANSVERSE SECT™S

DIE ELEVATION @eestoren) (E)THRO' NADS THRO’ PARTHENON
SS - 3

(P)Loncruoat SECTION (RESTORED)

fe 10 ea
©6666 666% Y
e e
e ee deals| e
e a ry
ig PARTHENON i;
| s
e sien METHOD? LIGHTING sy
MN LA. mo CLEARSTORY (FERGUSSON)
2 y| @|"
Q iy q
N
2 || |
2 2
e a
° al
: alps at
METHOD 2LIGHTING sv
T (BSTTICHER
fe iide/, ° NB. 9) SCALEFORELEVATIONS & SECTIONS
e = MTRS 1: |
@ @ © © @ @)y {eam A - SCALE FOR PLAN & LIGHTING SECTNS
PLAN (RESTORED) STATUE OF ATHENA (RESTORED) METRES
2
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 123
cavalry, chariots, men with olive branches, musicians, youths, sacrificial animals,
maidens with sacrificial vessels, magistrates and gods, all culminating in a great
central group at the eastern end over the principal entrance to the temple, while
the imposing chryselephantine statue of Athena in the naos was seen through the
open door (p. 122H). Out of the original length of 524 ft, only 335 ft are in exist-
ence. The western frieze, excepting the three central figures, is in its original
position; the greater portion of that belonging to the northern, southern and
eastern sides is in the British Museum, while the remainder, with the excep-
tion of eight fragments of the eastern frieze in the Louvre, is in the Athens Museum.
The sculptured metopes (p. 163K, M), about 4 ft 5 ins square, numbering fourteen
on each front and thirty-two on each side, are in high relief. Those on the eastern
facade represent contests between gods and giants; on the western, between Greeks
and Amazons; on the southern, between Centaurs and Lapiths; and on the nor-
thern, scenes from the siege of Troy. Traces of bright colours have been found on
the sculptures in pediment, metope and frieze. This miracle of architecture, com-
pact of glistening marble, marvellous sculpture and glowing colour, has thrown its
glamour over men through all the ages, and more than justifies the poetic descrip-
tion of Emerson:

Earth proudly wears the Parthenon

As the best gem upon her zone.

In the fifth or sixth century the Parthenon was converted into a Byzantine Chris-
tian church, dedicated to the ‘Divine Wisdom’, and an apse was formed at its
eastern end. From about A.D. 1204, under the Frankish dukes of Athens, it served
as a Latin church, until, in A.D. 1458 it was converted into a Turkish mosque.
Then, during the capture of Athens by the Venetians in A.D. 1687, it was much
damaged by a shell which fell into the portion of the building used as a powder
magazine. The Venetians withdrew in the following year. In A.D. 1801-3, through
the instrumentality of Lord Elgin, many of the sculptures were removed to the
British Museum. After some further damage from various causes, including that
from an earthquake in A.D. 1894, and some trivial attempts at restoration, the north
side was re-assembled from the scattered fragments between A.D. 1921-9. Little
survives, however, of the interior.
The Temple of Apollo Epicurius, Bassae, in Arcadia (c. 450-425 B.C.) (p.
I24) is a mainland temple contemporary with the Parthenon, and Ictinus was
again the architect. The temple took a long time in building, owing to Ictinus’
preoccupation with the Parthenon, begun a year or two later, though completed
earlier. A most remarkable feature of this temple is the use in it of all three of the
Greek Orders of Architecture—Doric outside and Ionic and Corinthian within; it
seems evident that the practice of using different Orders in one building was intro-
duced by Ictinus. The plan is hexastyle peripteral, with fifteen columns on the
flanks, all built up in drums. Most of the building is of a hard, fine-grained grey
limestone, but marble was used for the sculptures and the more decorative parts,
including the ceilings over the pronaos, the opisthodomos and the short sides of
the ambulatory, which otherwise were of stone. The temple has other peculiarities.
It faces north, instead of east, and the statue of Apollo was placed in an adyton, or
inner sanctuary, partially screened off from the naos proper and lighted from a large
opening in the eastern, side wall. On both sides of the naos are Ionic half-columns,
attached to spur walls, the recesses thus formed with the main naos wall having a
stone, coffered ceiling. Between the adyton and the naos was a single, free-standing
column, with a Corinthian capital (p. 138F). Until recently it was thought this was the
 124 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

TEMPLE F APOLLO EPICURIUS: BASSAE

8 py — ie
o
©
=r
'

ty
c)
f 4

XY |||| setin | 2
; l= = x

3 ;
a nea ELEVATION : B ae ON Q-a
c Z i Z |
| 1] HILT || |
tat Se COEEAT EAN ee
aes oe a SRO taker (ee nbnd Shen el origcaeYA) Suse dey
he re ie ip! TS = = —
he Meee I aol { I
Pee ey eames! mex eoe a oe =
E ie oe ar I r i - I I sh |

BO ee a lI |
oo ek
PMG, es || te i i= = I!:

ees ij
tae ‘A Wil
rill
il |
|
|

= SCALE. FOR
‘N@||| ELEVATIONS
. E SECTIONS [4s \Wi\ === I
atta -20FT (zal Sia
MTRS - —

he
' 34/10
' 2
|

oo MOULDINGS
AT b IN
elle PORTICO

10 iene

SCALE FOR PLAN re =e SCALE FOR MOULDINGS

105.90 © 20 30 40F? Ob 2. s eens
! 10 12MTES INTERIOR aa G MOULDINGS
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 125
solitary instance in the temple, but Professor Dinsmoor now has disclosed that the
adjacent spur walls, splayed diagonally from the main walls, also had partial Corin-
thian capitals. These three are the first instances known of the Corinthian Order.
There is a possibility that Callimachus himself designed them (see p. 139). The entab-
lature was Ionic and continuous with that over the four Ionic half-columns on each
side. The capitals of the latter were of unique design, with diagonal volutes, and
they had high wide-flaring bases (p. 127c). Professor Dinsmoor shows too, that
the naos had a coffered timber ceiling and that there was no hypaethral lighting,
although some light was undoubtedly admitted to the roof space through rect-
angular openings in many of the marble roof tiles. The celebrated sculptured
marble frieze over the half-columns, portions of which are in the British Museum,
must have been poorly illuminated. It is 2 ft high and ran 100 ft long, representing
battles of Centaurs and Lapiths and Athenians and Amazons.

THE IONIC ORDER

The Ionic Order (p. 127) is specially remarkable for its volute or scroll capital,
which, like so many other decorative motifs, may have been derived from the
Egyptian lotus (p. 1268), which must have undergone sundry modifications on its
way from Egypt through Assyria and divers other Near Eastern countries to Asia
Minor (p. 126£). The spiral was also a common motif in Aegean art, and this
could well account for its survival in those places which had inherited the Aegean
tradition. The early Ionic capitals at Cyprus (p. 126A), Neandria (p. 126M), Lesbos
and Larissa exhibit volutes of a distinctly vegetable type with a palmette inter-
posed. Other Ionic capitals at the Greek colony of Naucratis in Egypt (p. 126K),
or at Delos (p. 126]), Delphi (p. 126L) and Athens, where they had served as votive
offerings, would seem to form a link between these and later types.
The nautilus shell (p. 126D) with its simple spiral and the ram’s horns (p. 126G)
are examples of nature’s spirals which were at hand for the observant architect;
and scrolls, quite obviously derived from nature, are seen on Egyptian wall paint-
ings (p. I126F), Cypriote vases (p. I26H), and bronze armour plates (p. 126N). The
bracket capital (p. 126c) shows a simple device for decreasing the bearing of an
architrave, still frequently employed at the present day. The long and shallow
form of many early capitals (p. 126], L) indicates this kind of purpose and points
unmistakably to a wooden origin. There is indeed no doubt that, as a whole, the
Ionic Order of Asia Minor, like the Doric Order from further west, evolved from
timber forms. Originally, the architrave spanning from column to column was
made up of broad timber plates, laid one on top of the other. On the architrave
were laid cross-beams, but these were smaller and more numerous than the Doric
triglyph beams, and relatively to the architrave took up far less height. Even with
the longitudinal timbers above them providing seating for the rafters and cover
for their ends, the whole entablature was much shallower, and therefore lighter,
than the Doric; so that after translation into stone, there was less need for sturdy
column support. Thus Ionic columns were always comparatively slender, and
needed a base at their lower end to spread the weight transmitted. In the entabla-
ture there were only two main parts; the architrave, with its fasciae, representing
the original plates, and a cornice of which the ‘dentils’, derived from the closely-
spaced cross-beams, formed an integral part. There was no frieze in the entablature
of the true Ionic Order of Asia Minor, and none was acquired there until late
fourth century B.c. The Ionians, whose architecture always tended towards exces-
sive ornamentation, loved the sculptured frieze, but it was used on the body of
the temple rather than as an essential part of the entablature.
Ionic columns, including capital and base, are usually about nine times their
 126 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

tage |THE IONIC ee

)
iei,KS,
4" i y iaK beten a cae
u
In| l
i

volute rrom |EGYPTIANBLUE | BRACKET CAP

TOMB: CYPRUS LOTUS PATIO:CORDOV.

5,i
2a PAINTS J ee
CYPRUS Sead

BRONZE
ARMOUR PLATE:
CYPRUS __|
Ah
wt A-B=HALF A MODULE. WITH BAS CENTRE DESCRIBE THE CIRCLE
OS C-D (EYE OF VOLUTE) DIAMETER 35 PARTS (5 MODULE ).DIVIDE C-D
Lim me, INTO 4 EQUAL PARTS 1B4D AND FURTHER DIVIDE IB ANDB4 INTO 3
: ff, EQUAL PARTS. ON I-4,5-8 AND 9-I2 FORM SQUARES. FROM CENTRE
awe COTTON WOUND | RADIUS I-A DESCRIBE ARC A-E.FROM CENTRE 2 RADIUS 2-€ DESCRIBE
Fae ROUND SHELL ARC E-F AND CONTINUE FROM CENTRES 3-4-5:6-7-8-9:10-l ident

FINISHING CURVE

(Powe vate DRAWN From a WHELK SHELL ae METHOD For stomceor VOLUTE

oe

(R)caprrat: PROPYLAEA :PRIENE

ary
(S come ELEUSIS —
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 127

Wo”

7,
===5
bet 1i9'6"-Ets

ARCHAIC. TEMPLE TEMPLE VON- THE ie MPI ESOhrAP OREO

OF ARTEMIS: EPHESUS ILjSSUS ATHENS PRIGURIUSS BASS

PLAN OF
ANGLE CAP
LOOKING UP)

KEY ELEV. /E.PorTICO LATE R TEMPLE OF TEMPLE [e} F

HE ERECHTHEION:ATHENS} ARTEMIS: EPHESUS [ATHENA POLIAS: PRIENE_

SCALE FOR KEY ELEVATIONS SCALE OF MODULES.
8 9 \OMODULES
[O05 SON 101 920) 30) 840), SOFEET PARTS 5Q ee Cy
128 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

lower diameter in height and have twenty-four flutes separated by fillets and not
by arrises or sharp edges as in the Doric column. Early examples, however, may
have as many as forty (p. 127A), forty-four, or forty-eight flutes, which then are
shallow and do meet on a sharp arris. The moulded base evolved by stages
into that known as the ‘Attic’ base (p. 165H), having been brought to this perfected
form in Attica. It consists of an upper and lower torus, divided by a scotia and
fillets, but until late in the Hellenic period there is no square plinth. The capital
has a pair of volutes or spirals, about two-thirds the diameter in height, showing
to front and back and joined at the sides by a concave cushion, sometimes plain
but usually ornamented with numerous flutes, fillets and beads. The volute scroll
rests on an echinus, circular on plan, carved with egg-and-dart and resting on a
bead moulding. Methods of setting out volutes are shown (p. 126P, Q, R, S). Above
the volute scrolls was a shallow abacus, with moulded edge, which at first was
elongated in the direction of the architrave it supported, but which eventually
became square on plan. The Greek double-fronted capital represented difficulties
at the outer angles of a rectangular building, and in such positions a canted angle
volute was used (p. 127B, D, E, F). The four-fronted capital, like that indicated by
the Order in the Temple at Bassae (p. 127C), is exceptional in Greek Hellenic
architecture though it became increasingly common in the Hellenistic period.
The Ionic entablature (p. 127) passed through important stages of develop-
ment during the Hellenic period. As evolved in Asia Minor, it had only two main
parts, architrave and cornice, the latter containing large dentils in the bed-mould.
It was therefore very light in relation to the columns, being as little as one-sixth of
their height. The Order was soon used on the mainland too, at first only in treasuries,
but afterwards importantly in temples, like the Erechtheion (p. 133) and the
Temple of Niké Apteros, Athens (p. 133), which are the finest examples of the
style. On the mainland, the influence of the Doric caused a frieze to be inserted in
the entablature, but with the consequence that, until late fourth century B.Cc., the
bed-mould was omitted from the cornice except for a minor moulding under the
widely-projecting corona. At about this time (late fourth century B.c.), Asia Minor
adopted mainland practice and the three-part entablature became universal for the
Order, but with the fresh development that henceforward the dentilled bed-mould
type of cornice as well as the frieze became established parts of the entablature.
Whenever the frieze was present, at whatever stage of the evolution, on the main-
land or in Jonia, the entablature still was much lighter than the Doric—about one-
quarter the height of the column, i.e. rather more than two diameters high. The
Tonic architrave, normally with three fasciae, is capped by a small group of mould-
ings. The frieze, when present, sometimes is plain, but more often is ornamented
with a continuous band of sculpture. Ionic temples do not show antefixae on the
flanks; instead, the cymatium or gutter moulding of the inclined cornices at the
ends of the temple is carried along the side cornices too, and carved lion heads at
intervals serve to eject the rainwater from the roof (p. 163B).
The principal examples of the Ionic Order, found in Asia Minor and on the
Greek mainland, are set forth below.
Ionic Temples in Asia Minor
c. 560 B.C. Archaic Temple of Artemis, Ephesus (p. 129)
c. 540 B.C. Temple of Hera, Samos
C350 B.C: Later Temple of Artemis, Ephesus (p. 129)
C. 334 B.C. Temple of Athena Polias, Priene (p. 131)
C. 325 B.C. Temple of Artemis-Cybele, Sardis
313 B.C.—A.D, 41 Temple of Apollo Didymaeus, Miletus (p. 131)
193 B.C. Temple of Dionysus, Teos
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 129

Ionic Temples in Greece

449 B.C. Temple on the Ilissus, Athens (p. 131)
c. 450-425 B.C. Temple of Apollo Epicurius, Bassae (internal Order only) (p. 123)
427 B.C. Temple of Niké Apteros, Athens (p. 133)
421-405 B.C. The Erechtheion, Athens (p. 133)
339 B.c. The Philippeion, Olympia (external colonnade) (pp. 105B, IO9F)

The Later Temple of Artemis, Ephesus (c. 356 B.C.) (p. I 30), was the fifth in
succession to stand upon this very famous site. The three earliest had been rela-
tively small; the immediate predecessor, known as the ‘Archaic’ temple (c. 550 B.C.),
was burnt down in 356 B.c. and built anew in still more magnificent style, but on
an identical plan. The only substantial differences between the old and the new
were in the quality of the detail and the fact that the Later Temple stood on a
platform of steps, about 9 ft high, instead of upon a two-step crepidoma, as formerly.
Yet owing to the scanty remains, there are uncertainties about the arrangement of
the plan, and several somewhat different restorations have been proposed. The
temple was dipteral, octastyle at the front but perhaps enneastyle (nine columns)
at the rear. The object of an extra rear column would be to evade the very serious
difficulties of spanning the exceptionally wide central intercolumniation, which,
although inescapable at the front, was not essential on the rear. The column spac-
ings on the main front were progressively less wide from the centre outwards to
the angles, and the central one was more than 28 ft, to be spanned by a marble
architrave block about 4 ft high; for the temple was grand in dimensions, though
not the largest in Ionia. Over the stylobate, it measured about 170 ft by 366 ft,
with the flights of steps in addition. The columns were some 6 ft in diameter and
almost 58 ft high. The entablature was relatively shallow, being of the usual
Asiatic type, comprising architrave and dentilled cornice but no frieze. We have
seen earlier that grandiose plans, dipteral as here, or pseudo-dipteral, are typical
of the Ionic of Asia Minor. Equally characteristic are the deep pronaos, having several
pairs of columns within it, and the shallow opisthodomos, which in some cases is
absent altogether. About the internal arrangements of this temple, nothing is defi-
nitely known. The orientation is unusual, as for traditional reasons on this site,
the temple faced west instead of east. The building was one of the most impressive
of Greek temples and was celebrated for its sculptures. The pediment bore a
sculptured tympanum representing Artemis mothering her devotees bringing
their offerings, while the crowning acroteria portrayed the goddess enthroned.
There were 117 columns altogether (interpretations differ), 36 of which bore
sculptures on their lower parts. The preceding temple had similar sculptures, and
fragments from both periods, along with elements of corresponding capitals and
shafts, some of which are in the British Museum, allow us to compare the early
and late work (pp. 127A, E; 130C, E). The volutes of the earlier capitals spread
widely beyond the column shaft, and the abacus is nearly twice as long as it is
wide; in the later examples the volutes are much more compact, and the abacus
consequently is almost square. Flutes on the column shafts, numbering up to 48
in the earlier instances, in the later have settled to the normal 24, separated by
fillets instead of sharp arrises. It is typical of Asia Minor practice that in neither
temple were the columns identical in all respects. The designs varied a little be-
tween one column and the next. Thus in the older temple, rosettes might be sub-
stituted for the inner part of the conventional volute. Base mouldings in Asia
Minor in the Hellenic period commonly had only two main elements, a large torus
upon a deep, circular disc, both of them lavishly ornamented with horizontal flutes
and reeds, separated by fillets or beads; but it was with the Archaic Temple at
e
H.O.A.
 I 30 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

»)
THE TEMPLE OF EMIS EPHESU

0} yal (a

el

Set

——

ix =}
==|

q
ESSSO
3
Zi

RESTORED VIEW OF TEMPLE & TEMENOS: ac 356

ae ew
geaeeaceaeae
a Ss#seSeeOeeseeseeeseaes
SSSOSRS
ewz

w&

4d)

SCORE

aus”

aeae
EOO
@
aeeeese
S@aaee
ie
4)
a:
Se
a
=
am
=)

_4}

iS a
OS
_4} eeeaeenaeaeseenae
See
(ed s

g | Ee a a
ae @

Crown OF ARCHAIC 47 (DiS TO aes OF LATER

TEMPLE SSBC. 550 CYMATIUM. TEMPLE : BYCl356:
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 131
Ephesus that a square plinth first came to be associated with the Ionic base (p.
130C). Also, the site evidences early instances of the pedestal under the Order
(p. 130E), which henceforward became accepted as an optional element in the
classical decorative system. The building of the Later Temple is said to have
extended well into the Hellenistic period. Like its predecessor, it ranked as one of
the seven wonders of the Ancient World. The original designers were Demetrius
and Paeonius of Ephesus, and probably Deinocrates. Famous sculptors, particu-
larly Scopas, were employed in its decoration. The Temple of Artemis was the
centre of the Pan-Ionian festival of the Asiatic colonies, as the Parthenon was of
the Panathenaic festival in the motherland.
The Temple of Athena Polias, Priene (c. 334 B.C.) (pp. 127F, 132) is finely
proportioned but more modest in plan and scale than other principal Asia Minor
temples. Pythius, the architect, wrote a book about it. For once, the plan is perip-
teral, 64 ft x 122 ft over the stylobate, with a hexastyle front and eleven columns
on the sides, exactly twice as long as broad. The deep pronaos and shallow opistho-
domos are normal, while the column bases have the now usual plinth. The two-
part entablature, still omitting the frieze, shows how deep-rooted in Asia Minor
was this traditional arrangement (p. I27F). (Restorations showing a frieze, as p. 132,
are no longer accepted as correct.) The columns are 4 ft 3 ins in diameter, and had
a height of 37 ft 6 ins, supporting an entablature almost 6 ft Io ins in height,
including the cymatium. Fragments of the Order are in the British Museum.
The Temple of Apollo Didymaeus, Miletus (313 B.c.-A.D. 41) (pp. IOQN,
141), was so long under construction as to be essentially a Hellenistic building, and
even sO, was never quite completed. It was designed by Paeonius of Ephesus and
Daphnis of Miletus, and was of great size, 150 ft by 359 ft at the top of the seven-
step crepidoma, so vast that the naos was never roofed over. The 120 columns were
6 ft 8 ins in diameter and 64 ft 8 ins high. The upper part of the cornice remained
incomplete. The column bases (p. 141M) varied in design, in pairs astride the main
axis of the temple. The general arrangement was dipteral decastyle (ten columns),
and there was the customary deep pronaos, and no opisthodomos. There were
peculiarities in the design of the naos. Two inclined ways led downwards from the
pronaos, under staircases flanking a vestibule, to the hypaethral, paved courtyard,
some 13 ft below peristyle level, where a roofed shrine sheltered the effigy of
Apollo. High up on the inner face of the naos wall, their bases 4 ft 6 ins above the
peristyle level, were great pilasters, 6 ft wide and 3 ft projection (p. 141J), orna-
mented in a way usual for anta capitals in Asia Minor. Leading back from the
courtyard, an imposing flight of steps gave access to the vestibule, 6 ft above the
pronaos, between doorways flanked by Corinthian attached columns (p. I4IL, P),
their capitals immature in design in lacking the minor pairs of volutes and in
having sharply pointed angles to their abaci.
The Temple on the Ilissus, Athens (449 B.C.) (pp. 127B, 132), an amphi-
prostyle tetrastyle small temple, of Pentelic marble, measured about 20 ft by 42 ft
over a three-step crepidoma. The architect was Callicrates, who, with Ictinus, was
responsible for the Parthenon. It is a developed example of mainland Ionic, show-
ing certain differences which occur there, due to the influence of the Doric. Even
in the sixth century B.C., the archaic phase, treasuries built at sacred sites in Greece
by Ionian cities represented at the festivals, possessed these differences from the
at Delphi,
native types; and in two cases, the Cnidian and Siphnian treasuries, both
530 B.C., the in-antis porches had pairs of ‘caryatid
respectively of 565 B.c. and
examples
sculptured female figures instead of columns, foreshadowing the famous
concern
of the Erechtheion (pp. 134G, 136). The principal traits referred to however,
which in mainland Ionic possessed a frieze from the beginning,
the entablature,
 132 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

TEMPLE, on tHE IILISSUS: ee

K
5 SGALE FOR PLAN soe FRONT ELEVATION —
(Ge
WL.ee ee

" i yo i a De
1S s
1
i
| | 7 (ed |
I
sd : |

| a Hf
i i | | 4

== Ss ; =

=5]| F ~

“TEMPLE
OFATHENA
AM POLIAS:PRIENE
aE SIDE ELEVATION beg ee ie eseres LONGITUDINAL SECTION

Sa a) St ed a, Fil a ar
ee reveal ele :FA th yess
Ae te EEE (EI Wes
rt Poy MN uM oF : HEATH Mee ‘
——— = ile = ee ada =

VIEW From S.E. (restorep) DETAIL

oes Ee. PLAN SCALE FOR O30 ENTABLATURE
te) 100 ISOFT 1OR aOne oe 2 40

PORTICO

aletabe’
seNslelisitelelsitetecstensierans

= at

© FRONT ELEVATION a (E
PART SIDE ELEVATION
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 133
but with a resulting ejection of most of the bed-mould of the cornice, including
the distinctive dentils, there remaining only a cyma-reversa moulding in this posi-
tion. The architrave too, quite often is plain, like the Doric, without the bands or
fasciae normal in Asia Minor. Such features are found in this temple; and the
column bases are ‘Attic’, there being an extra small torus below the disc—now
become a hollow scotia mould—and the upper large torus usual in Ionia at this
time.
The Temple of Nike Apteros, Athens (427 B.C.) (pp. 103B, 104C, 135B, 142B, H),
1s an exquisite amphi-prostyle tetrastyle small temple of marble, about 18 ft by 27 ft
over the stylobate, dedicated to ‘Wingless Victory’, standing picturesquely on the
south-western spur of the Acropolis. Callicrates was again the architect. The
bastion which forms its site was surrounded on three sides by a marble balustrade,
3 ft 2 ins high, enriched with very fine sculpture. The temple is quite small, the
columns being 1 ft 9 ins diameter and 13 ft 3 ins high, standing upon a crepidoma
of three steps. The columns thus are unusually short in proportion, rather less
than eight diameters. Apart from this circumstance and the fact that the architrave
has fascia bands, the Ionic Order closely resembles that of the Temple on the
Ilissus. The entablature has a frieze, which bore beautiful relief sculpture, of
which there are examples in the British Museum. The temple was taken down by
the Turks in 1687, and built into a battery on the Acropolis; but in 1836, the
materials were recovered and the temple was reconstructed on the original site.
The Erechtheion, Athens (421-405 B.C.) (pp. 103B, 104, 127D, 134, 135A, 136,
157J), designed by Mnesicles, stands on the Acropolis north of the Parthenon, ad-
jacent to the site of an older temple of Athena badly damaged in 480 B.c. by the Per-
sians. It is unusual and irregular in plan (p. 134F), having three porches as well as
an attached colonnade on the western end, and was constructed at two different levels,
the western half of the naos and the ground to the north and west sides of the
building being ro ft 6 ins below the rest. A flight of steps north of the east portico
joined the two levels. The temple was intended as a replacement of the old temple
of Athena, on a similar plan; but it having been decided to retain the western half
of the naos of the older building, which had suffered less than the remainder from
the Persian depredations, the new structure was thrust further north on to an
awkward, falling site, where too, there were several sacred spots, much venerated
by the Athenians. These had to be preserved intact, and led to severe distortions
of the original design. The eastern part of the main block, forming the shrine of
Athena Polias, guardian of the city, is at the general Acropolis level, approached
from a hexastyle porch, with columns 2 ft 3 ins in diameter and 21 ft 6 ins high,
by a high doorway flanked by a window on each side. Windows are quite rare in
Greek temple architecture. The western part of the naos, at the lower level, was
divided into three chambers, together comprising the shrine of Erechtheus. The
westernmost served as a vestibule to the other two, which were separated by a
longitudinal wall. The walls sub-dividing the western part were about 13 ft high
and did not reach the ceiling, which they all shared. In the western vestibule was
the tank containing the salt sea of Poseidon. This vestibule also connected the
North Portico and that roughly balancing it on the south side, the Caryatid Porch,
which, being at the higher level, had the necessary flight of steps within it. The
North Porch probably was a substitute for a western portico, for if there had been
one in the latter position, it would have encroached upon the sanctuary of Pan-
drosus, an enclosure outside the west front and in which grew the sacred olive
tree of Athens, and impinged upon the tomb of Cecrops which lay adjacent to the
west wall. In fact, to escape the latter, the position of the west wall had to be
altered after the building had started, withdrawn a little towards the east. On the
 134 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

THE ERECHTHEION :aeay”,

a AW
i |
i ae Te
im

=u Ee
VAN ANAAD

ee (A)view FROM NORTH WEST. RESTORED

==st fou OLD =

STEMPLE
OF ATHENA

OWN

Ye

f| SHRINE SHRINE #
OF OF
Ey

f R ECTHEUS PENS l @
A POLIAS §
Hy @

1o 65 °
im ae !
67 8 9 10ll 2 METRES 123456789
SCALE “FOR ELEVATIONS & SECTIONS SCALE FOR PLAN
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE
135

B. Temple of Niké Apteros (Athena Niké), c. Nereid Monument, Xanthos (restored)

Athens (restored) (c. 400 B.C.). See p. 148
(c. 427 B.C.). See p. 133
136 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

The Erechtheion, Athens (c. 421-405 B.c.). Caryatid Porch. See opposite page
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 137
west wall there was only the semblance of a portico, for its upper part
bore an
attached colonnade of four columns in antis, while in the lower was a doorway
leading from the western enclosed vestibule to the sanctuary of Pandrosus.
A general view of the former appearance of the building, built splendidly
in
Pentelic marble, is given in the restoration (p. 134A). The main block, measuring
38 ft by 75 ft, was roofed at a common level, and the east porch and the attached
portico on the west shared the same entablature, of the Attic type, without dentils,
which surrounded the whole building. The anta moulding too, continued along
the flanks (p. 163L). As the bases of the western attached columns were raised
about 3 ft above those of the east porch, the two Orders necessarily had different
proportions. The tetrastyle North Porch, two bays deep, has columns 2 ft 8 ins in
diameter and 25 ft high. The Porch stands at the lower level and its entablature
fits just below the main one, resembling it in design and, like it, having a frieze of
black Eleusinian limestone to which relief sculpture in white marble formerly was
attached by cramps. Under the North Porch floor is a basement, and the marks
on its rock floor where the trident of Poseidon had struck could be exposed to the
sky through a trap in the basement ceiling and a marble shaft in the porch roof.
The North Porch capitals are very fine (p. 135A). The spirals of the volutes are
enriched with intermediate fillets, and below them is an ornamental band of
anthemion ornament. At the outer angles of the Porch, as on the East front too
(p. 127D), the volutes are canted at forty-five degrees to overcome the difficulty of
expressing adjacent faces of the capitals. Within the Porch is a famous doorway,
excellently preserved (p. 159D, E). The proportions of the columns of the three
porches differ, being 93 diameters on the east front, 9? diameters in the North Porch
and 9 diameters for the half columns on the west front. As originally arranged, the
latter columns on the west were attached to piers, between which there were per-
haps grilles in metal or wood, but these openings were walled up in Roman times
except for windows in the three central intercolumniations (p. 134c). The southern
or Caryatid Porch (pp. 134, 135A, 136, 157J) had six draped female figures or
Caryatids, 7 ft 9 ins high, standing on a solid marble wall rising about 8 ft above the
Acropolis level. All the figures face southwards; the three western lean on the right
and the three eastern on the left leg, giving an effect of resistance to the weight of
the entablature which, because of the special circumstances is of the shallow, Asiatic
type of design, lacking the frieze and with dentils in the cornice, though the dentils
are less large than the true Ionic type. The second caryatid from the west is in the
British Museum, and is replaced by a terra-cotta copy (p. 134G, and opposite).
The Erechtheion has passed through various vicissitudes, having suffered con-
version to other uses and much damage from time to time. Internally, very little
survives of the former arrangements, but of the rest there are considerable remains,
all of which in the present century have been skilfully restored to their former
place.

THE CORINTHIAN ORDER

The Corinthian Order (p. 160E) did not evolve from a constructive basis like the
Doric and Ionic, but made its first appearance in Greek architecture in the fifth
century B.C. as a decorative variant of the Ionic, the difference lying almost entirely
in the column capital. It came to acquire a more distinct identity as time progressed,
though it was the Romans who brought it to full maturity in the late first century
B.C. There are few Hellenic examples; its popularity increased greatly in the Hellen-
istic period.
The Corinthian column, with base and shaft resembling the Ionic, tended to
become more slender, and eventually a proportion of ten diameters was regarded
 138 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

EVOLUTION OF ‘THE CORINTHIAN Toy ME

FABLED TYPICAL
ORIGIN GREEK LEAF

PLANS
(LOoKINGUP)
i “\
\'| y i| Mi i i, ¢ ve f iS |

CAPL:TEMPLE 2 APOLLO Jie, \ A (ta CAP*:CHORAGIC MONT

P| 2, Y,

EPICURIUS ‘BASSE aao veil

Bae | 2 LYSICRNTES “ATHEN

Soe
i
ie
CAPITAL: THOLOS: EPIDAUROS

oeie © THE WINDS: ATHENS

NS SA

Beno a ‘ApieHENS
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 139
as fitting. The distinctive feature is the capital, which is much deeper than the
Ionic, and though of variable height at first, settled down to a proportion of about
1% diameters high (p. 138). Vitruvius records the tradition (bk. 1v, chap. i) that
the invention of the capital was due to Callimachus, a worker in Corinthian bronze,
who obtained the idea from observing a basket over the grave of a Corinthian
maiden, covered with a tile to protect the offerings it contained. Accidentally, the
basket was placed over the root of an acanthus plant, the stems and foliage of
which grew and turned into volutes at the angle of the tile (p. 1388). The earlier
examples appear to have been in bronze. The perfected type has a deep, inverted
bell, the lower part of which is surrounded by two tiers of eight acanthus leaves
(p. 138c, D), and from between the leaves of the upper row rise eight caulicoli
(caulis =a stalk), each surmounted by a calyx from which emerge volutes or helices
supporting the angles of the abacus and the central foliated ornaments. Each face
of the moulded abacus is curved outwards to a point at the angles (pp. I4IL, P;
138F, H, K; 162A), or the abacus is chamfered at each angle (p. 138G). Another and
rarer type has one row of acanthus leaves with water leaves above and no volutes,
and a moulded abacus, square on plan (p. 138J).
The Corinthian entablature is not distinguishable from the Ionic in Greek
architecture; in the earliest known instance of the Order, in the Temple of Apollo
Epicurius at Bassae (p. 124), Corinthian and Ionic internal columns share the same
entablature. Throughout the Hellenic period the Order is used with either the
Doric or the Ionic Order in the same building, the notable exception being the
Monument of Lysicrates, Athens (below), where also it appears externally for the
first time. Invariably there are three parts to the Corinthian entablature, architrave,
frieze and cornice, and the latter normally is the developed type, with small dentils
in the bed-mould. Eventually, in Roman hands, the Order is enriched by extra
small mouldings, and an important ‘modillion’ band is added to the bed-mould,
the modillions being consoles or brackets, giving support to the projecting corona
of the cornice (compare E and F, p. 160).
Corinthian Examples
C. 450-425 B.C. Temple of Apollo Epicurius, Bassae (internal) (p. 124)
c. 400 B.C. The Tholos, Delphi (internal Order)
c. 350 B.C. The Tholos, Epidauros (internal Order) (pp. 106B, IO9E, 138H)
339 B.C. The Tholos(Philippeion), Olympia (internal Order)(pp.105B,109F)
334 B.C. Choragic Monument of Lysicrates, Athens (below)
313 B.C.—A.D. 41 Temple of Apollo Didymaeus, Miletus (internal) (p. 131)
I74B.C.—A.D. 132 The Olympieion, Athens (p. 140)
Cc. 48 B.C. Tower of the Winds, Athens (p. 140)
The Choragic Monument of Lysicrates, Athens (334 B.C.) (pp. 138G, I4I,
I60E, I63E) is a type of monument erected to support a tripod, as a prize for
athletic exercises, or musical competitions in Greek festivals. There were many of
these in the Street of Tripods. Lysicrates had been the leader of a successful
chorus, and this elaborate monument was built to commemorate the event. Of its
two stages, the lower is a lofty podium of Piraeus stone, 9 ft 6 ins square on plan,
decoratively treated with drafted margins to the masonry joints, with a high,
stepped base and a simple, projecting capping. The upper part is a hollow cylinder
of white Pentelic marble, 6 ft in diameter inside, standing upon a base of bluish
Hymettian marble, around which are six Corinthian columns, appearing to be
attached, though in reality complete, as the curving wall forms panels between
them. Between the column capitals there are sculptured bas-reliefs. Above the
entablature is a dome shaped from a single block of Pentelic marble, carved to
imitate fish-scale tiling, and bearing three sculptured scrolls terminating in a floral
140 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

ornament, which formerly bore a bronze tripod, its base 34 ft above the ground
(p. 163E). Marble acroteria, linked together as a decorative cresting, served in place
of the usual cymatium to the cornice. This monument provides the first instance of
the Corinthian Order used externally, and of a building employing it as the sole
Order. For the first time too, an entablature, whether Corinthian or Ionic, appears
with both frieze and dentilled cornice, a type of design which henceforward was to
become universal (p. 141E). The columns are 11 ft 7 ins high and have capitals of
graceful if imperfect design which relatively are of unusual depth; 1 ft 7 ins, or
14 diameters. The upper halves of the capitals fit awkwardly upon the lower, and
are too narrow-waisted at that point. The flutings of the shafts terminate as leaves,
and the channel above them may have had a bronze collar. Between the acanthus
leaves of the capitals, which have each only a single range, the place of a lower
being taken by water leaves, there are eight-petalled rosettes, which appear to
imitate bronze clips such as might have been used in earlier instances to secure
metal foliage (p. 141B). The architrave bears an inscription indicating the purpose
of the monument, and the frieze is sculptured to represent the myth of Dionysos
and the pirates of the Tyrrhenian Sea.
The Temple of Zeus Olympius (Olympieion), Athens (174 B.C.-A.D. 132)
(pp. I09H, 146A, 162A), stands on a site of an earlier Doric temple commenced in
515 B.c. It was built as the gift to Athens of Antiochus Epiphanes of Syria, from
designs by Cossutius, a Roman architect. Yet there was much that was Greek in its
conception and execution, so far as it was constructed at that time, and it demon-
strates the growing fondness for the Corinthian Order in the Hellenistic period.
It remained incomplete, and Sulla in 86 B.c. transported some of the columns to
Rome for the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus (p. 180), where they had an important
effect on Roman taste. Work was resumed under Augustus, but it was completed
and dedicated by Hadrian, in A.D. 132. It was dipteral octastyle (p. 109H) and
measured 145 ft 6 ins by 362 ft 6 ins, standing in a magnificent peribolus or enclo-
sure of 424 ft by 680 ft. Vitruvius records that it was hypaethral, but it is probable
that it was covered in after his time. The fifteen columns remaining of the former
one hundred and four columns of the peristyle bear witness to its pristine grandeur.
They were 6 ft 4 ins in diameter and 56 ft high, a proportion of about one to nine.
The surviving capitals appear to date from all three periods of construction, though
the later maintain the character of the original design.
The Tower of the Winds, Athens (c. 48 B.C.) (pp. 138], I4I, 162B, C), another
Hellenistic building, is also known as the Horologium of Andronikos Cyrrhestes,
who erected it for measuring time by means of a clepsydra or water-clock internally
and by a sundial externally; while it was also provided with a weather-vane. The
building, on a crepidoma of three steps, is octagonal, and its eight sides face the
more important points of the compass. It is of marble, and measures 22 ft 4 ins
internally, and on the north-east and north-west sides are distyle porticoes with
fluted columns 13 ft 6 ins high, without bases and bearing capitals which vary from
the normal Corinthian design, having square abaci, no volutes and a range of water
leaves occupying the upper half of the bell, over a single row of acanthus leaves
(p. 138]). From the south side projected a circular water cistern, supplying the
water-clock. The interior is 40 ft 9 ins high, and the upper part is encircled by
small, fluted Doric columns, standing on a projecting band. The external wall of
the octagonal structure is plain for a height of 29 ft with the exception of incised
lines forming the sundial, and above this, boldly sculptured figures on each face
represent the eight principal winds (p. 162B, C). The roof, formed of twenty-four
radiating, wedge-shaped blocks of marble, was once surmounted by a bronze
Triton, pivoting to show with his rod the quarter in which the wind lay,
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

Y My tee Fe ein SCROLL

CLA | Pp iL SEARS
REE BEDUTEBY 0 Hoeisbppaanell FROM ROOF
___ Mie + | tssee (RESTORED )
se ELEV. & SEC. @ VIEW FROM S.E. (Bean
ENTABLATURE >

THE TOWER OF THE WINDS: ATHENS

SCALE FOR PLAN SCALE FOR SEC.AND ELEV.
FEET
us
alee
METRES

VIEW FROM E(REST2) \[7]/ HALF SECTION & ELEVATION

HE TEMPLE Of
OF APOLLO
DAT DIDYMAN? ae
Vil
EAUS

ae
ooo Gane

10
oaoa08

ad Me TO + COLUMN
Rove.
ve:

donggGco
BosBso05000
HRRRHoOBoG0RaS
ILE =)
ALE FOR PLAN !? Sines 20 FEET N BLA
LEV. OF TEMPLE § ooJo METRES N PLAN OF CAPITAL
(LOOKING UP)
 142 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

WEST ELEVATION X-X

(RESTORED) SCALE FOR ELEVATIONS € SECTIONS
(Oi. 59-46 10 20 30 40 50 FEET

Uy YHyy 5 0 5 10 15 MTRS
YY 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 7080 90 IOOFEET
oe 2
SAA res a Orr a! MTR
SCALE FOR PLAN

ee
Se
eee

k- | TEMPLEOF
| NIKE APTEROS

(B) SECTION Y-Y

( RESTORED)
——

Yj

(C)SECTION Z-Z RestoRED)

PEDESTAL
OF AGRIPPA

DETAIL
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 143

PROPYLAEA
Propylaea, or entrance gateways, marked the approach to the sacred enclosures in
many cities, such as Athens, Epidauros (p. 1068), Eleusis and Priene.
The Propylaea, Athens (437-432 B.C.) (pp. 103B, I04, 142), erected under
Pericles by the architect Mnesicles, forms the imposing entrance to the Acropolis,
approached by a steep ascent from the plain below. The front and rear hexastyle
Doric porticoes are on different levels, and give access to a covered hall with a
wide central passage flanked by Ionic columns and with an eastern wall with five
doorways of different heights. The projecting wings on either side of the western
front have three Doric columns, smaller than those of the main block. The northern
wing, provided with windows, was used as a pinacotheca (p. 142H), but the southern
wing was never completed, probably to avoid encroaching on the sacred precincts
of the Temple of Niké Apteros. The generai appearance, showing the important
position of the Propylaea as part of the world-famous group of Acropolis buildings,
is shown in the view (p. 103B). The original design was never realized in full owing to
the Peloponnesian war (p. 142G).

THEATRES
The Greek theatre, an open-air structure, which consisted of orchestra, audi-
torium or cavea and scene-building, was generally hollowed out of the slope of a
hillside, in or near a city. The orchestra was a complete circle, usually with an
altar to Dionysos at the centre, where the chorus chanted and danced. The
orchestra was slightly raised and edged by a kerb, outside of which was a paved
ambulatory, allowing spectators to reach their seats from the lower level. The cavea
rose in tiers of stone seats, founded on natural rock, divided into wedge-shaped
blocks or ‘cunei’ by radiating flights of steps. Above a horizontal pathway or ‘dia-
zoma’, the number of cunei was doubled, because of the enlarged radius. The
outer ends of the horseshoe-shaped cavea were buttressed by retaining walls, and
alongside them were passages to the orchestra which completely separated the
cavea from the scene-building except for a slight link afforded by a lintelled
entrance portal on either side.
The theatre first acquired permanent form about the fifth century B.c., but still
at the end of the Hellenic period, 323 B.Cc., the scene-building was only partially
developed. This ‘skene’ or scene-building originally was merely a tent or booth in
which the players prepared. It had become a permanent structure, serving also for
the storage of properties, showing a plain wall towards the orchestra, with three
large, square-headed recesses within it for the exhibition of conventional scenery.
At its ends, wings or ‘parascenia’ projected forwards, marking the width of the
orchestra. Early in the Hellenistic period, a ‘proscenium’, at first of wood and later
(second century B.C.) of stone, came to be built in front of the scene-building, its
roof serving as a stage or ‘logeion’ (speaking-place). The proscenium averaged 8 ft
deep and 10-12 ft high, faced with colonnades infilled with panels. Parascenia pro-
jected slightly at the ends, following the old tradition. With the advent of the pro-
scenium, the importance of the orchestra declined. The scene-building became
> with the
two-storeyed, the upper providing a raised background or ‘episcenium
while sloping ramps or stairs at the ends of the
three wide recesses for scenery,
Greek
block gave the necessary access to the stage. Though at first simple, the
episcenium was to lead to the rich and extravagantly-ornate permanent architec-
theatre,
tural settings of the Romans; the use of a low stage; typical of the Roman
was a separate development arising in the Hellenistic period.
Polycleitus,
The Theatre, Epidauros (c. 350 B.C.) (Pp. 144C, 145A; B), designed by
144 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

A. Theatre of Dionysos, Athens B. The Parthenon, Athens (447—432 B.C.).

(c. 330 B.c.). A priest’s throne. View of angle. See p. 121
See p. 147

c. Theatre, Epidauros (c. 350 B.c.). See p. 143

 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 145

THEATRE, EPIDAUROS THE THEATRE, ORANGE

Se cs
Nile eee ee

C7"
SS

FEET 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
METRES O 5 #410 + 20 £2
PLAN
146 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

Sie: ‘ O
SOR
B Ss z i

A. The Olympieion, Athens (174 B.C.-A.D. 132) with the Acropolis in the
distance. See p. 140

B. The Stadium, Athens, looking towards entrance (reconstructed c. A.D. 160

and restored in 1896). See p. 148
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 147

is a well-preserved and typical example. The orchestra, a complete circle, is 67 ft

across and the total diameter of the theatre, 387 ft. The lower part of the cavea
has 34 rows of seats, divided by a diazoma from the upper, containing 21 rows,
which slope at a steeper angle. ‘Parodoi’, forming entrances at orchestra level,
separate the cavea from the ruined stone scene-building, which was of later date
and due to a Hellenistic reconstruction of about 200 B.c. Sloping ramps, starting
from outside the simple stone gateways, led to a high proscenium, providing a
stage or logeion about 10 ft deep, faced with an Ionic colonnade and having pro-
jecting wings or parascenia at the ends. The scene-building no doubt would have
risen up behind the proscenium to form an episcenium background.
The Theatre of Dionysos, Athens (reconstructed c. 330 B.C.) (pp. 103B, IO4C,
144A) accommodating eighteen thousand spectators, was founded about 500 B.c.
and suffered successive modifications through the Greek and Roman times. It is
scooped out of the Acropolis rock, and is tremendously deep, having three banks
of seats and two diazomata. On the front row were sixty-seven marble thrones for
city dignitaries, of individual design, added about the first century B.c. (p. 144A).
A theatre was usual in every Greek town of consequence, as at Delphi (p. 1064),
Ephesus, Syracuse, Delos and Priene, but very many were altered by the Romans.

PUBLIC BUILDINGS
The restorations of Athens (p. 105A), Olympia (p. 105B), Delphi (p. 106A) and
Epidauros (p. 106B), give an idea of the distribution of buildings on these famous
sites.
The Agora (p. 105), or town square, was the centre of Greek social and business
life, around or near which were stoas or colonnaded porticoes, temples, admini-
strative and public buildings, markets, places of entertainment, monuments and
shrines.
The Stoa (pp. I04C, 105, 132K), a long, colonnaded building, served many pur-
poses, as until late times the Greeks could not easily erect complex structures.
Stoas were used around public places and as shelters at religious shrines. Impor-
tant instances are the Stoa Poikilé or Echo Colonnade, Olympia (p. 1058), about
330 ft by 30 ft, two at Epidauros (p. 1068), three at Delphi (p. 106A), and the Stoas
of Eumenes, Athens (p. 103B) and Attalos II (pp. 105A, 158), Athens.
The Prytaneion served as senate house for the chief dignitaries of the city and
as a place where distinguished visitors and citizens might be entertained. It con-
tained the official banqueting room and also the symbolic communal hearth on
which a fire burnt perpetually, associated with the cult of Hestia, goddess of the
hearth. Instances occur at Olympia (p. 1058), Athens and Priene.
The Bouleuterion, or council house was a covered meeting place for the
democratically-elected councils. Early examples necessarily were small and needed
many columns to support the roof; Hellenistic examples might accommodate more
than five hundred persons, but still needed some intermediate rocf supports. ‘They
were usually rectangular buildings with banked seats facing inwards on three sides
or arranged in a semi-circle. Those at Olympia (p. 105B) and Athens were repeatedly
enlarged. That at Miletus (c. 170 B.C.) accommodated 1,200 people (p. 154A).
Assembly Halls, for citizens in general, were similar, but needed to be larger.
Until constructive skill was sufficiently advanced, public assemblies met in the
open air, in the case of Athens at the hill-side Pnyx. Covered assembly halls went by
special names in different places, e.g. the Thersilion, Megalopolis (c. 370 B.C.) and,
the Ecclesiasterion, Priene (c. 200 B.c.). The Telesterion, or Hall of the Mysteries,
Eleusis, served a religious purpose.
The Odeion, a kindred type to the theatre, was a building in which musicians
148 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

performed their works for the approval of the public and competed for prizes. The
Odeion of Pericles, Athens (c. 435 B.C.), adjoined the theatre of Dionysus, and
served too for rehearsals. It was a square building with eighty-one columns—nine
by nine—so placed as to give clear sight lines. The Odeion of Herodes Atticus,
Athens (c. A.D. 161) (pp. 103B, 104) was very much more ambitious. It resembled a
theatre in plan and probably was not wholly roofed over.
The Stadium was the foot racecourse in cities where games were celebrated,
and had a length of about 600 ft between banks of seats founded on convenient
natural ground or on the spoil from excavation on flat sites. The starting end was
straight, the other semi-circular. The oldest stadium in Greece is that at Olympia
(p. 105B). There are others at Epidauros (p. 1068), Delphi, Ephesus and Athens.
The latter (p. 146B), commenced 331 B.c. and reconstructed in A.D. 160 by Herodes
Atticus, was restored from A.D. 1896 for the Olympic Games of 1906. It is said to
accommodate 50,000 spectators.
The Hippodrome was a similar, though longer type of building for horse and
chariot racing, and was the prototype of the Roman circus. Few traces now remain.
The Palaestra was a wrestling-school, but the term is usually used interchange-
ably with Gymnasium, a place for physical exercises of all kinds. Gymnasia, as
at Olympia (p. 105B), Ephesus and Pergamon, were prototypes of the Roman
thermae, and in the Hellenistic period were formal structures comprising courts
for athletes, tanks for bathers, rooms for dressing and toilet, places for rest and
conversation, exedrae and other seats for spectators, stores and an ephebeum or
club-room which served too for lectures.
Naval buildings included ship-sheds and stores. The Arsenal at the Piraeus,
built c. 340 B.c., a long narrow building for the storage of sailing tackle of the
Athenian navy, is chiefly important in that the specification survives to show that
still at that time the principle of the timber roof truss was not understood. The so-
called Sanctuary of the Bulls, Delos (third century B.C.) (p. 157C, E, F, H) was
similar in form, 220 ft long and 30 ft wide, and was a sacred, commemorative
building housing a war galley in a shallow, dry tank. At the far end was a sanctuary
approached through an entrance flanked by piers which were half Doric columns
and half antae capped by recumbent sculptured bulls.

TOMBS
The Nereid Monument, Xanthos (c. 400 B.C.) (p. 135C) typifies Ionian sculp-
tural luxuriance and the use in Greek Asia Minor of a temple form of tomb,
elevated on a high podium. The entablature lacks a true frieze, but the architrave
is sculptured and there are other bas-relief friezes on the podium. Between the
columns stood nereids or marine nymphs. The remains of the monument are in
the British Museum.
The Mausoleum, Halicarnassos (355-350 B.C.) (p. 149), the most famous of
all tombs and one of the seven wonders of the world, was erected to King Mausolos
by his widow, Artemisia, and from it is derived the term ‘mausoleum’, applied to
monumental tombs. It had a lofty podium and a temple-like upper part surrounded
by Ionic columns and surmounted by a pyramidal roof, with a marble quadriga
and a group of statuary at its apex (p. 149C, L). The early restoration of Newton
and Pullan is shown in detail (p. 149A—D, L), and some of the other restorations
made of this monument (p. I49E-K). The achitects were Pythius and Satyrus,
and Scopas was among the famous sculptors employed. Portions of three friezes,
the statues of Mausolos and Artemisia, with the horses, quadriga, and other frag-
ments, are grouped together in the British Museum.
The Lion Tomb, Cnidos (c. 350 B.C.) (p. I50A—-F) is unusual for Asia Minor
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

THEMAUSOLEUM, HALICARNASSOS

ll
|
=
FSS Ii
Fel aa

Meg nearsate
al _LER URAL!ELD
TT
LALLLLLL

Ue Yocuavern
LLL LUE
RAMP

DSSS

Lo
a
SrO2Om=
eae ae
————
F PLAN(BHALF PLAN (C\WEST FRONT 4,Noe ha e215) DETAIL OF ORDER
SEMENT e peRIsTYLE Ait

BER

a G | )SOUTH FRONT : NEWTONsPULLAN (1862) K ) STEVENSON (1896)

 150 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

a LION TOMB g@ AT CNIDOS i

oe =| (RESTORED)

Se : =

: en 2S }
| =e ; |

: fz [

DEcela (C)FRONT
Oe SEATON
20 2) :
/ V7)
12345678M™ i. Tl
| I I y
SCALE FOR PLANS di
fSCALE FOR ELEVATIONS Lo
4 3ae ene ®&
(E KeyY PLAN

H AY i) A K
Ne ‘fl AL (CA (wai mh
: — ir
—= = SSeS
DOCU
<_< —_(G-0)
= —_ =
=
— (OFU
= — ¢= —

bf Ff > ell
Hl LD Bi) |

eIills! ZAM
|
eS AS ‘ w\a
Hh EX iat i \
,
(|

|_| 1 = NO 2 G
is ‘ A a.

(J;)TomB AT CNIDOS TF
‘OMB OF THE WEEPERS: SIDON
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE Ist
in having Doric columns. Unusual too is their pseudo-peripteral arrangement.
This was another early instance of the introduction of the Egyptian, stepped
pyramidal crown, from which the terminal crouching lion, which gives the tomb
its name, is in the British Museum. The circular interior was roofed with a cor-
belled dome (p. 1508).
The Sarcophagus, Cnidos (p. 150), is an interesting and beautiful example,
taken from a tomb chamber, of the ornamental treatment given to a stone coffin
hewn out of one block of marble and with sculptures of a late period.
The Tomb of the Weepers, Sidon (350 B.C.) (p. 150K), now in the Museum at
Istanbul, is a sarcophagus in the form of a miniature Ionic temple, with sculptured
figures of mourners between the columns.
The Alexander Sarcophagus (330-320 B.C.) (p. 150G, H), also found near Sidon
and now in the Istanbul Museum, is the most beautiful and best preserved
surviving example of this class of monuments. It is so called because marble sculp-
tures on its sides represent battles and hunting scenes of Alexander.
There are also important rock-cut tombs in Cyrenaica, North Africa, and in
Asia Minor (p. 126£), including two from Lycia, now in the British Museum,
which illustrate the genesis of the Ionic entablature from a wooden prototype.
The Stele (p. 157G) consisted of a slab of stone placed upright in the ground,
like a modern headstone, carved in bas-relief and generally terminated with
floriated ornament; many of these can be seen in the British Museum (pp. 162D,
163D), the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, and the Boston Museum.
The Tomb, Mylasa (p. 220A-D), in Asia Minor, though built in the Roman
period, shows the strength of the Greek tradition there. It is of the temple-tomb
class, and resembles the Halicarnassos Mausoleum; it has Corinthian tetrastyle
colonnades raised on a high podium, and a pyramidal crown of stone slabs, of
which the lowest course has diagonal beams across the angles. The angle pillars are
square, and the intermediate columns elliptical, their bearing area being increased
by the insertion of pilaster strips on each side. The tomb at Dougga (p. 220R),
near Tunis, is somewhat similar, but has a walled-up colonnade.

DOMESTIC BUILDINGS
The Greeks lived much of their waking life in the public and sacred parts of the
city, and their houses were at first modest in scope and materials. The rooms looked
towards a small court, the chief apartments being on the north side, facing the
winter sun, with others on the east and west sides. Two-storey arrangements were
quite common. In Asia Minor, the Ionians long retained the Aegean megaron as a
chief element in their houses (p. 234C, D), but the Dorian Greeks developed the
‘pastas’ house (p. 153), the pastas being a long, shallow room, crossing the house
from side to side and partly open on the south towards the court, whilst serving
too for access to the main inner rooms to the north. In old parts of towns, houses
were irregular and crowded, and still were varied in design when towns came to be
regularly planned. Second storeys sometimes were flats, and shops might occupy
parts of the frontages. Knowledge of Greek house design comes principally from:
the planned lay-outs of Olynthos, Macedonia (between 432-348 B.C.) and Priene,
Asia Minor (fourth and third centuries B.c.), and from Delos (second century B.C.)
on the island of that name. Full colonnaded peristyles began to develop around the
internal courts of the Greek house from the third century B.c.
‘House No. 33’, Priene (p. 234C, E), measuring about 98 ft by 57 ft overall, is
one of the best examples in this planned town (p. 1326) of the survival of the mega-
ron element, usually found in a block of four apartments, in which the megaron and
its columned porch, facing south on to the inner court, give access to two further
152 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

rooms ranged along one flank. All four apartments were as much as twenty feet
high.
The ‘Maison de la Colline’, Delos (p. 153) is an unusually regular house,
nearly square, illustrating the pastas type which became general and influenced
Roman arrangements. The court was fully colonnaded, with a water cistern cen-
trally below it, its north side lighting the pastas which extended the full width of
the house. From the latter opened a large room, occupying half the available
width, and two other principal apartments of differing sizes. The entrance was on
the west, with a kitchen adjoining, and in the south-west corner was a wooden
staircase to bedrooms opening from a gallery on a second floor. Other Delian
houses, usually with peristyles, were much less formal, and none was sym-
metrical, like the typical Roman house at Pompeii (p. 234B).

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
(for Aegean architecture see p. 92)
PLANS (p. 109). Temple plans normally were simple, rectangular and symmetrical,
though occasionally asymmetrical, as at the Erechtheion (p. 134F), or circular, like
the Tholos, Epidauros (pp. 106B, IO9E). House plans were invariably asymmetrical.
The plans of all roofed buildings were so arranged that the spans were nowhere
too large for the untrussed timber roofs, and for this reason internal pillar supports
had often to be used in temples, stoas and halls. Greek temples were, however,
planned principally for external effect, the single naos being surrounded by those
open colonnades which are their special charm; quite the reverse from the typical
Egyptian temple with its courts and massive, stone-roofed, columned halls en-
closed within a high girdle wall. In Greek architecture, the spacing of columns
generally was regular, except where, for reasons of effect, they were more closely
spaced at the angles of temples, or, where for practical purposes, the central inter-
columniation was increased, as in the Propylaea at Athens (p. 142H) where the
Panathenaic procession with its mounted knights had to pass. The Greeks em-
ployed the circular plan for open-air theatres, tumulus tombs and sometimes for
monuments, such as that of Lysicrates at Athens (p. 141A), while the octagonal
plan was adopted for the Tower of the Winds, Athens (p. I41F).
WALLS. For temples and the best buildings, walls were constructed solidly of
fine, bonded masonry of stone or marble, bound together by cramps and dowels of
wood or lead in the archaic period and iron, run with lead, in later times. Mortar
was not used, except in small quantities to ensure even bedding. Coarse-grained
masonry was sheathed over with an excellent marble stucco, polished on com-
pletion; the better quality stones and marbles were so carefully fitted that the joints
could scarcely be seen, and the surface was made faultlessly smooth. Coloured
marbles were not used, the only possible exception being the limited employment
of blue-black Eleusinian limestone, as for the frieze of the Erechtheion (p. 135A).
Masonry courses were of even height, until Hellenistic times, when alternately
high and narrow courses were often used instead. During the process of construc-
tion of temples, the masonry of crepidoma, walls and column bases and shafts was
left in the rough until the fully-carved entablature had been fitted. Walls had
entablatures or cornices even when the Order was not present; string courses were
rare. At the base of temple walls externally, stones were fitted as vertical slabs,
these ‘orthostates’ recalling primitive times when the upper walls were of timber-
framed, sun-dried brick. About the fifth century B.c., terrace and retaining walls
sometimes were faced with polygonal masonry of very large stones fitted together
so precisely that the wall produced an effect like that of a picture-puzzle (p. 161).
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 153

B. Plan (restored)

‘Maison de la Colline’, Delos (second century B.c.). See opposite page

 ARCHITECTURE
154 GREEK

A. Bouleuterion (Council House), Miletus (c. 170 B.c.). See p. 147

| |)
— SSS
i

i
| a
| |ll Lt
————-
_———— ll
= ——t

B. Temple of Aphaia, Aegina. Sectional view, restored (c. 490 B.G;). See Pr lrs
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 155
The masonry of defensive city walls, also mortarless, varied in quality from
coursed
rubble to the best ashlar, but usually was left rough-faced, giving it an appearance
of rugged strength; the cores of such walls sometimes were of rough rubble
or
earth. Square or round towers were spaced at frequent intervals. House walls until
late times had stonework only at the base, the upper parts being of stucco-covered
sun-dried brick.
OPENINGS. Greek architecture was essentially trabeated, and openings were
Square-headed and spanned by a lintel. Columns had to be placed close together
when carrying lintels or architraves of stone or marble, but internally, when carry-
ing timber, could be spaced much farther apart. Facades of temples, which rarely
had windows, would have appeared barren without the alternation of light and
shade produced by the succession of free-standing columns and the shadows seen
in the spaces between them. Door and window openings usually were narrowed
towards the top, as in the doorway of the Erechtheion (p. 159D).
RooFs. The inclination of temple pediments was governed by the slope of the
roof, which was low-pitched, as the principle of roof-triangulation was not em-
ployed until very late times (p. 154B). For the latter reason, internal columns were
sometimes needed in temples, as at Paestum (p. 1168). The timber rafters of the
roof were boarded and buildings of all classes were covered externally with terra-
cotta tiles, or, in the case of temple buildings, with specially-cut marble tiles (p.
II0H). The flat, marble ceilings of temple porches and peristyles were enriched by
lacunaria or sunken coffers (pp. 120K, I54B).
COLUMNS. Temples were one-storey high, and columns, with their entablature,
comprised the entire height of the buildings externally. Internally, some temples
had double tiers of columns to help support the roof, separated only by an archi-
trave, and not a full entablature (pp. 116B, 122F). Hellenistic buildings, other than
temples, were quite often of two tiers; the Stoa of Attalos, Athens (pp. 105A, 158),
had Doric columns in the lower tier and Ionic in the upper.
The Orders (p. 160), which have been fully dealt with, may be summarized as
follows:
The Doric (p. 108) is the sturdiest of the Orders, and its finest examples are in
the Parthenon and the Theseion (p. 119).
The Ionic (p. 125) was more slender, and two typical examples are in the
Erechtheion (p. 133) and the Temple of Athena Polias, Priene (p. 131).
The Corinthian (p. 137), which apart from its elaborate capital differed little
from the Ionic, was a purely decorative invention of the Greeks and was not much
used until late Hellenistic times. The best-known examples are the Monument of
Lysicrates, Athens (p. 139) and the Olympieion (p. 140) upon which the Romans
based their own version of the Order and brought it to full fruition.
Caryatids (pp. 136, 157J), Canephorae (p. 157D), which were draped female
figures, and Atlantes or Telamones (p. 114J), carved male figures, were sometimes
used in place of columns or as supports.
MOULDINGS. Mouldings are an architectural device whereby, with the help of
the light and shade they produce, definition is given to the salient lines of a build-
ing (pp. 164, 165). Thus the delicacy of moulded contours is in proportion to the
strength of sunlight in any given country, always making due allowance for national
tendencies and the possibilities of the material used. Greek love of refinement
found full opportunity for expression in graceful mouldings in the sunny climate
of Greece; the Roman character, in a somewhat similar climate, displayed itself in
more pronounced mouldings; while in grey and sombre England mouldings became
coarse and full-bodied to secure sufficient shadow to throw up their lines. Greek
mouldings were refined and delicate in contour, due first to the fine-grained
156 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

marble in which often they were carved, and secondly to the clear atmosphere and
continuous sunshine which produced strong shadows from slight projections.
Though the sections of these mouldings were probably formed by hand, they
approach very closely to various conic sections, such as parabolas, hyperbolas and
ellipses. As a general rule the lines of the carved ornament on any Greek moulding
correspond to the profile of that moulding and thus emphasize it by the expression
of its own curvature in an enriched form. The examples given of mouldings taken
from the Parthenon, Erechtheion, and elsewhere may be studied (pp. 164, 165).
The following is a classified list of the most important mouldings compared with
the Roman (p. 164).
(a) The cyma recta (Hogarth’s ‘line of beauty’) which is often carved with
honeysuckle ornament, whose outline corresponds with the section (pp. 164G,
165Q).
(b) The cyma reversa (ogee) when enriched is carved with the water leaf and
tongue (pp. 164H, I65N, Q).
(c) The ovolo (egg-like) when enriched is carved with the egg and dart, or egg
and tongue ornament (pp. 164F, 165L, Q).
(d) The fillet, a small plain face to separate other mouldings (p. 164A), is usually
without enrichment.
(e) The astragal or bead serves much the same purpose as the fillet, but ap-
proaches a circle in section. It is sometimes carved with the “bead and reel’ or with
beads, which, in fact, gave the name to the moulding (p. 1648).
(f) The cavetto is a simple hollow (p. 164D).
(g) The scotia is a deep hollow which occurs in bases, and is generally not
enriched (p. 164E).
(h) The torus is really a magnified bead moulding which, when enriched, is
carved with the guilloche or plait ornament, or with bundles of leaves tied with
bands (p. 164L).
(t) The bird’s-beak moulding occurs frequently in the Doric Order, and gives a
deep shadow (pp. 164K, 165A, E).
(j) The corona, or deep vertical face of the upper portion of the cornice, was
frequently painted with a Greek ‘fret’ ornament (p. 165C).
ORNAMENT (pp. I57, 162, 163). Greek ornament is specially refined in char-
acter, and on it architectural ornament of all succeeding styles has been based. The
acanthus leaf and scroll play an important part in Greek ornamentation (p. 138C).
The leaf from which these were derived grows in the south of Europe in two
varieties. The ‘acanthus spinosus’, preferred by the Greeks, has pointed, narrow
lobes, V-shaped in section with deeply drilled eyes giving a sharp, crisp shadow
(p. 138D). The ‘acanthus mollis’, preferred by the Romans, has broad, blunt tips,
flat in section (p. 138E). The leaf was used principally in the Corinthian capital
(p. 138), and is also found in the capital (pp. 138G, 141) and crowning finial of the
Choragic Monument of Lysicrates (p. 163E). The scroll which accompanies the
leaf and acts as a stalk is usually V-shaped in section with sharp edges. The anthe-
mion, palmette, or honeysuckle ornament (p. 163A) was a favourite Greek decora-
tion, and was largely used to ornament anta capitals (p. 163L), cyma recta mould-
ings (p. 164G), and neckings of columns as in the Erechtheion (p. 127D). It is also
frequently employed on stele-heads and antefixae (pp. I57G, 162D, 163D).
Greek sculpture, which has never been excelled, may be classified as follows:
(a) architectural sculpture, which includes friezes (pp. I20N, 163H), tympana of
pediments (p. 117C), acroteria at the base and summit of pediments (p. 117A, B),
sculptured metopes (pp. 120A, C, 163K, M), caryatids (pp. 136, 157J), and figure
sculptures, as the ‘Gigantomachy’ of the Altar of Zeus at Pergamon in Asia Minor
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 157

SUNKEN
AREA
(NHGURR
(MKS,
enw
soanosos
Soca
on7ex
Sho
os WARIEIO0
ome
eee
Bes
Fe

4-05'-----------
=--
\
i y -
*H Mt, YHAW ha :5
\
'
| xches FN
“oes at
FIN ;1
Dan i ‘ ’ 1 ‘
7 } i : th 1 '
'
; ie
Ve OR PSHERS tAyeyeh = SPs
OR ;1
‘ _~—
‘ ABT,
Oe =
[--- 2-5.
9-5 ---»

= are
=

==

(J)carvarp: eee
‘H)SANCTUARY 2 THE BULLS: DELOS: ELEV. AT a ERECHTHEION
158 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

(197-159 B.C.); (6) sculptured reliefs, as seen on the stele (p. 157G); (c) free-standing
statuary, consisting of groups, single figures, bigas (two-horse chariots) or quad-
rigas (four-horse chariots) (p. I49C, L).
Colour, of which traces survive, was largely used, particularly on buildings of a
religious character. In many instances stone and sun-dried brick were covered with
carefully prepared stucco, to receive paintings or colour decoration, made with
powdered marble dust, which was very thin in the best buildings but became much
thicker in Hellenistic times. This marble stucco was capable of such high polish
that Vitruvius mentions that it would reflect like a mirror.

The Stoa of Attalos II, Athens (reconstruction by the American School of Classical
Studies, Athens). c. 150 B.c. See p. 147

REFERENCE BOOKS
BELL, E. Hellenic Architecture. London, 1920.
—. Pre-Hellenic Architecture. London, 1926.
CARY, M. The Geographical Background of Greek and Roman History. Oxford, 1949.
COCKERELL,C.R. The Temples at Aegina and Bassae. London, 1860.
COTTRELL, L. The Bull of Minos. London, 1953.
D’ESPOUY, H. Fragments del’ architecture antique. Paris, 1899.
D’ESPOUY et SEURE. Monuments antiques. 4 vols., Paris (t19—).
DINSMOOR, W.B. The Architecture of Ancient Greece. 3rd ed., London, 1950.
DORPFELD, W. Das griechische Theater. Athens, 1896.
DURM, J. Die Baukunst der Griechen. Leipzig, 1910.
EVANS, SIR ARTHUR. Palace of Minos at Knossos. 4 vols., London, 1921-3.
FERGUSSON, J. The Parthenon. London, 1883.
FRAZER, J. G. Pausanias’s Description of Greece. 6 vols., London, 1898.
FURTWANGLER, A. and others. Aegina: das Heiligtum der Aphaia. 2 vols., Munich, 1906.
FYFE, T. Hellemstic Architecture. Cambridge, 1936.
GLOTZ, G. The Aegean Civilization. New York, 1925.
GOODYEAR, W. H. Greek Refinements. Yale and London, 1912.
GROMORT,G. Histoire abrégée de l’architecture en Gréce et a Rome. Paris, 1947.
HAVERFIELD,F. Ancient Town Planning. Oxford, 1913.
HOMOLLE, T. and others. Exploration archéologique de Délos. Paris, 1902.
HULOT, J. Selinonte. Paris, 1910.
INWOOD, H. W. The Erechtheion at Athens. London, 1827.
The Antiquities of Ionia (Dilettanti Society). 5 vols., London, 1769-1915.
KOLDEWEY, R. and PUCHSTEIN, 0. Die Griechischen Tempel von Unteritalien und
Sicilien. 2 vols., Berlin, 1899.
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 159

elf! ONE OF THE

S]TZMETAL DOORS

Y SCALE FOR DETAILS

& C5 OUnns. 12 IB INS
io O 20 CMS

foo 0 0 0 u

(C)peTaL e ENTABLATURE
DOORWAY OF PANTHEON :ROME.
¥;

WW glodZ
t AG ‘OBsOG
Hi S

HO} y

'
\ |
Y
H ;
a
4
Raa
PAWN
iS Sa SS
?
Naleg i : F He
Pals 4 BhES i
al iiWW | f Hen
Alfe | :R
4a} ‘
Ju i|e —

Gre kK
IR
\
mR
we

' Wh
| iO
in
! 4 } Riese RB | ge
ote
OS).
Oe Mu
ate Te
Wn
i
i
Rf
np
[S<<ScaLe° FoR DETAILS
V]| f6) 6 12 NS
= Wn : Wye i 1 -30CMS

——
i
teWe H Ht
H
\ ae Wy ee aa PLAN THRO’
!! E|T Hee Mt CONSOLE AT
' I ee Lyn,

ee WO — Yyyys
“Gr
2 4
J)
tity
| aeLL
; WMH

' H :
UW YY Yd
ty
Wy UY

( : ARCHITRAVE Yj
j
~. LAN ae lt

ELEVATION o:
UE (E) DeTLs ? ENTABLATURE
DOORWAY OF N.PORTICO: ERECHTHEION: ATHENS
SaLL 160

F & E 22 “=
GREEK
! | |
ARCHITECTURE
: 3x z = W * °. ! 1

(dN

SINOY :NOSHINVd SHL

9NIHO07) SY)

NVWOU
ene
(
bWitWiSS —————
NINO Sasidgg

(dN
SNIMO07)

“SSLVUOISAT 40 INOW SISVHOHD

?

Elelal3)
0 x =o g o
(dn
nu
| ; | ; 1 ;
9NIMOO7)

ae

SMA VNALUOI JO ITIdWAL © “SNSHLV:SMSSIIINO FIdW3L = “VOD IV FTIAWAL

(Chm)
|
a
SIMS
qd

NVWOd
- | ' | ‘(dAa <N ©,N |
w
\ !| \
fo
\
Se
NVIdSNIYOO7)
ae
Mise)

re.

Y 7, Z a Sees
a
GY

y 87;

i
7

ir N
SALVO)

—_
NAVAS:
| | =

i] ies Maad9
= ee4 ) : : | I “A = D ° 09, |
se
b i aaron
I Hl

SNIMOO7) a
Wy
Z

iil eH

Ie Mi.
NVWOd

Wses [2o re
A
= a ie| : I (dN \ au
| |
:| !
ONION) ey
felit es
“SNSHLV: NOISSSH.L SHL

J Sa

LI eame
, I a
aii vy
ME Elal3)

i |
§
©)
(q)
@
V)
NVIHLNI
‘OldOG,
|OINO!,|.
f |

a4
ie = a ~ /\ ! | : a = b (e) be @ a i
NC
SariLH
xi5épare | 1 ! (
i
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 161
LALOUX, V. et MONCEAUX, P. La restauration d’Olympie. Paris, 1889.
LAWRENCE,A. W. Greek Architecture. Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, 1957.
LETHABY, W.R. Greek Buildings. London, 1908.
MARQUAND, A. Handbook of Greek Architecture. New York, 1909.
MAUCH, J. M. VON. Die Architektonischen Ordnungen der Griechen und Romer. Berlin,
| 1896.
MIDDLETON, J.H. Plans and Drawings of Athenian Buildings. 1900.
NEWTON, C. T. and PULLAN,R. P. A History of Discoveries at Halicarnassus, Cnidus and
Branchidae. 3 vols., London, 1862-3.
PENNETHORNE, JOHN. The Geometry and Optics of Ancient Architecture. London and
Edinburgh, 1878.
PENROSE, F.C. The Principles of Athenian Architecture. London, 1888.
PERROT, G. and CHIPIEZ, C. Artin Primitive Greece. 2 vols., London, 1894.
QUENNELL, M.andc.H.B. Everyday Things in Greece. 3 vols., London, 1929-32.
Restaurations des monuments antiques, publiées par Il’Académie de la France a Rome. Paris,
1877-90.
ROBERTSON, D.S. Handbook of Greek and Roman Architecture. 2nd ed., Cambridge, 1943.
SELTMAN,C. The Twelve Olympians. Pan Books, London, 1952.
SPIERS,R.P. The Orders of Architecture. London, 1926.
STOBART, J.C. The Glory that was Greece. (Reprint) London, 1948.
STRATTON, A. The Orders of Architecture. London, 1931.
STUART, J.and REVETT,N. Antiquities of Athens. 5 vols., London, 1762-1832.
WATT,J.C. Greek and Pompeian Decorative Work, London, 1897.
WIEGAND, T. and others. Milet: Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen und Untersuchungen.
Berlin, 1906- (in progress).
WILKINS, W. Antiquities of Magna Graecia. Cambridge, 1807.
WYCHERLEY,R.E. How the Greeks built Cities. London, 1949.

ins capa BP ie
Delphi. Polygonal masonry of the fifth century B.C.
See p. 152
 162 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

jj
Se,
N i | Mh
tt ~
I = — os

OD Wh VA
Nee — | pee
ey
; WSs
SS rf Z a—
2
fe \/ pam / \ y}4 eae Y, WWW fe | WL
a x= Wf <n I \y--
\ i i (\ Vi \
= — |

| N
Renee
pe , a ! \ ; . i
Sr ths Ke VAG
y
l lk \@i
yf
Be
Ps aw s :

i
(i Ay| \ |
‘
‘fi

€ Ky ‘ifyl!
cay a ee wwfin “4 NG > Z BROKEN AWAY

VOSA i UN fee
iS Gs cy ES yj
SARS WL CAM EN

ae a(aby
CAPITAL:THE | a7 AL
\ v4 \ | Ge ‘ \

/ (a4 e \,\

Y a SSS

AT HASTE ————‘*——
mone
A Sj: SN i 7:

a
SS SG SY.
fe! |

! Up. SS Ve Leys |

(Bein, SAE AW |
q

:
(B SCULPTURE REPRESENTING E.WIND
fi ey ih
OI AMT

TOWER OF THE WINDS: ATHENS

BOPEAD :
FICS yb Ve Zs eee
Ss" vy “
= aceite Sere x GA
z,
Fé
Zs << me y
R

SCULPTURE REPRESENTING N. WIND “(D)stete HEAD WITH ANTHEMION

TOWER OF THE WINDS: ATHENS
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 163

f------ [=O. Smee 1

“Ato Se ee ee
wis (UT, oot

= ey 4 i
ee NN Sac —
| aed ‘(B)RAIN WATER spout
i = ans! :

\ \ WY

(OS
POCO,
OC
\

COV ZEDES \

& QITZR |
( re
(Coanterxa ORNAMENT

HRT OG RNusesAS
tA aw?
OU
LYSICRATES MONUMENT
my. E.,.

SUSE ale ao men ‘

K)METOPE ;PARTHENON ANTA CAP :ERECHTHEION (M JMETOPE : PARTHENON
 164 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

(GREEK) | @ , ROMAN]
——— FF 4. O_ 2, AAEESs
HO ‘a . neJS% COW
I OCOI OIC
OOOON HK
(BEAD € REEL)

CUuUSW CAUCUS WN

EGG & TONGUE

ENRICHMENT

5/9 CYMA-REVERSA.
(OGEE) “~—A
44
¢ LEAF € TONGUE
N ENRICHMENT
®
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE 165

GREEK
Uf Gece BASE:
TEMPLE OF APOLLO Wy
DIDYMEUS: ////féaia
MILETUS 7/7
Yy YjY
(IONIC)
EDIMENT Yj Y PART OF CORNICE:
N. PORTICO
ERECHTHE!ON

(E)piros peak A
y iy

IONIC FLUTE:
ERECHTHEION

CORINTHIAN

Doce LUTE: MONT

OF LYSICRATES

ROMAN y
wy Y
7/ lonic connice: 7/7 Vp
ld
Vy Ui fgevun _ AWawes /

Jf Y CORINTHIAN FLUTE? ayy

WS
CORINTHIAN
SE Pf
Ww, J
VESPASIANGS””
ROME 7 on / y
Srevenss/
y Wy
ZZ
Yj YYW.
OF NERVA:YYROMEZ
; YY
YEE

? i
Yyy A plZiin
Uy 2 m7
oy
eS 4%
a C
Y “ batitark' -

QUASI-DORIC 4
CORNICE: COLOS-7

ADENTIL
166 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE
om west

A. The Colosseum, Rome (A.D. 70-823; upper storey added 222-224). See p. 210

B. The Colosseum, Rome: the arena and auditorium

 *Vulci
eCorneto

The Roman Empire

IV. ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

(300 B.C.—A.D. 365; preceded by Etruscan, 750-100 B.C.)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. The Etruscans, an immigrant people, whose civilization the
Romans arrested and absorbed, occupied only the west-central portion of Italy, and
not the whole, as did the Romans, later on.
The comparative simplicity of the long coast-line of the Italian peninsula forms
a strong contrast to the complexity of the indented coast-lines of Greece and the
innumerable islands of the Archipelago. Italy has few natural harbours and few
islands along her shores. The great chain of the Apennines runs like a spine down
the centre of Italy and much of the country is very mountainous, but it is not
broken up into isolated little valleys to the same extent as is Greece. These clearly
marked geographical differences between the countries of the Greeks and the
Romans have their counterpart in equally clearly defined differences of national
character. The central and commanding position of Italy in the Mediterranean Sea
enabled Rome to act as an intermediary in spreading art and civilization over
Europe, Western Asia, and North Africa. In their empire-building the Romans
proceeded logically: they conquered first by war, dominated by force of character,
and then ruled by laws and civilized by arts and letters. It was also natural that,
under different geographical conditions, the methods adopted by Rome for extend-
ing her influence should have differed from those of Greece. The Romans were
not a seafaring people like the Greeks, and did not send out colonists in the same
way to all parts of the then-known world: they depended for the extension of their
168 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

power, not on colonization, but on conquest. The Roman power was built up, first
of all in Italy itself, by a gradual absorption of little states, at a time when there
were few rival cities and when small towns were not over tenacious of their sepa-
rate independence; whereas neither Athens nor Sparta was able to carry out a
similar process of absorption, owing to the fierce independence of the small Greek
cities, protected as they were in their isolated and well-nigh impregnable valleys.
The Roman Empire was ultimately not confined geographically to Italy, but, as
shown in the map (p. 167), included all those parts of Europe, North Africa and
Western Asia which constituted the then-known world.
GEOLOGICAL. The mineral wealth of early Italy was concentrated in Etruria,
and it was to the iron of the island of Elba, and the copper and tin of the adjacent
mainland that the rise of the Etruscan civilization was due. These provided the means
of economic exchange and were the principal materials of its manufactures, crafts and
arts. For-building, there was ample good stone and, at that time, adequate timber.
The Romans, in their turn, took very great pains to exploit natural resources to
the full. The geological formation of Italy differs from that of Greece, where the
chief and almost the only building materials are stone and marble; whereas in
addition to these, the Romans could procure suitable earths for the making of
terra-cotta and brick, the latter very extensively used, even for important buildings.
In the neighbourhood of Rome building stones included tufa, of varying degrees of
hardness, from calcareous deposits in Rome itself and immediate vicinity; peperino,
a stone of volcanic origin from Mount Albano; travertine, a hard limestone of fine
quality from Tivoli; lava from volcanic eruptions; besides excellent sand and gravel.
The building material, however, which led to great structural innovations was con-
crete, which rendered possible some of the finest examples of Roman architecture.
Not only vaults and domes but also walls were frequently made of this concrete.
It was formed of stone or brick rubble and a mortar of which the important in-
gredient was pozzolana, a volcanic earth, found in thick strata in and around Rome
and in the region of Naples. Pozzolana is a much superior substitute for sand, and
when mixed with lime and wetted, produces mortar of very great strength and
tenacity. The mortar will set under water; the proportions of the ingredients were
varied according to the nature of the work for which it was intended, and crushed
tiles or potsherds were sometimes added. Roman concrete consisted of alternate
layers of mortar and rubble firmly compressed, and not, as to-day, of a mixture
made before being placed in position. The facings of the ponderous walls were
much more carefully laid than their cores, and presented a neat appearance of cut
stonework of various types or of brickwork. Nevertheless, except in the case of
utilitarian buildings, these fine constructive facings often were covered over with
plaster, or sheathed with alabaster, porphyry and other marbles, hewn from count-
less quarries by armies of slaves. Pliny records that enormous quantities of white
and coloured marbles were imported from all parts of the Empire to special wharves
on the Tiber, and were then worked up by gangs of slaves and convicts. Roman
architecture, as it spread over almost the whole of the then-known world, was
naturally variously influenced by the materials found in the widely differing
localities where it planted itself; but concrete, which in conjunction with its brick
or stone facings was the favourite material, helped to give uniformity of style
throughout the Empire, and thus local geological influences were to a certain
extent at a discount. Yet in the countries around the eastern Mediterranean, where
already there were deep-rooted traditions, and where stone was so abundant that
it might, at times, be used in enormous blocks, as at Baalbek in Syria, or Philae in
Egypt, concrete was but little favoured and the customary usage of those countries
for the most part prevailed.
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 169
CLIMATIC. North Italy has the climate of the temperate region of Europe,
Central Italy is genial and sunny, while the south is almost tropical. This variety
of climatic conditions is sufficient to account for diversity of architectural features
and treatment in the peninsula itself, while the differing climates of the various
Roman provinces from Britain to North Africa, and from Syria to Spain, pro-
duced local modifications in details, though Roman architectural character was so
pronounced and assertive as to leave little choice in general design.
RELIGIOUS. Since the Romans were originally a mixed people, their poly-
theistic religion was a fusion of several cults, but owed most to the Etruscans. In
course of time, many of the chief Roman gods acquired similar attributes to those
of the Greeks, but retained their Latin names and rites. The religion of Ancient
Rome soon became part of the constitution of the state, and even the worship of
the gods was eventually kept up only as a matter of state policy. The Emperor
ultimately received divine honours and may almost be described as the head of the
pantheon of deities of the various provinces which came under the tolerant and
widespread Roman rule. Religious feeling had not so strong a hold on the Romans
as on the Greeks, and did not enter in the same degree into the life of the people;
nor do we find that it formed the bond of union among the different provinces of
the Empire. Dissatisfaction with state religion showed itself from time to time in
the introduction to Rome of alien cults from Egypt and the Near East. The posi-
tion of the Emperor as Pontifex Maximus is rather indicative of the glorification of
the Empire than of religion, and officialism stamped its character even on temple
architecture. The principal buildings are not only temples, as in Hellenic Greece,
but also public buildings, which were the material expression of Roman rule and
imperial power. Sacerdotalism had no place in Roman religion, and the priests
were not, as in Egypt, a powerful and privileged class, but only performed the
sacrifices, while augurs ascertained from omens the will of the gods. Every house,
whether palace, villa, or ‘domus’ had an altar to the Lares or family gods, and
ancestor worship was a recognized part of religious rites; so it came about that
Vesta, goddess of the hearth, was exalted to a high position in the Roman pantheon
of gods, and vestal virgins, attached to the temples of Vesta, were of greater
importance than the ordinary priests of sacrifice.
SocIAL. In early historical times, Etruria, in west-central Italy, was occupied
by the Etruscans. Their antecedents are uncertain, but they most probably were
Asiatic immigrants, who about 750 B.c. had come deviously by sea from Lydia in
Asia Minor. They subjugated the local inhabitants. Italy was not inhabited by one
race alone but by several. North of the Etruscans were the Ligurians; to the east
were the Picenes, and to the south the Samnites and Latins. Newcomers, in addi-
tion to the Etruscans, were the Greeks, who from mid-eighth century B.c. onwards
planted their colonies in South Italy and Sicily, these territories being collectively
known in ancient times as ‘Magna Graecia’. The early form of government in Italy
resembled that of Greece, and towns or districts intermittently were joined to-
gether in leagues. Etruria had twelve great cities, loosely linked together for relig-
ious practices and occasionally for political or military objects. The Etruscans were
great builders, redoubtable sailors and skilled craftsmen in metalwork and pottery.
The government of Rome was at an early period carried on by chosen kings (753-
509 B.C.) aided by popular assembly, but at the latter date Rome became a re-
public. On Pompey’s defeat at Pharsalus, Julius Caesar remained without a rival,
but was murdered in 448B.C., when there followed a period of great confusion.
Then came the Triumvirate, consisting of Marcus Antonius, Caius Octavius (great-
nephew of Julius Caesar), and Marcus &milius Lepidus, who were opposed to
Brutus and Cassius and eventually defeated them. On the defeat of Marcus
 170 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

Antonius at Actium (31 B.c.) Caius Octavius commenced to rule, and when the
need for centralized government of distant provinces resulted in the formation of
the Empire he received the title of ‘Imperator’ and in 27 B.c. that of ‘Augustus’,
afterwards used as a surname by all Roman Emperors. The Augustan Age was one
of the great eras in the world’s history, like the Periclean Age in Greece, the Eliza-
bethan Age in England, and the nineteenth century throughout Europe. At such
epochs a new spring seems to well up in national and individual life, vitalizing art
and literature. It was indeed the boast of Augustus that he found Rome a city of
brick and left it of marble; though this colourful claim should not be taken too
literally, as the use of marble was restricted to exceptional buildings, and stone and
concrete were more representative of his day. The poets Virgil (70-19 B.c.),
Horace (65-8 B.C.), Ovid (43 B.C.-A.D. 17), and Livy the historian (59 B.C.—A.D. 17),
all flourished during this great period. The poems of Virgil and Horace show that
the population flocked into the cities and disliked rural life, so that the land
gradually went out of cultivation and the people depended on imported corn. Fol-
lowing Augustus, who died A.D. 14, came a line of famous Emperors, of whom
Nero (A.D. 54-68), Vespasian (A.D. 69-79), Trajan (A.D. 98-117), Hadrian (A.D. 117-
38), Septimius Severus (A.D. 193-211), Caracalla (A.D. 211-17), and Diocletian
(A.D. 284-305) were the greatest patrons of architecture. The “Building Acts’ of
Augustus and of his successors, Nero and Trajan, show the controlling influence
of the state on architecture. Then ensued a period when a turbulent populace
within the Imperial City, and the huge armies required to keep in check the bar-
barian tribes on every frontier, dominated the government. Emperors were no
sooner chosen than they were murdered, and social chaos weakened the political
power of the Empire. The social life of the Romans is clearly revealed in their
architecture—there were thermae for games and bathing, circuses for races, amphi-
theatres for gladiatorial contests, theatres for dramas, basilicas for lawsuits, state
temples for religion, and the apartment house or the ‘domus’ for the family life,
while the forum was everywhere the centre of public life and national commerce.
Amidst all this diversity of pursuits there is one consistent trait running through
all Roman life, and this is that capacity for obedience which was the basis alike of
society and the state. The patria potestas, or supreme power of the father, was the
foundation-stone of family life, and out of their obedience to authority, whether to
the head of the household, or to censors in the state, the Romans developed their
capacity as law-makers, and through this one characteristic they have left a special
mark on the world’s history. Based on slavery and aristocratic in origin, the Roman
social system lacked a strong middle class. Roman women were held in high respect,
family life was protected, and the Temple of Vesta, the most sacred spot in Rome,
has recorded for all time the sacredness attached by the Romans to their family
hearth.
HISTORICAL. From about the eighth century B.c. when they first came to his-
torical notice, the power of the Etruscans waxed until it was the mightiest in Italy
and its western seas. Their territories expanded; down the west coast beyond the
Bay of Naples and Pompeii; northwards into the valley of the Po; and eastwards
towards the Adriatic sea (p. 167). Through the sixth century B.c., Rome itself was
under Etruscan domination and was ruled by Etruscan kings. The turn in fortune
came with the fall of the monarchy and the collapse of Etruscan power in Rome in
509 B.C., cutting off Etruria from her southern domains; followed in 474 B.c. by the
further disaster of the defeat of the Etruscans in sea-battle by the Syracusans,
allies of Cumae, the oldest of the Greek colonies in South Italy. The initiative then
passed to Rome. The traditional date for the foundation of the city is 753 B.c. The
Republic established in Rome after the expulsion of Tarquinius Superbus, the last
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE I7I
Temple of Temple of Tabularium Temple of
Jupiter Capitolinus Vespasian Concord

of
Arch

Severus
Septimius

Column of Phocas Rostra Rostral Column

A. The Roman Forum (restored), looking towards Tabularium. See p. 184

Basilica of Colosseum Temple of Archof Templeof House of Temple of
Constantine Julius Caesar Titus Vesta the Vestals Castor and Pollux
| be — | go
7 a) eo

Hill
Palatine

the
(Palaces
of
Emperors

Saturn
of
Temple

Forum | Columnof Temple of Basilica

Rostra Phocas Concord Julia

B. Remains of the Roman Forum, looking towards the Colosseum. See p. 184
 172 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE
Faeeae ohh tates chRAST SPRATT Age a Re

ST
Sa
ACAI SEINRE
teGerace
SSenrecosta
ie a e a
1 baal

A. Forum Boarium, Rome (restored) in the time of Constantine. See p. 184

(Left) Temple of Fortuna Virilis; (eft centre) Arch of Janus
Quadrifrons; (right centre) Ara Maxima; (right) Temple of Portunus

B. Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, Rome (restored)

(Dedicated 509 B.c., and as rebuilt in A.D, 82 by Domitian). See p. 180
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 173

of the Etruscan kings, engaged in many wars, extending her power among her
neighbours and conquering Veii, the nearest of the great Etruscan cities; but was
defeated in 390 B.c. by the Gauls, who continued for some time afterwards to hold
the northern part of Italy. The Gauls also weakened the resistance of the surviving
Etruscan towns, though they only fell to the revived aggression of Rome by slow
_ stages. Meanwhile, the force of Roman arms had prevailed in the south, and the
conquest of lower Italy was concluded by c. 273 B.c. Then came the wars with
peoples outside Italy. The first Punic war (264-241 B.C.) against Carthage brought
about the annexation of Sicily as the first Roman province. The second Punic war
(218-201 B.C.) was the most severe struggle in which the Romans had engaged; for
Hannibal, the great Carthaginian general, entered Italy from the north, defeated
the Roman armies, and maintained himself in Italy until recalled to meet a counter-
attack of the Romans, under Scipio, upon Carthage itself. The third Punic war
(149-146 B.C.) ended in the destruction of Carthage, which with its territory be-
came a Roman province in Africa. The conquest of Macedonia (168 B.c.) and of
Greece (from 146 B.c.) added two more provinces to the Roman Empire, and also
stimulated the importation of Greek artists and art into Italy. Greece, in its turn,
formed a stepping-stone to Asia Minor, of which a chief part became the Roman
province of Asia in 133 B.c., the rest being gradually subdued over the ensuing
century and a half. With the conquests of Spain (133 B.c.) and Syria (64 B.C.), the
Roman Empire extended from the Euphrates to the Atlantic, while Caesar’s cam-
paign (58-49 B.c.) made the Rhine and the English Channel its northern boun-
daries. In 30 B.c. Egypt was added to the Empire, and in A.D. 43 Britain became a
Roman province. Then later, when the Empire had reached its greatest extent,
discontent at the centre and barbarian attacks on the frontiers led to that weaken-
ing of authority which resulted in its decline and final fall. Constantine (A.D. 306-
337) removed his capital to Byzantium in A.D. 330 as a more convenient centre for
the extended Empire, but in A.D. 365 the Roman Empire was divided into East and
West with two Emperors, and the year A.D. 476 marks the end of the Western
Roman Empire by the election of Odoacer as the first king of Italy.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
ETRUSCAN ARCHITECTURE
(750-100 B.C.)
The Etruscans, who were the early inhabitants of west-central Italy, were great
builders, and their methods were taken over by the Romans. They made remark-
able advances in the organization of large-scale undertakings, such as the con-
struction of city walls and sewers, the draining of marshes and the control of rivers,
and the cutting of channels to regulate the water-level of lakes. They are credited
with the earliest use in Italy, if not in Europe, of the true or radiating arch, and
with the invention of a new Order of Architecture, called the Tuscan, an addition
to the three, Doric, Ionic and Corinthian, originated by the Greeks. Etruscan
towns were fortified with powerful stone walls, several feet thick, which were
alternatively of the Cyclopean type, like that of the Aegeans; of polygonal work, as
occasionally used by the Greeks (pp. 99G, 161); or, when the available stone was
easily worked, of fine squared and bonded masonry laid in alternate courses of
header and stretcher blocks sometimes more than two feet high. No mortar was
used. Exceptionally, city walls were of very large, partly-burnt bricks, as at Arezzo,
where the bricks were approximately 14 x1 x4 ft, laid in clay mortar through the
thickness of the 14 ft 6 ins wall. A stone city gateway at Volterra, the Porta all’Arco,
bears the remains of the earliest known arch above ground, dating from about
1/4 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

300 B.c. Tombs, which exist in great numbers, were located outside the city walls
on special necropolis sites, the earliest often taking the form of great, conical
tumuli, with stone burial chambers concealed within their earthen mounds. The
majority were underground, cut in the soft tufa rock and simulating the interior
of the contemporary house. The ‘atrium’ type of house, characteristic of Roman
times, is believed to have originated with the Etruscans, though there is little to
show now, for dwellings were of sun-dried brick, covered with terracotta-tiled
wooden roofs. Temples too were at first of sun-dried brick, but had timber frames
and columns to sustain the wide-eaved, low pitched roofs, lavishly ornamented
with brilliantly-coloured terra-cotta slabs and crestings along the pediments,
cornices and ridge. Columns themselves sometimes were sheathed in terra-cotta.
From the fourth century B.c., walls and columns were of stone throughout, as at
all times were the high platforms, or ‘podiums’, on which the temples stood.
Temples were invariably frontal, and usually faced south. Despite the eventual
Roman occupation, Etruria retained much of its own architectural character until
the first century B.c.

ROMAN ARCHITECTURE
(300 B.C.—A.D. 365)
Roman building work retained its Etruscan character for some time after the
Republic had been founded in 509 B.c., but in the third century B.c. began to
derive much of its external complexion from Greek sources, whilst at the same
time developing the constructive traits that were to make it the most stupendous
architecture in the history of the western world. By about 200 B.c., its own identity
was well established, though experiments with technique and building method,
and the exploitation of building materials, were to progress continuously until
well into the Christian era. The mightiest achievements, for which Roman archi-
tecture is justly famed, belong to the period of the Roman Empire, growing
increasingly daring as time progressed.
The Romans adopted the columnar and trabeated style of the Greeks, and
developed also the arch and the vault from the beginnings made by the Etruscans.
This combined use of column, beam, and arch is the keynote of the Roman style in
its earliest stages. The Colosseum, Rome (p. 210), everywhere throughout its struc-
ture, displays these two features in combination, for piers strengthened and faced
by attached half-columns support arches, which in their turn carry the entablature.
In works of an engineering character, such as aqueducts, the arch was supported on
piers without the facing column. Thus the Orders of architecture which, as used
by the Greeks, were essentially constructive were frequently employed by the
Romans as decorative features which could be omitted and even at times lost their
original use, although the Romans also used them constructively in temple colon-
nades and basilicas (p. 200A).
The Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian Orders of architecture were used by the
Greeks (p. 96), and the Etruscans and Romans added respectively the Tuscan
and Composite (p. 244), making five in all. The Tuscan Order (p. 181J, K) is a
simplified version of the Doric Order, about 7 diameters high, with base, unfluted
shaft, and simply-moulded capital, and with a plain entablature. Actually, in
ancient times it was used only with the wooden entablatures of the Etruscans, and
there is no certain Roman example. Vitruvius, the Roman authority on architec-
ture in the late first century B.C., recorded it, and it was revived with a stone
entablature in Renaissance days. An example is that of S. Paul, Covent Garden,
London (p. 898). Vitruvius also gives the proportions of the Doric, Ionic and
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 175

Corinthian Orders, but not of the Composite, which was not evolved until
the first century A.D. The proportions of the various Orders were studied in the
Renaissance period by famous architects, such as Palladio, Vignola, and Sir
William Chambers (p. 972).
Temples were the predominating buildings of the Hellenic Greeks and were of
one storey, but the complex civilization and varied needs of the Romans intro-
duced other types and necessitated the use of several storeys, which were fre-
quently ornamented, as in the Colosseum, by attached half-columns superimposed
one above the other. The architectural aims of the Romans were essentially utili-
tarian, and thermae, amphitheatres, basilicas, aqueducts and bridges all testify to
the great constructive ability they possessed; their majestic buildings are in accord
with the grandeur of Roman Imperial power.
The Romans continued and developed the Etruscan method of using large
blocks of stone without mortar during the Republic, but their practical mind
eventually hit upon greater economy of materials by the use of concrete, a hard
composition which consists of small fragments of stone, such as tufa of its various
kinds, peperino or travertine, or again, broken bricks, laid in an excellent mortar
of lime and well-selected sand. The ‘sand’ was, in fact, usually pozzolana, a
special earth which abounds in all the volcanic regions of Italy: in places where it
was not forthcoming equivalents were painstakingly sought. The important parts
of the work were done by skilled craftsmen, who built up the outer carcase of the
ponderous walls and saw to the erection of the temporary wooden centerings for
arches and vaults. Under their direction, the purely mechanical tasks of dumping
alternate layers of mortar and broken stones or brick, which would solidify into
concrete, were performed by local slaves liable to statute labour on public buildings
or, in the case of military works, by soldiers of the Roman legions. This extended
use of concrete originated a new constructive system which was adapted with rare
sagacity to diverse types of important buildings.
Roman walls, both of stone and concrete, are of special character and must be
described in detail. Walls of ‘opus quadratum’, i.e. rectangular blocks of stone,
with or without mortar joints but frequently secured with dowels or cramps, still
continued in use. In the best work, the stones were very regular, 4 x2 x2 Roman
feet in dimensions (the Roman foot is 4 inch less than the English), laid in the
usual alternate courses of headers and stretchers. Sometimes, such walls were
solid throughout, at others, used as a facing to the concrete core, as in the case of
temple podiums. Roman concrete walls presented a succession of face effects.
Good mortar of lime and sand first began to be used extensively in the third cen-
tury B.c., and when its virtues had been realized, stones became quite small, and
on the wall faces appeared in a loose pattern roughly resembling the polygonal
work from which the techniques derived. This pattern is known as ‘opus incertum’
(p. 177B). Gradually, it became more regular, until by the time of Augustus it had
assumed the net-like effect of ‘opus reticulatum’ (p. 177C), with fine joints running
diagonally, so that each stone unit was precisely square, though set lozenge fashion.
In both the incertum and the reticulate work, the stones were only 4 ins or so
across the face, and tailed into the wall pyramidally for about 8-Io ins. Specially
cut stones were used at outer vertical angles. Reticulate work in its turn was super-
seded by brick facing, or ‘opus testaceum’ (p. 177D), which became the hall-mark
of the Imperial period in Italy and elsewhere. Wall cores then sometimes were of
broken brick too, but generally, stone fragments still continued to be used. The
‘bricks’ were in fact old roofing tiles, upwards of 14 ins thick and of considerable
but irregular length, raggedly broken to tail back into the wall: only in the second
half of the first century A.D. were triangular bricks specially made for facing the
176 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

walls. Except in the case of opus incertum, the wall faces were necessarily laid a little
in advance of the core of a wall, in better mortar, and they consequently tended to
come adrift. Hence bonding courses of large square tiles or ‘bipedales’, two Roman
feet square, were soon introduced to pass back into or even right through the wall,
distributed at frequent intervals up the height. A variant kind of facing appeared
for a while about the time of Hadrian, in which panels of reticulate work were
enframed in horizontal and vertical strips of brickwork. A final type, ‘opus mixtum’,
an alternation of courses of brickwork and small, squared stone blocks, began to
be used towards the end of the Empire period. These several kinds of facing to
concrete walls were not used everywhere; in many of the Roman provinces, Britain
included, a coursed-rubble facing of squared units only a few inches high was usual.
No special facings could, of course, be employed when the concrete was laid
against earth or boarding in foundations or vaults (p. 177A, E).
Concrete was a manufactured material, and as such not being special to any
country could be used in every part of the Empire; thus throughout the Roman
dominions it gave uniformity and similarity to the buildings, whose character was
thus largely independent of local conditions.
It was upon the capacity to span over enormous spaces that the character of
Roman architecture largely depended. The Greeks of Hellenic times had been
limited to what could be achieved by simple beams of wood, and so had had to
introduce double lines of superimposed columns inside even their temples, to
support the roof timbers, whenever extra space was needed. It was not till about
the third century B.c. that the Greeks began timidly to employ the principle of
triangulation of the elements of wooden roof trusses. The Romans seized upon the
idea, and developed it apace: Vitruvius, the Augustan architect, tells us of the
wooden-roofed basilica he built at Fano, in North Italy, where the central unim-
peded space was sixty feet wide and one hundred and twenty feet long. Similarly,
the Romans developed the stone arch of the Etruscans; and already before the end
of the Republic could bridge a span of 80 ft, as in the Pons Fabricius at Rome (pp.
238C, 241£). But it was, above all, concrete which allowed the Romans to build
vaults of a magnitude never equalled till the introduction of steel for buildings in
the nineteenth century. How puny seem the naves of English vaulted cathedrals,
rarely as much as 40 ft wide, against the great Roman halls, 80 or 90 ft across.
Concrete vaults had the advantage over stone in that they could be accommodated
to complicated plan forms without involving difficult and laborious stone cutting.
The vaults were supported on ‘centering’ or temporary wooden framework until the
concrete had set. In important cases, such vaults were constructed of brick ribs,
with concrete filling, the object being to lighten the load imposed on the centering
and to guard against cracks (p. 177E). The various vaults used in Roman buildings
were as follows (p. 177): (a) The semicircular or waggon-headed vault, otherwise
known as the ‘barrel’ or ‘tunnel’ vault, was borne throughout its length on the two
parallel walls of a rectangular apartment (p. 370A). (6) The cross-vault (pp. 370B,
373A), which was formed by the intersection of two semicircular vaults of equal
span, was used over a square apartment and the pressure was taken by the four
angles. When cross-vaults were used over long halls or corridors, the hall was
divided by piers into square bays, each of which was covered with a cross-vault,
which allowed of the insertion of windows in the upper part of the walls, as in the
central hall of the Thermae of Caracalla (p. 177L) and the Thermae of Diocletian,
Rome (p. 207A). The lines of intersection of these cross-vaults are known as
‘groins’. (c) Hemispherical domes or cupolas (cupa =a cup) (p. 196) were used over
circular structures, and semi-domes for exedrae or semicircular recesses (p. 77H,
K).
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE Ta

CTION or WALLS ann ARCHES

BRICK BONDING
>, COURSE

Uy,
Cx?
ahs
YY ey, od
dpe ey TUFA STUDDING

(B)orus incertum Corus reticuatum (D))

OPUSTESTACELM

CONCRETE
SS SS semnone we
soaehese 7’ (F )ARCH CENTRE SUPPORTED
E )vaut CONSTRUCTION i Same

i Vas ns

SEMI-DOME SEMI-DOME
THERM. 2 AGRIPPA THERMA 2 CARACALLA
a Wl
SSH Sam
Py —— th

THERME ?CARACALLA:ROME THERM

#DIOCLETIAN (N))VAULT:MINE RVA MEDICA: ROME
fF
178 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

In all these vaulting forms, concrete was the important factor, for it was eco-
nomical of skilled labour and had much greater cohesion than vaults made up of
separate stone units. Yet it remained necessary to buttress the oblique sideways
thrusts exerted against the walls by the enormously heavy concrete vaults, which
even at the crown, were several feet thick. The barrel vaults over the side aisles or
recesses of the Basilica of Constantine, Rome, for instance, each of which spans
76 ft, were 8 ft thick at the top (p. 177J), and the dome of the famous Pantheon,
142 ft across, is more than 4 ft thick in its upper part (p. 199A). To a certain extent
the ponderous walls absorbed these stresses, but the Romans took no chances and
devised an elaborate buttressing system. The fact is not always apparent, for in
complex buildings the thrusts of one vault were balanced against those of another,
as in the Thermae of Diocletian (p. 207D), where the enormous central hall was
surrounded by lesser apartments with their walls aligned against the points where
the stresses of the groined triple vault were received. Also, the Romans usually
concealed their buttresses with a masking wall. The art of buttressing was de-
veloped in the course of early engineering works, which frequently required the
retaining of masses of earth. Three principal types of buttress were used. (i) The
hemicycle or niche, which is the best of all buttresses for retaining earth. This type
was used on an enormous scale in the Forum of Trajan, north-east side, where the
hemicycle cuts into the foot of the Quirinal (p. 185B). Galleries of shops and offices
in three tiers conceal its utilitarian purpose. (ii) The ordinary ‘Gothic’ type of
‘spur’ buttress, familiar in countless Mediaeval buildings. The niche type was not
very suitable for buildings where large openings for windows and doors were
needed—though a pair can be seen flanking the portal between the central hall
and the frigidarium of the Thermae of Diocletian (p. 207D)—so for convenience
in normal buildings it was squared-off into spur buttresses and a linking wall in
which windows could be placed. The connecting wall, however, was put across the
outer edge of the buttresses so that the space between them could be covered over
with a vault and included in the useful interior accommodation. The aisles of the
Basilica of Constantine utilize the space between the great buttresses in this way
(p. 200D, E, F), and the latter can be seen, with their sloping tops, rising above the
vaults of the aisles to catch the thrusts of the main vaults where they are concen-
trated in the pockets above the columned pillars (p. 200D). Instances of flying but-
tresses are known (p. 185E, F). (iii) The principle of the pinnacle too, was
extensively used. Pinnacles were placed on the tops of spur buttresses to help by
their weight to drive the oblique thrusts more steeply down to earth. They are of
very great size at the Thermae of Diocletian (p. 2078), but, as is almost invariably
the case in Roman architecture, their mundane purpose is disguised by architec-
tural ornament; in this instance by canopied sculptures. In buildings of which the
walls were not too much broken up by window or other openings, the same prin-
ciple was applied, but the extra load then ran continuously along the top of the
wall outside the base of the vault, as an abutment, to reduce the danger of its
collapsing outwards.
The Pantheon at Rome, the finest of all illustrations of Roman construction,
embodies every form of Roman buttress. It will be noted there (p. 199A) that the
building is two tiers high to the springing of the hemispherical dome inside, but
there is an extra tier on the outside, providing rigid and weighty haunches to pre-
vent the dome from splitting outwards; and, as an extra precaution, a further series
of steps of concrete rises two-thirds the height of the dome. It is for this construc-
tional reason that Roman domes are always saucer-shaped outside, though hemi-
spherical within. Very adroitly in this building, the weight of the vault is reduced
by omitting a portion at the crown—the most difficult part to construct—to provide
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 179
an “eye’ which is the sole source of natural light. The twenty-feet thick walls are
not by any means solid; the decorative recesses inside are contrived within spur
buttresses linking inner and outer shells, and between these recesses are construc-
tional niches which run the full three-tier height and are crowned with semi-domes
at the top of each tier; in the upper tiers they are split in half by spur buttresses
(p. 199A, B). Thus all the forms of buttress used later in developed Mediaeval archi-
tecture were anticipated by Roman architects, but with the difference that the
Roman were far less light and compact, and were not usually plainly exposed to
view.
Concrete vaults often were lightened by recesses or ‘coffers’ on the underside,
but concrete does not lend itself to carved enrichment, like stonework, and walls
and vaults normally received a decorative sheathing of plaster, stucco, marble or
mosaic. Various plasters of lime and sand were used outside, and plaster or stucco
within. The latter was of marble dust and lime, and frequently was modelled into
shallow, geometrical patterns, the panels thus created being ornamented with low-
relief figures and foliage, and painted in attractive colours. In such cases the stucco
was as much as 3 ins in thickness. When bold mouldings or entire columns were
required in this material, as in the peristyles of houses, they would have a concrete
or brick core. Alternatively for walls, especially in domestic work, the stucco was
carefully prepared, in as many as five successive coats, to receive elaborate and
brilliant paintings in fresco, tempera or encaustic. A special mixture, ‘opus signi-
num’, of ground terra-cotta and lime, with or without sand, was used for the lining
of water-channels, aqueducts and reservoirs and in damp situations.
Marble was rarely used solidly throughout a wall; and only the white was so
employed, never the coloured. Normally it was just a facing, up to a foot or so
thick when the marble was the native ‘Luna’ from Carrara, but in mere veneers
down to $ inch thick in the case of coloured marbles. Marble, porphyry, jasper or
granite veneers were laid against a stucco backing and secured to the walls by iron
or bronze cramps (p. 177G); they were arranged in geometrical patterns of different
varieties (‘opus sectile’), and were used in this manner too for floors. Coloured
marbles were too expensive for universal use, and on walls, the pattern was fre-
quently simulated in paint instead. When the Orders of Architecture were con-
structed in marble as a whole, as in the case of temple porches, it was only the
column shafts that might be of the coloured varieties; and to show their veinings
or textures to best advantage, they were unfluted monoliths, shaped at the quarry
before shipping. The omission of fluting in such instances affected usage in
general, and as often as not the flutes were omitted even when the shafts were
built up in stone, whatever the Order employed.
Marble mosaics were employed to some extent for walls and vaults, but above
all, for floors—as an alternative to the opus sectile—in an infinite variety of geo-
metrical and pictorial patterns (pp. 241F, 249H, K-M). A humbler type of paving was
‘opus spicatum’, made of small bricks set in herring-bone pattern. Glass mosaics
were not suitable for floors, but made a brilliant decoration for vaults and were
excellent for structures and situations liable to damp, such as garden ornaments and
pavilions, fountains and semi-subterranean porticoes and grottoes. Gilding was
sometimes applied to wood ornaments and to bronze-covered roofs of important
buildings, such as the Pantheon (p. 198).
The abundance of statues brought from Greece led to the formation of wall
niches for their reception, and these were either semicircular or rectangular, and
were occasionally flanked by columns supporting a pediment, to form a frame for
the statue, or were fronted by a screen of columns, as in the Pantheon (pp. 1968,
I99B).
180 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

EXAMPLES
ETRUSCAN ARCHITECTURE
The character of Etruscan architecture has been referred to (p. 173). The remains
consist chiefly of tombs, city walls, gateways, bridges, and culverts.
The Cloaca Maxima, Rome, was first constructed in the late Regal period as
an open drain for the valleys between the hills of Rome; which is its only title to
be included as an Etruscan example, as nothing of the present remains is so old.
The drain was subsequently covered in, and underwent many repairs in ancient
times. At its outlet to the river Tiber (p. 181A), it shows a semicircular (Roman)
vault of peperino stone, of c. 78 B.Cc., 11 ft in span, of three concentric rings of
voussoirs, each 2 ft 6 ins high. The oldest known true arch in Rome is that over a
similar drain in front of the Temple of Saturn, dating from about the fourth cen-
tury B.c. In Etruria, voussoir barrel vaults occur in numerous underground tombs
of the third and fourth centuries B.c., in the region of Chiusi and Perugia.
The Arch of Augustus, Perugia (late second century B.c.) (p. I8IB) is so
called because of the inscription ‘Augusta Perusia’, carved on the arch after 27 B.C.
Although Perugia fell to the Romans in 310 B.c., the arch still retains a strong
Etruscan character, as do the contemporary city walls, about two miles long, sur-
rounding the ancient city. Both are built of large blocks of travertine stone, with-
out mortar. An earlier arch, partially surviving, is the Porta all’Arco, Volterra, of
the fourth or third century B.c., in walls of roughly-squared, large blocks of sand-
stone of the sixth century B.c. Volterra did not succumb to the Romans until the
first century B.C.
The Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, Rome (509 B.c.) (pp. 172B, 182A), the
principal example of this type of building, had its cella divided into three chambers
for statues of Jupiter, Minerva, and Juno, and was nearly square on plan, with
widely spaced columns to support timber architraves. It was burnt in 83 B.c., and
rebuilt by Sulla, who here made use of some of the marble Corinthian columns
taken from the Olympieion, Athens (p. 140), but afterwards destroyed.
The Temple of Juno Sospita, Lanuvium (fifth century B.c.) (p. 18IH, J) is
restored from the description by Vitruvius (Bk. IV, chap. vii). The plan has three
cells for three deities, and a front portico with two rows of four columns, widely
spaced and approached by walled-in steps—a type of temple plan afterwards
adopted by the Romans, and in contrast to the Greek type. The restored elevation
(p. 181J) shows the steps between flanking walls and the portico columns support-
ing a terracotta-covered timber entablature and pediment. The roof carpentry of
an Etruscan temple is included in this reconstruction (p. 181K) and the terra-cotta
roof covering of this Temple has been set up in the British Museum (p. 1818),
while an interesting Renaissance version of the portico is seen in S. Paul, Covent
Garden, London (pp. 898, 902G-]).
The Temple, Alatri (third century B.c.) (p. 181L), remains of which were
found in A.D. 1882, has been re-erected in the court of the Villa of Pope Julius,
Rome. This small Etruscan temple rests on a podium, and a sloping ramp gives
access to a portico of two columns from which the central doorway opens into the
cella. It is now known that there was no rear porch. The typical entablature of
enriched terra-cotta, pediment with acroteria, and eaves with antefixae, resemble
those from Lanuvium. Greek influence is probably responsible for the return to
the single cella. Alatri is not in Etruria, but in the centre of Latium.
Etruscan Tomb, Corneto-Tarquinia. Of many rock-cut tombs at Etruscan
Tarquinia, near the present Corneto, some twenty-three are especially renowned
 ETRUSCAN ARCHITECTURE 181

So Ne ET} ere
dua cody
Sart att“)
®t} If.SS

L9 cir

6 |d sti GUAM ec eg Ne
5 =i inv
iM OC ccc D SF
ct an anc ccs
ulin
AIS Ben ea
pees
Sane ee ee,@
Re :

IMA ROME ARCH or AUGUSTUS

LOACA MAXIMA:Rome AUGU (Etruscan SARCOPHAGUS
ae
apes = a : ee
ae as eS
a LRTI
Ee
aTRN oa
RSs; 'f Wi oeccen =
=a =
Wk
t RT yn ?: AN Hey z AG y (ot a ©) a Gif 1 O'a aa )
a E Vier Wi = SS Nt ACT TF VU <O YS Ge -£\
- \ — Y NN , URSAG oils,
S ~X y i COS UAT TT

:on Gs
i)i i eM Qt
Pentel TAL
ay rn UNM AD IPT) 8A A Sen
q i = i OLA Yeo ETRUSCAN TOMB: VULCI oe —_
ee —aca toe «(BRITISH MUS) ETRUSCAN SARCOPHAGUS
is
(BRITISH MUS )

ETRUSCAN TEMPLE OF
4 aoe Veer ~~
I s

“TRUSCAN TOMB: corneTo: INTERIOR] WING SOSPITA: LANUVIUM

i
io
F
Gz h
ae
= 4
"
]

TD) WY 8
ec Pe
Ging

Wn AD M®V

3 at Ry

Ki
‘iT iCFmay YYW, :
LU); i OE 0Ls
Joy “iy,

:)J Yj mlz yy
(ea
ee v7,
FRUSCAN TOMB:CORNETO %SECTION
eae SECTION

=
THT TST FUSU PAS TLY,

i
SU | as

eS : es
ROOF CONSTRUCTION OF
ETRUSCAN TEMPLE
~ETRUSCAN TEMPLE
“CONSTRUCTED IN THE COURT
(RESTORED)
- VILLA POPE JULIUS: ROME
 182 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

TEMPLE OFé Za : soooa : =? TEMPLE OF

JUPITER eter cn i |JUNO MONET
CAPITOLINUS

ey

REFERENCE TABLE
TEMPLE OF TRAJAN 16 ARCH OF TITUS
TRAJAN'S COLUMN 17 HOUSE OF THE VESTAL VIRGIN
TRAJAN'S BASILICA 18 TEMPLE OF VESTA
T.OF VENUS GENETRIX 19 THE REGIA
TEMPLE OF MARS ULTOR 20 TEMPLE OF DIVUS JULIUS
TEMPLE OF MINERVA 21 ARCH OF AUGUSTUS
TEMPLE OF PEACE 22 T. OF CASTOR & POLLUX
BASILICA AMILIA 23. BASILICA JULIA
T. OF ANTONINUS& FAUSTINA 24 COLUMN OF PHOCAS
TEMPLE OF ROMULUS 25 ARCH OF SEPTIMIUS SEVERL
BASILICA OF CONSTANTINE 26 ROSTRA
T. OF VENUS & ROME 27 TEMPLE OF SATURN
COLOSSUS OF NERO 28 TEMPLE OF VESPASIAN
THE COLOSSEUM 29 TEMPLE OF CONCORD
ARCH OF CONSTANTINE 30 TABULARIUM

_ 190 290 300 400 500 600 700 800FEI

50 100 150 200 OMT

VIEW POINT OF
ABOVE SKETCH
OF THE FORUM
ROMANUM
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 183
for their vivid wall paintings, which retain a remarkable freshness. One tomb shows
architectural importance as well (p. 181F, G). The entrance leads to an outer cham-
ber, somewhat resembling the atrium of an Etruscan house as described by
Vitruvius, with a rock roof carved in imitation of rafters sloping up to a central
opening which admitted light through a vertical shaft. A doorway leads to a
smaller, inner chamber at a lower level.
The Necropolis, Cerveteri, is one of the most remarkable of Etruscan burial
sites. The tombs are laid out systematically along paved streets, like a town for the
living. The oldest tombs, which include the seventh century B.c. Regolini-Galassi
example, where rich treasures were found in A.D. 1836, are distributed irregularly
in the neighbourhood, whereas the great tumulus mounds and the underground
rock-cut chamber-tombs, chiefly of the sixth and fifth centuries B.c., are grouped
compactly together to save space. Most famous among the latter are the late-seventh
century Tomb of the Shields and Stools and the fifth century Tomb of the Alcove,
which reproduce in rock the interior features of houses; and the Tomb of the
Stucco Reliefs, third century B.c., where the personal and household possessions
of the deceased noble and his wife are modelled in stucco on the walls.
The Necropolis, Vulci. The ancient city site has long been deserted, but the
tombs of its necropolis were discovered and despoiled of their priceless store of
jewellery and painted vases in the nineteenth century. But there, as elsewhere,
tombs were often adorned with architectural features, as well as wall paintings. A
tomb from Vulci, discovered in A.D. 1833, has been reconstructed in the British
Museum. It includes a short, sturdy column with a capital (p. 181D) which is dis-
tinctively Etruscan, with upspringing volutes at the corners, and carved human
heads between. It derives from a primitive type from the Near East, but the heads
are an Etruscan addition; used quite frequently too, for the decoration of the key-
stones of arches. The acanthus leaves show the influence of the Greek Corinthian
Order. We have seen that the Etruscans imitated the Greek Doric Order and pro-
duced from it their own ‘Tuscan’ variant. They also had their versions of the Greek
Tonic, as seen in the Arch of Augustus, Perugia (p. 181B).
Etruscan Sarcophagi. Both ordinary burial and cremation were practised in
Etruria. The receptacles grew increasingly large, until in the fourth century B.c.,
sarcophagi of stone, alabaster and terra-cotta were used in very large numbers. The
deceased were normally represented as reclining on a couch. The sarcophagus from
the British Museum (p. 181E) has marine monsters on the side, and the reclining
figure holds the plate for the coin to be paid to Charon for ferrying the departed
across the Styx. The example from Cerveteri, now in the Villa of Pope Julius
Etruscan Museum, Rome (p. I81C) is in terra-cotta, and in portraying man and wife
together, shows the high status which women enjoyed in Etruscan society.

ROMAN ARCHITECTURE
Examples of Roman architecture are found not in Italy only, but wherever Roman
government extended, as at Nimes and Arles in France; Tarragona and Segovia in
Spain; Tréves and Aix-la-Chapelle in Germany; Constantine, Leptis Magna, and
Timgad in North Africa; Baalbek and Palmyra in Syria, besides Silchester, Dover,
Verulamium and Bath in England (p. 383).

FORUMS
The forum, corresponding to the agora in a Greek city, was a central open space
used as a meeting-place, market, or rendezvous for political demonstrations, like
the French ‘place’, the Italian ‘piazza’ and the English market-place. For small
184 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

towns a single forum might suffice, but in the larger several were needed, though
there was always one of principal importance. In towns which had grown from
small beginnings, forums underwent piecemeal changes and were often somewhat
irregular in shape, but when towns were newly founded or for some reason partially
rebuilt, the forums were laid out systematically, on formal lines. All were designed
to meet the requirements of Roman citizens, and with the surrounding buildings
they reflect not only the religion, law, and commerce, but also the busy corporate
life of the city, which was much the same whatever the form of government,
whether of elected kings, Republic, or Empire (p. 169).
The Forum Romanum, Rome, the oldest and most important in the city, was
sited in the valley between Rome’s famous hills. It is not strictly rectangular; it
was originally an all-purpose forum, but as the city grew its shops were removed
elsewhere and the contests and displays which once had taken place there were
relegated to the theatre, amphitheatre and circus. Only the chief public buildings
then were grouped around it, and its appearance in the heyday of ancient Rome,
adorned with pillars of victory and statues and surrounded by porticoes, colon-
nades, temples, basilicas, and state buildings, must indeed have been imposing
(pp. I7IA, 182), as viewed from the arcaded Tabularium (78 B.C.), where the public
archives were preserved. Rome, with its great Empire, required more civic space
than the Forum Romanum allowed, and successive Emperors laid out imposing
new symmetrical forums which were at the same time monuments to themselves.
Julius Caesar added the first; then the Emperors Augustus, Vespasian, Nerva and
Trajan in turn (p. 182B).
The Forum of Trajan, Rome (A.D. 98-113) (pp. 182B, 185, 186), was the
largest. It comprised four parts: (i) the forum proper, with large hemicycles on
either side, screened off by colonnades, containing tiers of shops; (ii) a marketing
area comprising shops and a two-storey vaulted hall on the slopes of the Quirinal
Hill beyond the N.E. hemicycle (pp. 185D, E, F, 186); (iii) the Basilica of Trajan and
two adjoining libraries separated by a court from which rose Trajan’s commemora-
tive column; and (iv) a peristyled enclosure containing the Temple of Trajan.
Besides these forums, others, such as the ‘Forum Boarium’ (p. 172A), served
as markets for special purposes. Pompeii, as all towns of importance, had a forum
as a centre of civic life, which was crowded on festival days when sacrifices took
place before the temples (p. 226B). The forums of Rome and the provinces provide
many instances of well-considered town-planning, and there were fine examples
even in the outskirts of the Empire, as at Palmyra, Samaria, Damascus, Antioch
and Bosra in Syria; Pergamon in Asia Minor; Timgad and Tebessa in North Africa;
and at Silchester and elsewhere in England; in all of which there were colonnaded
streets to give shelter from the sun.

RECTANGULAR TEMPLES

Roman temples are an amalgamation of Etruscan and Greek types; for while in
many respects they resembled the Greek, the typical prostyle portico and podium
were derived from Etruscan temples (p. 180), There are several types, of which the
most characteristic is pseudo-peripteral (p. 189H), which, instead of side colon-
nades, has half-columns attached to the walls with a prostyle portico in front. The
steps to the principal entrance were flanked by massive, low walls which were an
extension of the lateral podium, and they frequently supported groups of statuary
(p. 189G). Greek peripteral temples were normally twice as long as their width, but
Roman temples were much shorter in proportion, while the cella itself, used as a
treasure house and as a museum for Greek statuary, frequently occupied the whole
width of the building. The intercolumniation was sometimes wider than in Greek
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 185

ee:

A. Northern hemicycle of Forum of B. Northern hemicycle of F eran of

Trajan, from below Trajan, from above

see

a es

c. East end of northern hemicycle of D. Shops with balcony over, on the flank
Forum, containing a buttressing apse of the Great Hall of the Markets of Trajan

E. Flying buttresses over clear-story F. Flying buttresses to vault of Great

yassage of Great Hall in Markets of Trajan Hall in Markets of Trajan
Forum and Markets of Trajan (A.D. 98-113). See opposite page
186 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

METRES
‘6 5 6
~ ~- er
0 5 10 15 2 5 30
FEET “ -

Cross section, showing vaults

SECTION BB,

> JEEETee
o 0 0 %
[ie 0 ee
3 & mM & % 100

Great Hall of the Markets of Trajan, N.E. of the Forum of Trajan (A.D. 98-113).
See p. 184
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 187
temples, and then the architrave and frieze were built in voussoirs as flat arches,
but this treatment was unnecessary where walls supported the entablature. Most
rectangular temples were simple structures compared with buildings erected for
public relaxation, like theatres, amphitheatres and thermae, and the latter types
are more truly representative of Roman architectural taste and constructional skill.
Nevertheless, temples quite clearly evidence Roman ability to cover large spaces
without the aid of intermediate supports, Spans of fifty or sixty feet were common.
Normally, the roofs were of trussed timbers, like the basilicas, and probably were
elaborately coffered with wooden panelling on the underside. Some few temples
were vaulted, as the Temple of Venus and Rome at Rome (p. 192¢, E). Roman
temples sometimes were partially or wholly isolated in precincts, like those in the
Imperial Forums at Rome (p. 182B), though most were intended to be seen from
the forum which they faced, and the entrance was emphasized by the deep portico
and steps. There was no attempt at orientation, as in the Greek temples, which
regularly faced east, or the Etruscan, which usually faced south.
The Temple of Fortuna Virilis, Rome (c. 40 B.C.) (pp. 189A, B, C, 251) is
pseudo-peripteral tetrastyle with the deep portico common in Roman temples and
which illustrates the retention of Etruscan practice. The Ionic Order used, how-
ever, shows Hellenistic Greek influence in almost all its details. The capitals are
two-faced, so there had to be a canted volute on those at the angles, as in the East
Portico of the Erechtheion, Athens (p. 127D), but the front wall of the cella raised a
special difficulty, as the two attached columns which mark its position had to have
canted volutes too. The temple demonstrates Roman selective use of materials
according to their respective properties, for whilst the majority of the building is
faced in tough travertine, the shafts of the intermediate attached columns on the
side and rear walls, the cella itself and the portion of entablature above it are of
tufa stone, and the podium core is concrete.
The Temple of Mars Ultor, Rome (14-2 B.C.) (pp. 182B, 190), in the Forum
of Augustus, was dedicated to Mars the Avenger by Augustus in fulfilment of his
vow to avenge the death of Caesar. It was one of the largest and finest of temples;
from the artistic point of view, Roman architecture reached its climax in Augustan
times, though the great constructional achievements had then barely commenced.
Quite a little of the temple survives. Apart from its being attached to the forum
wall, it was peripteral and had Corinthian columns 58 ft high (p. 246D). The walls
were of peperino stone, faced with thin slabs of Luna marble, tied back at intervals
up the height by solid marble bonding courses, whilst for the podium there were
upright large facing slabs of marble about a foot thick. The cella, nearly square,
had internal columns and pilasters (p. 246c), and an apsidal recess—one of the
earliest instances of a feature afterwards adopted in Early Christian churches. It
stood in front of the Quirinal Hill in a peribolus surrounded by a wall some Ioo ft
high, of peperino stone and ornamented with niches for statues (p. 190A).
The Temple of Concord, Rome (7 B.C.-A.D. 10) (pp. 182B, 171A), had a very
large cella, unusual in being wider than deep—148 ft x 82 ft—due to its cramped
position against the base of the Capitol Hill. Its deep hexastyle prostyle porch
occupied the centre of one of the longer sides, and the whole stood on a platform
about 20 ft above the roadway. The cornice of this temple affords one of the
earliest instances in Rome of the use of ‘modillions’ or scrolled consoles, which
under the Empire became an orthodox part of the Corinthian entablature (cf. p. 191).
The Temple of Castor and Pollux, Rome (7 B.c.-A.D. 6) (pp. 182B, 191) had
been dedicated in 482 B.c. to the twin gods in gratitude for their aid at the battle
of Lake Regillus in 496 B.c. This peripteral temple had an octastyle portico on a
raised podium, 22 ft high, faced with Pentelic marble and filled in solid except for
188 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

vaulted small chambers below the side intercolumniations which served as strong-
rooms for storing the temple treasure and for testing weights and measures. The
three existing columns of Pentelic marble are 48 ft 5 ins high and have unique
Corinthian capitals in which the central volutes intertwine, and between these and
the angle volutes rises a tendril from which foliage is carried along the abacus (p.
I9ID). The entablature, 12 ft 64 ins high, has an architrave with carved mouldings,
a plain frieze, and a cornice enriched with modillions, dentils and cymatium, and
lion heads throw off rain-water. The angle (p. 191C) shows a clever arrangement of
ornamental features.
The Maison Carrée, Nimes (16 B.C.) (p. I90E-G) is the best-preserved Roman
temple in existence. It is raised on a podium 12 ft high, with steps only on the
entrance facade, and it is pseudo-peripteral prostyle hexastyle, with Corinthian
columns supporting a rich entablature, affording a further early instance of a
modillioned cornice.
The Temple of Diana, Nimes (c. A.D. 130) (p. 192), is a misnomer for a grand
staircase hall which dignified the approach to a baths establishment at a higher
level. The walls of the hall have internal columns, enframing niches, with capitals
that can be interpreted either as Corinthian or Composite, and an entablature from
which springs a stone-ribbed barrel vault, the thrust of which is counteracted by
continuous vaults over the side aisles. Above the vaults was a solid, pitched roof
covered with stone slates (p. 192J). In these arrangements, the building was prob-
ably a prototype of the vaulting of many southern French Romanesque churches
(p. 340).
The Temple of Vespasian, Rome (A.D. 94) (pp. 165M, T, I7IA, 182B), erected
by Domitian, beside the Temple of Concord, had a prostyle hexastyle Corinthian
portico, of which only three columns remain, and portion of an ornate entablature
with a heavily sculptured frieze.
The Temple of Venus and Rome, Rome (A.D. 123-35) (pp. 182B, 192), of
which little remains, was designed for Hadrian by Apollodorus of Damascus, and
was raised on a platform about 540 ft by 340 ft, which was entered through gateways
in a surrounding colonnade of nearly 200 columns of Egyptian granite and porphyry,
which formed a magnificent frame to this imposing temple (p. 192B). The plan was
pseudo-dipteral decastyle, and was still more unusual in that it had two cellas with
apses placed back to back, and there was a pronaos at each front. The cella walls,
which internally had monolithic columns framing niches for statues, were of extra
thickness to take the thrust of the semicircular coffered vault, and the two apses
for the statues of Venus and Rome had semi-domes which still exist. The plan (p.
192A) gives the usually accepted arrangement of this building. The restoration (p.
192B) shows the peribolus of columns surrounding the temenos, and the temple
centrally within, with its Pentelic columns, sculptured pediments, and a great roof,
covered with gold-plated bronze tiles, which were stripped off by Pope Honorius
(A.D. 625) to cover the basilican church of S. Peter.
The Temple of Antoninus and Faustina, Rome (A.D. 141) (pp. 182B, 89D, E,
F) is prostyle hexastyle, and has a deep portico, reached by steps between the
podium walls, leading into a spacious cella, 57 ft 2 ins wide, with plain external
walling without attached columns. The pediment was destroyed and the upper
part altered when it was converted into the Church of S. Lorenzo in Miranda in
A.D. 1602.
The Temple of Saturn, Rome (A.D. 284) (pp. 182B, 189G, H, J) is a pseudo-
peripteral prostyle hexastyle example of a debased type, in a commanding position
close to the Capitol. The temple is raised on a podium 12 ft 3 ins high and steps
lead to the portico of granite columns, 39 ft 44 ins high, of which only eight remain,
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 189

# = =

é THU
D ELEVATION SIDE ELEVATION

TEMPLE OF SATURN.ROME

~ (Getevation J DETAILS OF ORDER

 190 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

TEMPLE OF MARS ULTOR .ROME

oF
“ iv}
AAT mle
Sig \
= X
‘ ra r
Vimy
Seg
~
CANS UNA LADS eS

=
lit UGVSTVS PONTIF MAX-TRIB POTESTXi Ht

TT
THe

= wer |

a:
TEMPLE
co
AND FORUM OF AUGUSTUS (restore)
==
no SS SSS
ial *
NA
Sa es

£ a) 5 .
H no) :
} S :
a iz ‘3
. ee : ‘a
e
a is
‘<I a @ OD * a
ihe
s ‘fo OmO 0 On ‘s
f i Bs: , —
| Hl SEZ * i‘ === | .
=
aM = gma i; ‘@| FORUM OF AUGUSTUS .
a id
il | Ve 3 e) :
pe = '
== ee
' ke
z= i
Sj

B) es 4g COPLAN restores)
bet
)) PERISTYLE
pt poe = eet
tt tt dete

MAISON CAR REE:NIMES...

CEILING

=
aAC
ooh
ee

Wor
SS

! ‘| | 12-0"
je--—----—--
~~-----------
ERIOR FROM S.W.
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

OF CASTOR 6. POLLUA .ROME:

err = 2 ) )

et
ee
t

a ee

WASSs>
— ~

|
|

Wea :
Besse) —— 1

S aS EDS |
i |
1

xk
”

2 +
TO

1
I
| I
!
1

= )
— 3 f
(PLAN LOOKING UP) E. :

2 COFFERS AND Fons

IE

Beer TON
A OF ORDER \Bicansores.SANS nee LCOLS SScen
CLO eee ONS
eeeOO I xoe
FOO
SOON A S
ise a DENS A

>v\ \
|

( | 0 ) ala | Ay
( ht - a Ls a NY01554; a7 4
t hy Awe Wal A

Y, : i u
a, AR Le
\ IN Yd !
' i

I
!
|
!
ed ee 8fe,Ls 4
tre
Yau ATR Cn GATT
a-+ mG 5 fi ii |Ki
; Bsa ia ae eb aes crea ed ae
fa er ae
weiss “,, PLAN AT | 1 PLAN AT Pe
: = 4, A.LOOKING ; 1 LOOKING fossa
Lp LY:

ae
ang
Ewe,

ese
“ah

ANGLE innnannnn
 192 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

(pesssseesy TEMPLE
of VENUSe ROME,
HOME (RESTORED) |

B TEMPLE with PERIBOLUS (restorep)

SCALE FOR SECTIONS

Tat eh
dis NA nr tas! 62) VAULT COFFERI
30 40 METRES

as eee
filine
AEDS ies
—YyYJ) VME

LONGITUDINAL SECTION

TEMPLEorDIANA: NIMES
Jl, |iy ;
: . i
f 4

Pauw CAPITAL
o

1
SeSa
SOs

am

SSS
k-------34-62------» Tr N
aS

LONGITUDINAL SECTION
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

TEMPLES AY BAALBEK -‘SYRIA

Dew a E. SCALE FOR ELEVATIONS AND SECTIONS

ORED) FEET 125
" vee ne eg ee
4 a_i _ a_i MTRS 0 5. 10 20 30
!
| SQVNoioigie
SS Sle SCALE FOR PLAN
FEET 100 18) 100 200 300 400
i % CoV oe Ee es SSS
| ewe); = METRES o 50 100
ase BENS ie
) = si i cn ca mom cA a
: 3 x =f % % oa
e Lieut Ul litastd ant ful die Sar Wt Weta a ae -535!- Oll--------=-
| i | = 1 $4
aH I a oH a +
| E | ait Wer We Bile Mg T
ui L
!

E R OF =SECTION wa (eestor
|

sD TEMPL
JUPITE MAIN CL: FORECOURT PORTICO

EMPLE OF1“uN
ACCHUS
x
'

1 |
os

'
a
SS
SS
ee
Sr

E) TEMPLE OF BACCHUS TEMPLE OF BACCHUS+

TRANSVERSE SECTION
PORTICO (restorep)
194 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

with Ionic capitals having typical angle volutes, but the pediment no longer exists.
The architrave mouldings were omitted along the front to admit of the inscription
(p. I89G).
The Temple of Jupiter, Baalbek (p. 193), was commenced about A.D. Io, the
forepart undertaken by Antoninus Pius (A.D. 138-61) and the entrance portico not
completed till c. A.D. 249. The whole structure, built of hard limestone, forms part
of the magnificent temple group which rears its massive form high above the plain,
below the hills of Lebanon. It was raised on a high platform, approached by steps
which led to a dodecastyle Corinthian portico ‘in antis’. Three doorways opened
into a hexastyle forecourt with rectangular exedrae on either side, each fronted
with four columns. Another three-fold portal led into the main court, 380 ft 6 ins
square, with rectangular and semicircular exedrae on three sides, all fronted with
columns. The wall enclosing the main court rises 70 ft above the plain, and the
substructure of the actual temple is formed of gigantic blocks of stone on the
western side. Three of these are known as the Trilithon, and are about 64 ft long,
II ft 3 ins thick, and 14 ft 9 ins high, and 725 tons in weight. The temple itself,
also constructed of large blocks without mortar, faced the main court, and stood
on a podium 17 ft above it. It was dipteral decastyle, and the unfluted Corinthian
columns, of which only six remain, are about 65 ft high and 7 ft in diameter, carry-
ing an entablature 13 ft 3 ins high. The temple was much damaged by Theodosius
the Great (A.D. 379-95), and later by Arabs and Turks.
The so-called ‘Temple of Bacchus’, Baalbek (second century A.D.) (p. 193),
which stands beside the Temple of Jupiter, is peripteral octastyle, with fifteen
columns on each side, and is approached on the east by steps between wing walls. The
interior has fluted Corinthian half-columns, supporting a returned entablature, with
two tiers of niches between the half-columns. The cella, once thought to have had a
coffered stone vault, is now known to have been timber-ceiled, though there was a
vaulted sanctuary approached by steps from the cella. Some stone coffering with
medallions and busts of gods and emperors still remains in position in the peristyle
ceiling.
The Great Temple of the Sun, Palmyra (first century A.D.), with its single
peristyle of giant Corinthian columns, stood on a raised platform in the centre of a
colonnaded court, and was approached from the town through a long street of
columns, which ended in a triumphal arch.
The Temple of Jupiter, Spalato (A.D. 300), is a small prostyle tetrastyle temple
within the palace of Diocletian (p. 231).

CIRCULAR AND POLYGONAL TEMPLES

The Romans sometimes employed the circular form, which was probably derived
from the similar temples of the Greeks.
The Temple of Vesta, Rome (A.D. 205) (pp. 182B, 195), in the Forum Roma-
num, was the most sacred shrine in the Imperial city, and here under the custody
of the Vestal Virgins the sacred fire was kept alight which signified the home hearth
as the centre and source of Roman life and power (p. 170). It was founded in 715
B.C., but was frequently destroyed by fire and repeatedly rebuilt, finally by Septi-
mius Severus in A.D. 205 (p. 195C). According to recent excavations, it seems to
have had a podium to ft high supporting a circular cella, 30 ft in diameter, sur-
rounded by eighteen Corinthian columns, 17 ft 6 ins high, and fragments of columns
have been found with fillets for the insertion of metal screens.
The Temple of Vesta, Tivoli (c. 80 B.c.) (p. 195) is circular peripteral with a
podium supporting a cella 24 ft in diameter, surrounded by a peristyle of eighteen
Corinthian columns 23 ft 6 ins high. The cella has two windows and a doorway
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 195

TEMPLE OF VESTA: ROME @estorep)

ere
l e
A2pepey
I ;
| TEA
—— |

ice
Te mT TTT

43%

—3—0'04<
—23'6"—
—

TEMPLE, OFVENUS: BAALBEK

(RESTORED)

—— Ze) pee a
Saat see

(HYEXTERIOR row NW -SSECTION /sELEVAT!

 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

B. Drawing of interior by Piranesi

The Pantheon, Rome (A.D. 120-24). See opposite page
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 197
approached by steps. The columns are nearly 9? diameters high, and the capitals,
with large and unusual central flower and foliage derived from a crinkly variety of
the ‘acanthus mollis’, are one diameter in height. This early temple, like that of
Portunus, Rome, shows Hellenistic influence very strongly.
The Temple of Portunus, Rome (pp. 172A, 181A, 251), formerly known as the
Temple of Vesta, now S.M. del Sole, is not later than the time of Augustus. It is
situated in the Forum Boarium on a circular platform of eight marble steps. It is
of Parian marble and is circular peripteral with twenty Corinthian columns,
34 ft 7 ins high and 3 ft 2 ins in diameter and therefore nearly eleven diameters
high, which surround a cella 28 ft in diameter. The capitals have acanthus leaves
V-shaped in section and with sharp-pointed lobes which generally indicate Greek
craftsmanship. The roof was probably of timber rafters covered with bronze tiles.
The Pantheon, Rome (pp. 196, 199, 246A, F) is in the most perfect preservation
of all ancient buildings in Rome; much has been removed, much has been restored,
but the walls and vaulting of this great circular structure with its magnificent colon-
naded portico still remain. It belongs to two different periods. Its site was pre-
viously a large open place, 8 ft below the present level, on to which faced the south
front of the predecessor of the Pantheon, a temple completed in 25 B.c. by Agrippa,
son-in-law of Augustus. Agrippa’s temple was broad and shallow, 143 ft 6 ins
wide x 65 ft deep, and probably of the three-celled Etruscan type. It was severely
damaged by fire late in the first century A.D. The Rotunda was erected (A.D. 120-4)
by the Emperor Hadrian on the forecourt to the older temple, but at the higher
level and in such a manner that the podium of the latter could serve for the founda-
tions of a boldly projecting porch, now facing north instead of south. The portico
of Agrippa’s temple too was re-used, but made octastyle instead of decastyle, the
pediment consequently having a steeper pitch than before. Agrippa’s original in-
scription still appears on the frieze, along with an addition made by Severus and
Caracalla, recording a restoration of A.D. 202. The Corinthian octastyle portico,
110 ft wide by 60 ft deep in the centre, forms an imposing entrance to this grandest
of all circular temples. The unfluted monolithic columns of Egyptian granite, with
Corinthian capitals of white Pentelic marble, are 46 ft 5 ins high, 4 ft 113 ins in
diameter at the base, and 4 ft 34 ins at the top (p. 199C, D, E). They support an
entablature 11 ft high, and a pediment which originally had a bronze relief, as is
indicated by the holes for fixing it which still remain (p. 199A). The eight front
columns with the others form a triple colonnade, as in Etruscan temples (p. 199B).
At the back of this portico are niches in which stood colossal statues of Augustus
and Agrippa, and in the thickness of the wall behind these niches stairs lead to the
upper parts of the building (p. 1998). The ancient bronze doors which, with the
fanlight, were originally plated with gold (p. 159A), still remain, but the bronze
plates of the original segmental vaulting were removed in 1626 and recast for
the baldachino in S. Peter’s (p. 720B) and for the cannon of the Castle of S. Angelo.
The Rotunda is circular, with an internal diameter and height each of 142 ft 6 ins.
A massive circular foundation, 14 ft 9 ins deep, supports the wall of brick-faced
concrete, which, as we have seen (p. 178), was not solid but comprised an elaborate
constructive system, carefully devised to meet every kind of stress and strain to
which it was likely to be subjected. Internally, the wall was lined with marble and
porphyry. There are eight great recesses, one of which forms the entrance, while
the others—three of which are semicircular and four rectangular exedrae, probably
contained statues of the gods of the seven planets. Each of the exedrae, except that
opposite the entrance, which has a semi-dome, has two monolithic marble columns
in antis, 34 ft 10 ins high, with their lower third reeded and their upper portion
fluted, and Corinthian capitals supporting an entablature (pp. 196B, 199A). Above
198 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

these columns are hidden relieving arches. The eight piers have three tiers of con-
structive niches concealed within them. The marble facings to these piers, as well
as the pedimented altars projecting from them, are later additions. The pavement
of granite, porphyry and marble was restored in the nineteenth century. The attic,
or upper part of the circular wall, was originally faced with marble pilasters (six
of the capitals of which are in the British Museum) and panelling of giallo an-
tico, serpentine, and pavonazetto, but in 1747 this was replaced by stucco
decoration.
In effect, the Rotunda is a cylinder, three tiers high; the hemispherical dome,
fitted inside, springs from the top of the second tier, so that the third stage forms
an abutment to its base. The inner surface of the dome is coffered in five ranges,
in each of which the mouldings are adjusted or foreshortened with regard to their
appearance from below and were originally embellished with central ornaments of
stucco. The coffers not only ornament the surface of the dome, but also serve to
reduce its weight. The Pantheon is an instance of the Roman skilful variation of
the composition of concrete according to the function it has to serve. Researches
carried out for the Italian government under the superintendence of Sig. Alberto
Terenzio from 1929-34, have shown that the hand-laid courses of the brick-
faced walls are alternately of travertine and tufa stone lumps in the lowest tier,
and of tufa and brick in the second and third, there being large bonding tiles at
intervals. The tufa and brick alternation continues in the lower part of the dome,
but turns to a lighter alternation of tufa and pumice above the top of the third
range of coffers. The courses everywhere are horizontal. The lighting of the build-
ing is effected by one circular unglazed opening, 27 ft in diameter, in the crown of
the dome, and it still retains its original bronze cornice (pp. 196B, 199A). This
method of lighting produces the most solemn and impressive effect. It is a matter
of no small surprise that from this one single source ample light should be thrown
round all parts of the building, even when the great bronze doors are not open to
admit the Italian sunlight.
Originally, the lower storey of the Pantheon was faced externally with large
slabs of gleaming white Pentelic marble and its two upper storeys were coated with
stucco. The dome, the lower portion of which is formed in steps, was covered with
gilded bronze plates, till they were removed to Constantinople in A.D. 655 and
replaced by lead. The octastyle portico contained in its pediment a magnificent
bronze relief representing a ‘gigantomachy’ or battle of the Titans and various
deities, while the massive attic behind supported imposing groups of bronze
statuary as restored in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.
The Pantheon has survived centuries of change, both temporal and spiritual, and
is still devoted to the service of religion, but it is the religion of the one God of
Christianity instead of the pantheon of heathen deities. In A.D. 608 it was dedicated
by Pope Boniface IV to S. Maria ad Martyres, when many loads of martyrs’ bones
were brought here from the Catacombs. It is now known as S. Maria Rotonda and
is shorn of statuary, marble sheathing, iridescent bronze, and glittering gold which
rendered it magnificent in the days of Imperial Rome, but it still compels world-
wide admiration by reason of the severe simplicity and unity of the design (p. 196A).
The Temple of Venus, Baalbek (A.D. 273) (p. 195) has a cella, 32 ft in dia-
meter, raised on a podium and approached by steps. It is surrounded by Corinthian
columns 33 ft 8 ins high, some having five-sided capitals, six of which are well
advanced from the cella wall and occupy positions resulting from the division of
the circle into seven equal parts (p. 195G). The line of the entablature supported
by these six columns is curved inwards between the columns towards the cella
wall, forming a decoratively-treated buttressing system to a stone dome, which,
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 199

TOC TOC
Vl] bellb
IANAANE:f GAT ET
O

‘ans
BRONZE MOULDING
TO EYE OF DOME

io fal
'
i}
i

le
i

@e a
I hag Ss lol
lli
yg oO
:
j@ =
= |{
es J
i
li

St

ay

PLANS OF CAPITAL _
SLUTES
in Da seures erode
SOE
|8 :
oon
ae' te Pepe te) Bt ees
nue
= Ke
| |Z conse
en
ine a A'
f\) ANGLE NY) ZS ade Hier,
DAE NY 7c = ir

;
EMF Lees Rt

7 Si
=F 4
: ;
eas NY |
Bye
eo
]
= a ad ae
2
4) =X \\\ *
a
A ‘a S Aa BS
if Poth
X | [

So YB | es
+
-=|
je
uf
[ Sse

Bromico 0 RDER DETAILS OF CAP ITAL bewis 2 PORTICO COLUMNS

|
:
 200 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

BASILICA OF TRAJAN Rt OME =

WY
7

a\
UH
1

UAW

il VHNUOTCCMUVECUCQUT
cme
UIST
CCU
ie
==
stn
ies
USI
CQUUUUESQquUn(sPOPORQUCUCUHLE
HULU
=a
A JINTERIOR (nesrore0) eoesvevee
ire ee! ee ee ae CRM nee es
° TRAVJAN'S *

COLUMN e
Ce ) en: <0 oe ee ee

1
1
1
eoeeeee#e2e38seeee#eeeee#@# es se
1
eee 0 010 © © © © © 8 8 8 8 8

:
TRIBUNAL — 5 ° TRIBUNAL
FOR
FOR De ieee a ieee are a ne ey ae Nae Bin Shag eee I ats
JUDGES AND Nie . JUDGES AND
ASSESSORS 9H e
ASSESSORS

eeceeerevoeveve ee & © © ©
' i
eeeee eocecveeee ee @
ENTRANCE FROM FORUM
if. eee
ee of

B pian
ONSTANT INE a a

/TRAN

201
= =.

.
™ 30+\00
STORED)
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 201

however, has fallen. The entrance is placed centrally between two divisions of the
circle, and has a column on either side. The external wall of the cella has Corinthian
pilasters behind the columns, with semicircular niches for statuary between them;
while internally it has superimposed Ionic and Corinthian Orders.
Christian baptisteries were evolved from such little circular buildings (see also
the Mausoleum of Diocletian, p. 218), which therefore hold an extremely interest-
ing position in architectural evolution (p. 293).

BASILICAS
Basilicas, which were halls of justice and commercial exchanges, indicate clearly,
by their central position, the importance of law and business in Old Rome. These
buildings, which are of a pronounced type, are a link between Classic and Christian
architecture (p. 258). The usual plan of a basilica was a rectangle twice as long as
its width. Either two or four rows of columns forming a ‘nave’ and two or four
aisles ran the whole length, and there were sometimes galleries over the aisles. The
nave roof was raised above that of the aisles, so that the windows might be placed
in the upper walls between the two levels. The entrance was either at the side or at
one end. The tribunal, opposite the entrance, was on a raised dais, generally in a
semicircular apse, and sometimes separated from the main building by a screen of
columns or by a low balustrade. Ranged round the apse were seats for the assessors,
with a raised seat in the centre for the praetor, and in front was the altar where
sacrifice was offered before transacting business. The roof was generally of wood,
which the Roman knowledge of the principles of the roof truss permitted them to
use over very large spaces, when required. Basilicas usually presented a simple and
unadorned exterior in comparison with the interior: they were sometimes without
walls at the sides.
Trajan’s Basilica, Rome (A.D. 98-112) (pp. 182B, 200), by Apollodorus of
Damascus, was entered through a portico from Trajan’s Forum (p. 200B). Adjoin-
ing the Basilica were the Greek and Latin libraries with Trajan’s famous Column
in an open court between them (p. 200B). It had a central nave (p. 200A), 385 ft long
and 87 ft wide, with double aisles, each 23 ft 9 ins wide, and the total internal
height was about 120 ft. The columns separating nave and aisles were of red
granite from Syene, with white marble Corinthian capitals, and they supported
galleries over the side aisles, above which came the clear-story and simple timber
roof. At each end were raised tribunals with semicircular apses and sacrificial altars
in front.
The Basilica of Constantine, Rome (A.D. 310-13) (pp. 182B, 200, 241A), also
known as the Basilica of Maxentius or Basilica Nova, adjoins the Forum Romanum.
It consists of a central nave, 265 ft long by 83 ft wide, and was crowned at a height
of 120 ft by an immense groined vault in three compartments. North and south are
aisles also in three compartments, each roofed with a great semicircular vault, 76 ft
in span, springing from walls which are at right angles to the nave and pierced by
openings, and these walls, steadied by the pressure of the aisle vaults, supported
the nave vault. Monolithic columns stood in front of these transverse walls and
supported entablatures from which sprang the nave cross-vaults (p. 200F). There
were two apses, that on the north being an addition made by the Emperor Con-
stantine, who finished the building, brought almost to completion by his pre-
decessor, Maxentius. Light was introduced in the upper part of the nave over the
aisle vaults by lunettes in the wall formed under the intersecting vaulting. The
building is similar to the central halls of the thermae (p. 202) and with them, mani-
festly foreshadows the planning and structural organization of the greatest of Byzan-
tine buildings, S. Sophia, Constantinople (p. 280). It is too, in many respects a
202 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

prototype of a Gothic structure, in which the thrust and weight of intersecting

vaults are collected and brought down on to piers built to receive them. The vaults
to the northern aisle remain with their deep coffering, and show a series of embedded
brick arches, spanning the vaults from side to side (p. 177J). These were intended to
localize cracks which might arise in the concrete. The main vault had similar ‘box’
ribs of brickwork, and other ribs following the groins, which greatly eased con-
struction. Such ribs were a feature of many vaults of the later Imperial period, but
they were reserved for the best work. A portion of the main vault still overhangs in
mid-air, showing the extraordinary cohesive quality of concrete.
Other basilicas at Rome were the Basilica Porcia (184 B.c.), the first to be built
in the city; the Basilica Julia (46 B.c.) (p. 182B); and the Basilica Emilia (p. 182B).
The Basilica, Pompeii, and those at Tréves, Timgad, and Silchester in
England, are other examples, and there can be no doubt that wherever Rome
established her power a basilica for the administration of justice formed an impor-
tant feature in her town-planning.

THERMAE
The Thermae (Gk. thermos =hot) or palatial public baths of Imperial Rome, which
were probably derived from the Greek gymnasia, portray, even in their ruin, the
manners and customs of the pleasure-loving populace, and are as characteristic
of Roman civilization as are the amphitheatres. The principal ruins of thermae
in Italy are at Rome and Pompeii. The thermae were not only designed for
luxurious bathing, but were resorted to for news and gossip, and served, like
a modern club, as a rendezvous of social life besides being used for lectures and
athletic sports, and indeed entered largely into the daily life of the Imperial City.
A small entrance charge of a quadrans (4 farthing) was sometimes made, but in
later times they were opened free to the populace by emperors in search of popu-
larity. The thermae were under the management of the ‘aediles’; there were also
‘balneatores’ to take the entrance money, and janitors to guard the doors, with a
staff of attendants, including anointers, manicurists, barbers, shampooers, besides
stokers, lamplighters, and hundreds of slaves to make the process of bathing a
luxurious relaxation.
The thermae were generally raised on a high platform within an enclosing wall,
and underneath were the furnaces and rooms connected with the service of the
establishment, which usually consisted of three main parts, as shown in the
Thermae of Caracalla (p. 203B) and Diocletian (p. 207D).
(a) A main building. In this was a dominant central hall, about which all other
rooms were symmetrically arranged, having on its cross axis the three chief apart-
ments of the whole thermae—the ‘tepidarium’, or warm room, through which was
reached the ‘calidarium’ or hot room, each with heated-water baths; and, on the
other side of the central hall, the ‘frigidarium’, containing an unheated swimming
bath. The rest of the rooms were duplicated. On each side there might be a
‘laconicum’ (‘sudatorium’), or dry sweating room; and invariably there were
‘apodyteria’, or dressing rooms, and ‘unctuaria’ for oils and ungents, where the
‘aliptor’ shampooed, oiled, sanded and anointed the bathers and scraped the skin
with the ‘strigil’. Invariably also, there was a palaestra, for physical exercise, com-
prising an open peristyle court and attendant surrounding rooms including, some-
times, a bath for athletes. Large heated rooms usually needed a vault, and glass or
translucent marble windows, to contain the heat.
(6) A large open space. This was a park-like enclosure surrounding the central
structure, planted with trees and ornamented with statues and fountains. Part of it
was used as a stadium, for foot-racing, with raised seats at the side for spectators.
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 203

THIERMAE 8 CARACALLA | ROME

MARC) AN
\ Que De,

RO). rT SRadaaroos
SISOS BOS%s SORES
SAA

fo STADIUM Py nr Saenerrrei é

Do poooo000 & a 6 =
992000900 ©2988c00
22009090 69a20000
©9® XYSTUS OR PUBLIC PARK WITH AVENUES OF TREES Bore
2209000 SFvo900 =
aug6g00 aoaccee
9099e900@ 29e09090

° 90)
\S)

£
io
o © :
te)
\e fo)

Cl] r) c)
Qa Se) 1 ®
8 9 1 Ss
° cS) \ °
a cel H a
mY a a @ =

a 8 a) E
(Q c3) ' 3B
IsQ ® ny e
a ° 2
; rs) a)
Q -e- 3 °
ANTE ROOMS. 2 a ro} ° 7 SUITES OF
° ro) ® g =] | BATHROOMS
-APODYTERIA AND = C) a
"STAIRCASES 2f ie a \ oo Be 8. ENTRANCES
{ a a
ENTRANCE HALLS | 2 & U8)
i e 9. MAIN
MAINENTRAN
ENTRANCE
PEN PERISTYLES
OPE | ° e ! '
; s 10. TWO STOREY SMALL
| SUDATORIUM oF 3 — —s = —s = S 38 BATHS AND SHOPS
‘ TEPIDARIUM a ode ooenss Feu sovE_gIRTGa/50/0 FIT GT _IOS S OOHIUQAS VO 8 — li, LECTURE HALLS
or | bs 5 AND LIBRARIES
°
| 60 96966 G80S8Q 8200690 8009020000 ogags000 0 12 EPHEBEUM
pae@oee000 oe ee os fpr pew fey) [GYMNASIUM]

| =

|
—<
109,59, 190 200 PS Sse 600. 700FEET
(B) PLAN ap Caan coe aa |OOu am a AISO! | a). LOO METRES
204 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

& ‘g f sal ? aE :

CENTRAL HALL TEPIDARIUM CALIDARIUM

40
Tete Wien:° ile ea le
$0
a een 190
s
C)
———
50

LiF
c. The Frigidarium D. The Central Hall
The Thermae of Caracalla, Rome (A.D. 211-217), restored. See opposite page
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 205

(c) An outer ring of apartments. These included lecture rooms and exedrae for
philosophers, poets, and statesmen; while colonnades, a feature of all open spaces
in Rome, served as a protection from the sun. A large reservoir fed by a special
aqueduct supplied all the water needed for the bath apartments, fountains, and
miscellaneous purposes. Other apartments were let off as shops or accommodated
the numerous slaves of the establishment.
The Thermae of Caracalla, Rome (A.D. 211-17) (pp. 177K, L, 203, 204), with
accommodation for 1,600 bathers, give a splendid idea of the size and magnificence
of these establishments; for although now in ruins, the relative positions of tepi-
darium, calidarium, frigidarium, apodyteria, and other apartments can still be
traced. The thermae stood on a platform 20 ft high, measuring over one-fifth of a
mile each way, and underneath were the vaulted store-chambers, corridors, fur-
naces, hypocausts and hot-air ducts for heating the buildings (p. 203). A colonnade
on the entrance side screened two storeys forming shops on the ground level and
‘slipper’ baths on the platform level. The main entrance led to the park-like en-
closure, laid out for wrestling and games, around which were grouped halls for
dramatic representations and lectures. On the opposite side of the platform and
beyond the stadium was the great vaulted reservoir of water supplied by the
Marcian aqueduct, carried through leaden pipes to the places needed, and for the
hot baths, heated by furnaces in the substructure nearby. The main building block
measured 750 ft by 380 ft, thus covering an area of 285,000 sq. ft, i.e. about equal
to Westminster Palace, and larger than either the British Museum or the Royal
Courts of Justice, London. There were only four doorways on the north-east side,
which was exposed to cold winds; but large columned openings to the gardens were
a feature of the south-west side. The symmetrical planning of this building on
axial lines gave vistas through the various halls and saloons, while exedrae and
screens of columns prevented any loss of scale and emphasized the vastness of the
building.
The great central hall was the controlling feature of the plan and around it sub-
sidiary halls were grouped (pp. 203B, 204D). It was 183 ft by 79 ft, roofed with an
immense semicircular, intersecting vault of concrete, in three compartments 108 ft
high, which rested on eight massive piers of masonry, fronted with granite columns
38 ft high and 5 ft 4 ins in diameter, supporting short pieces of entablature (p. 177L).
This great hall was lighted by clear-story windows under the intersecting vaults,
which rose above the roofs of adjoining halls, as in the Thermae of Diocletian (p.
207A), and the Basilica of Constantine (p. 200C, D, F). The calidarium had a dome
similar to that of the Pantheon, and special attention was given to heating this
apartment by wall flues (p. 203). The frigidarium was probably open to the sky,
and this open-air swimming-bath formed a welcome retreat during the hot and
sultry months in the Imperial City (pp. 203A, 204C). The interior, unlike the ex-
terior, was evidently elaborately decorated, in marked contrast to Greek methods.
Pavements were formed of bright-coloured mosaics in geometrical patterns or with
figures of athletes; the lower parts of the concrete walls were sheathed with many-
coloured marbles, and the upper parts with painted and modelled stucco; the great
columns under the vault springers were of granite, porphyry, giallo antico, ala-
baster or other rare marbles. Various coloured marble columns were used con-
structively to support the upper balconies and peristyle roofs, and decoratively
were
to form frames for the superimposed niches in the walls. The great vaults
coloured
also richly ornamented with coffering, modelled and painted stucco, or
glass mosaic. iat ;
which
These magnificent halls sheltered some of the finest sculpture of antiquity,
the
was brought from Greece or executed by Greek artists in Rome. During
206 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

excavation of the thermae in the Renaissance period many of these masterpieces of

art were removed to the Vatican and other museums in Rome, whence later some
were carried off to the museums of Europe. Additional interest was given to in-
teriors by the perpetual streams of running water which, issuing from the mouths
of lions sculptured in marble or wrought in brightly polished silver, fell into
marble basins and produced a delicious coolness in hot, sultry weather. The
exteriors of these great thermae appear to have been treated very plainly in stucco,
except on the side open to the main gardens, where they were more elaborate.
The Thermae of Agrippa, Rome (c. 20 B.c.), which were the earliest, have dis-
appeared, and such fragments as remain belong to later restorations. The Thermae
of Trajan were still partly standing till A.D. 1795.
The Thermae of Titus, Rome (A.D. 80), stood on a great platform, partly over
the foundations of Nero’s Golden House on the Esquiline Hill, and when excavated
about A.D. I500 many remarkable frescoes (p. 249B) were discovered, which had
considerable influence on the painting of that period; and some of the finest statues
of antiquity, such as the Laocoon group, found their way into the art galleries of
Europe.
The Thermae of Diocletian, Rome (A.D. 302) (p. 207), which accommodated
over 3,000 bathers, resembled the Baths of Caracalla in their general distribution
(p. 207D). The great central hall, 200 ft by 80 ft and 90 ft high, has the original
cross vaulting of concrete (p. 177M), springing from eight monolithic columns of
Egyptian granite, 50 ft high and 5 ft in diameter, with Composite capitals of white
marble, supporting an ornamental entablature (p. 207A). This building is of special
interest, first because it gives the general appearance of these great halls, and
secondly because Michelangelo converted it in 1563 into the Church of S.Maria
degli Angeli(pp. 207A, D, 714). Achoir was added on one side by Vanvitelli(A.D. 1749),
which converted the nave into a transept. The restorations of the frigidarium (p.
2078) and the ephebeum (p. 207H) give a good idea of the sumptuous character of
the building.
The unbounded licence of the public baths, which were resorted to for all sorts
of dissipation, brought them under the ban of the Early Christians, who held that
bathing might be practised for cleanliness, but not for pleasure. Then in the fifth
century the thermae fell further into disuse and decay, owing to the destruction of
aqueducts by the Huns, and also to the decrease of the population. Later they
served as quarries for Mediaeval and Renaissance builders.
The Balneum or small private bath was very usual in Roman palaces (p. 231D)
and houses, and under the Republic gave its name to public baths, which were
simpler in character than the later thermae of the Empire, in which bathing
became secondary to luxury and entertainment. The Stabian Baths, Pompeii
(c. 120 B.c.) and the Forum Baths, Pompeii (c. 80 B.c.), are on the lines
of these small public baths.
Wherever the Romans settled they built thermae for the people, and thus at that
notable Roman city of Timgad, North Africa, there are the ruins of no less than
eleven of these sumptuous thermal establishments. The Roman Thermae, Bath
(England), the “Aquae Solis’ of the Romans, are the most remarkable in existence,
where the hot water still gushes up and flows through the massive leaden conduit
into the great swimming-bath. The Romans also used slipper baths, many of which
were beautifully carved (p. 250, G).
The Minerva Medica, Rome (c. A.D. 260) (p. 285A, B), is now generally
regarded as having been a nymphaeum in the sumptuous Licinian gardens, since
numerous other remains of important garden buildings have been found in the
neighbourhood. The absence of a hypocaust and of flue tiles precludes it having
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 207

THERMAL OF DIOCLETIAN : ROME

SS
: Se ee
AY
\——= Soy
Beas bs i
SS

LL now S.M.DEGLI ANGELL

at oad PRINCIPAL
r. \n/ q Nyy ENTRANCE
on re,
then $a BB a ee eererere © Trt err

SCALES
FEETIOO 50 200
METRES20 10 : a 7
h h h
as
ot KX
r, ao oe wy

FRIGIDARIUM Fry: hy
& 2. 3 Wl’

oeeeee

oom 2 > Bs er oe me ass

|__(¢ PERISTLE 2 STEPIDARIUM «3 PERISTILE C) |
cod : oe e Se ome oceigpe om Ne Se Bo 8 foc
seeeee

(RESTORED) pies
4)
(aay
aaa ws()
NOILLWAS
TS
OF
BATHS
BLOCK
MAIN
| VESTIBULES hai fh. d.g. SUITES OF
SECTION
LONGITUDINAL
a-a _ APODETERIA BATHROOMS
EPHEBEUM t TEPIDARIUM =}, ENTRANCES
. QUIET
xoap ROOMS y. EXEDRA <=
ne
NV
MOOM
SO
I
c

THEATRE Sseoven HALL

NOW PART OF
A SCHOOL
208 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

A. Portico of Octavia (re-erected by Augustus, 27 B.C.—A.D. 14) and

Theatre of Marcellus (23-13 B.c.), Rome (restored).
See pp. 209, 225

B. Roman Theatre, Ostia, near Rome (restored).

(c. A.D. 10: enlarged c. 193-217). See p. 210
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 209
served for heated baths of any kind. It is decagonal on plan, 80 ft in diameter, with
semicircular niches on nine sides and the entrance on the tenth. The niches are
both decorative and constructional. They are reversed compared with those in the
walls of the Pantheon (p. 199B), yet they serve, as there, to give stability to the struc-
ture. In the angles between them there are spur buttresses which rise up the angles
of the building to stiffen an upper tier, in which there is a range of large windows
to give light and air to the growing plants, assisted by other windows at the back
of a pair of niches on either side. The buttresses proved too weak to retain the con-
crete dome, despite the aid given by a heavy, stepped haunch rising around the
base of the dome in the usual Roman fashion, and almost at once, the building was
strengthened on the rear with two tremendous buttresses. These again proved
insufficient, and in the fourth century, exedrae were added on both flanks, deco-
rative in appearance but really to give added strength to the too-frail supports.
The dome, which bears a remarkable resemblance to S. Vitale, Ravenna (p. 280),
is particularly interesting because here roughly formed ‘pendentives’ are employed
to set its circular rim upon the decagonal base (p. I77N),a device further developed by
the Byzantines. In the dome are embedded box ribs, laced together by tile horizontal
courses, running upwards towards the crown. Such box ribs have been noted at
the Basilica of Constantine (p. 201): they first appear in Roman work in barrel
vaults at the Colosseum (A.D. 70-82), in groined vaults by the end of the first cen-
tury and in domes in early second century A.D. Tile ribs made vaults tougher,
lighter, and easier to build. Although this garden building would be unimportant
to the Romans, it marks a definite stage towards the more lightly poised construc-
tional system of the Byzantines, and the evolution of the dome.

THEATRES
Roman theatres were often adapted from the Greek to suit the Roman drama, and
for this the auditorium, with its tiers of seats one above the other, was restricted to
a semicircle (p. 145). The central area at the ground level, which in Greek theatres
was occupied by the chorus, became part of the auditorium and was assigned to
senators and other dignitaries. The stage increased in importance and was raised
and brought into immediate connection with the auditorium. Roman theatres were
not only hollowed out of a hill-side, but they were also built up by means of con-
crete vaulting, supporting tiers of seats, under which were the connecting corridors
used for retreat in case of sudden showers.
The Theatre, Orange (c. A.D. 50) (p. 145D, E, F, G), in the south of France, is in
an unusual state of preservation, and here the auditorium, which holds 7,000
spectators, is partly constructed and partly hollowed out of the hill-side. It is 340 ft
in diameter between the enciosing walls, and has stairways on either side of the
various levels. The stage was 203 ft wide by 45 ft deep, and is enclosed by return
walls at right angles to the wall at the back of the stage. The great wall of the outer
facade, 324 ft long by 116 ft high, is ornamented with wall arcading, and there still
remain the two tiers of corbel stones pierced with holes for the seating of towering
masts, from the top of which, chains extended to support the front of a wooden
sloping awning over the stage. An enormous portico, which once extended across
the full width of the facade, has entirely disappeared.
The Theatre of Marcellus, Rome (23-13 B.C.) (p. 208A), was built up on a
level site, and therefore the seats of the auditorium were supported not on a hill-
side, but, like those of the Colosseum, on radiating walls and concrete vaulting. It
is the only ancient theatre now in Rome, and, though in a ruinous condition, por-
tions of its auditorium still remain, consisting of two tiers of arcading, with super-
imposed Doric and Ionic Orders. The third tier has disappeared.
210 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

The Odeion of Herodes Atticus, Athens (A.D. 161) (pp. 103B, I04C), con-
nected by an arcade with the Theatre of Dionysus (p. 147), is Roman in plan,
partly hewn out of the Acropolis rock and partly constructed, and its marble seats
accommodated 6,000 people; while cedar wood, found buried on the site, would
suggest that there may have been a roof to the stage. The ‘Small Theatre’,
Pompeii (80 B.c.) (p. 145C) was definitely a roofed building, for an audience of
about 1,500.
The Theatre, Ostia (p. 2088), the large theatre at Pompeii, as well as those at
Taormina and Syracuse in Sicily, at Fiesole near Florence, at Timgad and Sabratha
in North Africa, and Aspendus in Asia Minor, are other Roman examples.
The Roman Theatre, Verulamium (second century A.D.), near S. Albans, is
the only known Roman theatre in England.

AMPHITHEATRES
Amphitheatres, unknown to the Greeks, are characteristically Roman. buildings
found in every important settlement and are good exponents of the character and
life of the Romans, who preferred displays of mortal combats, considered to be a
good training for a nation of warriors, to the tame mimicry of the stage. Gladiatorial
combats had their origin in funeral religious rites connected with human sacrifices
to the manes of the dead. The elliptical amphitheatre, with its rising tiers of seats,
may be regarded as a compound of two theatres, stage to stage, thus making a
continuous auditorium round a central arena. In addition to their normal purposes,
they were also used for naval exhibitions, and water-pipes for flooding some of the
arenas still exist. Spanish bull-rings of to-day give some idea of the arrangement
and uses of Roman amphitheatres. The arena, a Latin word meaning sand or
beach, was so called because of the sand with which it was strewn to absorb the
blood of the combatants.
The Colosseum, Rome (pp. 166, 211, 212), also known as the Flavian Amphi-
theatre, was commenced by Vespasian (A.D. 70) and completed by Domitian (aA.D-
82). It is situated in the level valley between the Esquiline and Caelian Hills, and
in plan it is a vast ellipse, 620 ft by 513 ft, with eighty external arcaded openings
on each storey, those on the ground floor forming entrances from which the various
tiers of seats were reached (p. 212). The arena proper is an oval 287 ft by 180 ft
surrounded by a wall 15 ft high, behind which was the podium, with the Imperial
throne and seats for the Pontifex Maximus, Vestal Virgins, Senators, Praetors and
other officers of state. Behind the podium rose the auditorium seats for some
50,000 spectators, with corridors and stairs beneath, while dens for the wild beasts
were under the lowest tier, on a level with the arena (pp. 166B, 211B). The seats,
which have been removed, were in four main divisions, the two lower or grand
tiers for those of equestrian rank and for Roman citizens, separated from the third
tier by a high encircling wall, above which was the top range and colonnade, all of
which were reached by stairs from the surrounding corridors placed at intervals
between radiating walls (p. 1668). The construction is notable for the skilful com-
bination of materials, according to the purpose to which they were applied. The
component parts of the concrete vary thus: (i) lava was used for solid foundations,
(ii) tufa and brick for the supporting walls, (iii) pumice stone for the vaults
to reduce their weight (p. 212B). Travertine blocks, set without mortar and
held together with metal cramps, were used in the facade, while marble was em-
ployed for the columns, seats, and ornament. The supporting mass has been cal-
culated to occupy as much as one-sixth of the whole area of the building, and
consists of wedge-shaped piers, radiating inwards and supporting concrete
vaults sloping downwards towards the centre, all producing a structure of great
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 211

ri
SiS. A Pee 1

A. The Colosseum, Rome .

. exter. i0r (restored) See opposite page

B. The Colosseum, Rome .

. in terior (restored)
 212 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

_ THE COLOSSEUM : ROME

40!-0'--
:
Es Ne
Ca | Soll Wo i U yu ud

; .| = | -

57!
LU
5ananan
3==
nnn
WALL] UID) ==: oo
(REMOVED)
Diu SIA
SECTION
age SP SeShi| gS UNDE ON x-x
Ra
o y :
4. PLAN w ION
(D)% ICplan
CORINTHIAN STO
RE
STOREY

Un

NC

=
-ENTRA,

Be
ADIATOR
iL
G

gtZ. PLAN
TOP STOREY. a%~ GROUND STORE
SCALE FOR PLAN —
i90 ee 50190 —S 50 FEET Dun I 20 30 49 50 60 70 280 §
G5 6 o 20 30 40 SOMETRES Ts 10 20° 2b
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 213
ae strength and consequently difficult to destroy—a fact well expressed by the
ne:

When falls the Colosseum, Rome shall fall,

The external facade, 157 ft 6 ins high, is divided into four storeys, the lower of
which are pierced with arches, and have attached three-quarter-columns of quasi-
Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian Orders, while the top storey has Corinthian pilasters,
with corbels between to support the masts of the velarium which was drawn across
the auditorium (pp. 211, 212A, B).
Some of the special architectural features of this wonderful building are: (i) the
massive piers which support the three tiers of apparently countless arcades which
encircle the exterior and form covered ambulatories; (ii) the decorative use of the
Classic Orders of architecture, which are superimposed and are thus in strong
contrast to the Greek use of single Orders; (iii) the grand sweeping lines of the
unbroken entablatures round the building (p. 211A). The proportions of the attached
columns, which all have the same diameter, are unusual, for the Doric columns are
about 9} diameters high, and the Ionic and Corinthian about 8? diameters.
The Colosseum is of a type unique among ancient buildings. The structural
problems involved were engineering in character, and all the more so because the
Romans built up the whole gigantic edifice without that extraneous support which
the Greeks secured in theatre building, by scooping the auditorium out of the
earth. Here, then, is an entirely new departure made possible by the invention and
use of concrete, employed not only in corridors and cells, even in chambers under
the arena itself, but also in multitudes of raking vaults, which formed the almost
indestructible foundations of each of the four tiers of seats reared one above the
other in a great ellipse, to the crowning colonnade. Greek architecture had been
simple in appearance and self-evident in design, with columns standing on a
crepidoma below and supporting an entablature above. Roman architecture, especi-
ally as carried out first in the Theatre of Marcellus and afterwards in numerous
amphitheatres, became complex in appearance and hidden in design; for not only
were columns placed in front of piers, but there were columns above columns,
entablatures above entablatures, and arches above arches, while radiating vaults
round the whole building were hidden supports to the auditorium seats. In the
Greek theatres the steps which radiated at regular intervals to the various ranges
of seats were slabs of marble between the seats; in a Roman amphitheatre the
stairs emerged at intervals from the vaulted supporting corridors which swept
round the building. Stupendous in proportions, complex in structure, and yet con-
sistent in the constant repetition of the external design, the Colosseum compels
alike awe and admiration of a nation who conceived and carried to completion such
an immense undertaking to serve popular amusements. The Colosseum is still
magnificent, even in its ruin, and recalls the gladiatorial contests, the naval displays,
and the martyrdom of Christians which took place within its giant walls before it
became a Mediaeval fortress or was plundered to provide building materials for
Renaissance palaces and churches.
The Amphitheatre, Verona (A.D. 290) (p. 214), is in unusually good preserva-
tion, and nearly all the stone seats are intact, although only four complete bays of
the upper part of the external wall are standing.
The Amphitheatre, Pompeii (70 B.c.), the earliest to be built, and those
at Pozzuoli, Capua, Syracuse, Pola, Nimes, Arles, and El] Djem (near Carthage),
are other examples, besides the remains known as the ‘Maumbury Rings’ at
Dorchester, and the Amphitheatre at Caerleon (Monmouth).
214 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

A. The Amphitheatre, Verona

(The surviving four bays of the external facade are seen on the left)

B. The Amphitheatre, Verona: the arena and auditorium

(c. A.D. 290). See p. 213
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 215

CIRCUSES
The Roman circus, for horse and chariot racing, was derived from the Greek
hippodrome, and attained great magnificence. (For foot-racing and athletic games
there was the stadium, based upon the Greek stadium, usually included with the
amenities of the thermae rather than appearing as a separate building.) Chariot
racing was enormously popular, and vast sums were spent upon the training and
selection of men and horses. Famous charioteers were the idols of the day, and
though risking life and limb, reaped rich rewards. Four-horsed chariots were usual,
but races were varied by using two, three, or sometimes six, eight or ten horses,
and by equestrian displays and acrobatic riding. The teams of the four factions or
‘stables’ of Rome competed against one another. Heavy betting gave intensity to
the popular interest, and brought its attendant evils. Until a permanent amphi-
theatre had been provided in Rome, in the late first century B.c., the hippodrome
was used too for the brutal contests of man and beast which then were relegated
there.
The Circus Maximus, Rome (p. 216B, C, D), so called from its great size,
was sited in the valley between the Aventine and Palatine Hills, but has long
since disappeared. It was the oldest in Rome and underwent many improvements
and restorations. Julius Caesar, from 46 B.c., followed by Augustus, first gave it
the monumental proportions for which it is so famous, and later emperors, Claudius,
Nero, Titus and Trajan, added their enrichments of costly marbles, columns and
statues. From Heliopolis, Egypt, came the obelisk of Rameses II, now standing in
the Piazza del Popolo, brought by Augustus to occupy the centre of the spina or
dividing wall, which ran down the middle of the arena in a slightly oblique direc-
tion, so that the chariots might have more room at the starting end. The restored
view (p. 216D), shows its probable appearance in the fourth century A.D. It measured
2,000 ft long and 650 ft wide, and seated 255,000 spectators. The twelve ‘carceres’
held the contestant chariots and horses, and each race required seven laps of the
spina, equal to a distance of about 2} miles. In the time of Caligula, the number of
races held in one day of the games was doubled, from twelve to twenty-four. When
a race was in progress, the laps were signalled by moving seven large wooden eggs
on the spina. Despite the twelve carceres, it seems that not more than four chariot
teams raced at a time. The bas-relief gives a good idea of a racing quadriga (p.
216c) and the relief on a lamp shows the triumphant victor in a race (p. 216B).
Around the track rose the triple banks of seats, supported on concrete vaults:
outside, the circus showed three ranges of marble arcades like those of the
Colosseum, under which thronged the excited crowds, importuned by wine-
sellers, caterers, tipsters and cheap-jacks who plied their trades there. The last race
to take place in the Circus was in A.D. 549.
The Circus of Maxentius, Rome (A.D. 311) (p. 216A), of which vestiges still
remain, consisted of a long, open, circular-ended arena with a ‘spina’ on its longer
axis, and was surrounded by tiers of marble seats, supported on raking vaults. At
one end of the arena were the ‘carceres’ or stalls for horses and chariots, with a
central processional entrance and two side entrances, and at the opposite end was
the ‘Porta Triumphalis’, and the whole was enclosed by a concrete wall.
The circuses of Flaminius and Nero were other examples in the Imperial City.

TOMBS
The Romans practised both forms of burial, cremation and interment, and thus
sarcophagi for the body and urns for the ashes are sometimes found in the same
tomb chamber. During the first three centuries of the Christian era, the body of
 216 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

—] 100.9 190 __-200__-390_—-490_ 590 FEET

‘7 ome Qe fo - 160 150 METRES
af ————— - r one = _~
SSSS SS SSS SS
SS SS

XS |
fe, enn
Wow, SS. f
Ix, Si eS C SPINA
2
©7 5sO
(Ici
JES
_ 1 SEI ath)
I= CARCERES 2
We nee care copeenna — = lees: ABT 1820 “Oa a aan oe aR ma ee
|
ip Hy

- mee
_ ae i aX

il a

K CIRCU

RELIEF ON
LAMP SHEW-
ING VICTOR

CIRCUS
MAXIMUS :
ROME (Restore)

(B)pont DU GARD: NIMES: FRANCE.

 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 217
nearly every Emperor was burnt on a magnificent pyre, from which an eagle was
released to symbolize his escaping soul. In the second century, when cremation
became less usual, wealthy citizens were embalmed on their death and placed in
massive and costly sarcophagi. Roman law forbade burial inside city confines, and
tombs lined the main roads radiating from the town gates, as along the Via Appia,
Rome, or the Street of the Tombs, Pompeii, with its fine Gate of Herculaneum
or again, at Ostia.
The Romans had five classes of burial places: Coemeteria, Monumental tombs
Pyramidal tombs, Temple-shaped tombs, and Sculptured memorials of miscel-
laneous kinds.
I. Coemeteria or subterranean vaults contained both columbaria and loculi.
“Columbaria’ (p. 220Q), so named because of their resemblance to pigeon-holes,
were niches formed in the rock to receive a vase containing the ashes of the
deceased, and with the name inscribed thereon. ‘Loculi’ or recesses for corpses
were sealed with a front slab inscribed with the name, as in the tomb of the Gens
Cornelia, Rome. Sarcophagi, often beautifully carved with figures and festoons,
and surmounted by lids like roofs terminating in scrolls, were also placed in the
vaults (p. 220P). Later these vaults were called Catacombs from ‘ad Catacumbas’,
the place-name of a district in Rome, where many are found.
2. Monumental tombs are the most typical Roman class, descended from the
Etruscan tumuli, with their embracing ring of stones or rock. They consisted of
large cylindrical blocks, often on a quadrangular podium, topped with a conical
crown of earth or stone.
The Tomb of Caecilia Metella, Rome (c. 20 B.c.) (p. 220J), is a landmark on
the Via Appia. It has a podium, Ioo ft square, supporting a circular mass, 94 ft in
diameter, at the core of which was the tomb chamber containing the sarcophagus,
now in the cortile of the Farnese Palace, Rome. The exterior, faced with travertine,
was crowned by an entablature, the frieze of which is carved with ox-skulls and
festoons, above which there was probably a conical earthen mound.
The Mausoleum of Augustus, Rome (c. 25 B.C.) (p. 237B), erected for himself
and his heirs, was a huge cylinder, 290 ft in diameter, faced in travertine, support-
ing a mound of earth, 145 ft high from the ground, planted with evergreen trees
and surmounted by a bronze effigy of Augustus. The interior was subdivided into
tiers of compartments, some of them vaulted, by a complex system of ring and
radial concrete walls, all of them finely finished with opus reticulatum facings
although all the compartments were filled with earth, except for the sepulchral
chamber and the passages leading to it. Behind the facade wall, a series of hemicycle
buttresses completed the precautions for retaining and dividing the pressures of
the great load of earth. A central pillar cored the system and supported the crown-
ing statue. In the twelfth century the monument was converted into a fortress by
the Colonna family; in its later history its collapsed ruins served in turn for a
formal garden, a bull ring, a theatre, and a concert hall, the latter removed in
1934.
The Mausoleum of Hadrian, Rome (c. A.D. 135) (pp. 220E, F, G, 237C), one of
the most important of these tombs, is now the Castle of S. Angelo. It originally
consisted, as shown in the conjectural restoration, of a square podium 285 ft each
way and 42 ft high, below a drum-shaped mass, 230 ft in diameter and rising to
over 100 ft. There was then a mound of earth, planted with funerary trees, capped
by a massive, cylindrical tower, providing a platform, 180 ft from the ground, for a
sculptured quadriga. The facing of the structure was Parian marble, and there were
marble or gilded bronze equestrian groups at the angles of the podium as well as
marble statues around the drum. The monument was surrounded by a bronze
218 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

railing, adorned with gilt-bronze peacocks. In lateral dimension (300 Roman feet)
it accords with the Mausoleum of Augustus, but was in every way a superior
design. The barrel-vaulted tomb chamber, in which was the porphyry sarcophagus
of Hadrian, was right at the heart of the building, its floor 44 ft above the entrance
level and reached by a rising corridor which made a complete circuit of the drum
before turning inwards, over the entrance passage, to reach the tomb chamber.
There is evidence here again in this monument of structural compartmentation to
divide the loads and stresses; the podium portion is entirely made up of narrow,
structural chambers, radiating from the drum. The monument has been much
despoiled by the Goths and later Vandals, and also much altered, for during the
Middle Ages it was converted by the Popes into a fortress, was afterwards used as
barracks, and is now a museum.
3. Pyramidal tombs were probably due to the introduction of Egyptian ideas
after the conquest of Egypt (p. 19). The Pyramid of Caestius, Rome (12 B.C.)
(p. 220K), is formed of concrete faced externally with white marble, and has a
tomb chamber, the vaults and walls of which are decorated with figure paintings.
4. Temple-shaped tombs usually consisted of a mortuary chapel, often having a
colonnaded portico or peristyle, standing on a podium in which was the sepulchral
vault. In the chapel were niches containing statues of deities and portraits or busts
of deceased members of the family. When there was no podium, the niches served
for the cinerary urns too. Rock-cut tombs, which are numerous in the East, as
around Palmyra, Jerusalem, Petra (Syria) and Cyrene (North Africa), often had
temple-like fagades in one or two storeys, with the sepulchral chamber cut in the
rock behind.
The Tomb of Annia Regilla, Rome (c. A.D. 143) (p. 219A), 26 ft square on
plan, had a broad flight of steps on its north side, leading to a mortuary chapel,
standing over a podium containing the sepulchral chamber. Both chambers had
groined vaults. Externally, it is a fine and well-preserved example of Roman poly-
chrome brickwork, with russet-red bricks for the pilastered order and yellow ochre
for the walls between. There are four Corinthian pilasters on the west and south
sides, but on the east, the inner two are expressed as hexagonal columns, sunk into
wall recesses. Centrally below them is the entrance to the vault. Originally, the
podium was covered with a thin coating of stucco, painted brilliant plum-red and
with white lines to imitate the very brickwork which lay underneath.
The Tomb of the Caetennii, Rome, is the richest among a score or so of
chamber tombs recently excavated below the nave floor of the great church of S.
Peter, where they had first been sealed from the light of day by its predecessor,
Constantine’s basilican church of A.D. 330 (p. 261). They date from the second
century A.D. up to that time, and many wonderful art treasures have been disclosed,
including a very early, Christian mosaic vault. They were closely ranged along a
narrow street-way, their walls painted and white-lined to simulate with greater
pungency the true brickwork behind. The Caetennii tomb, 17 ft wide and 18 ft
deep, had a marble-faced dado below a continuous range of alternating square and
semicircular niches, framed with stucco dressings, which held the cinerary urns.
Frescoes decorated the lunettes of the groined vault, itself richly ornamented with
low-relief stucco panelling, as were the similar vaults of the Tombs of the Valerii
and Pancratii on the Via Latina, Rome (p. 2I9B, C).
The Mausoleum of Diocletian, Spalato (c. A.D. 300) (p. 231C, D), standing in
Diocletian’s palace, is elaborate, as befits an Emperor’s tomb. It is octagonal exter-
nally, and is raised upon a podium containing the sepulchral chamber. Around it,
there is a low peristyle of Corinthian columns. Internally, it is circular, 43 ft 8 ins
diameter, with four semicircular and four rectangular recesses, including with the
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 219

B. Tomb of the Valerii, Via Latina, c. Tomb of the Pancratii, Via Latina,
Rome: stuccoed vault (A.D. first century). Rome: stuccoed vault (A.D. second
See opposite page century). See opposite page
 220 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

(ING PLAN OF PERISTY

-—— 18-6 —— ---a4

HALF PLAN OF BASEME!

Vip Az GED ¥

AES 7reg eee

oa!
J iDiek =e

\N
Yj NSUY

I
WY iv Yi
SS

}é--
60'0'-----
—--ABT.
--
-—iy)
Wik a
as
y

TOMB.
er

Rit
Es alt
|
iS
cc
-=
65':0"--+>4
==-~-ABT
==
f(

sg ND

TOMB @N/EVOLEIA TYCHE: OCK-CUT TOMB? TOMB: DOUGGA.

POMPEII EL KHASNE:PETRA CO LUMBARIA: ROME NORTH AFRICA
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 221
latter the one containing the entrance. Between the recesses stand eight granite
Corinthian columns, carrying an entablature broken back around them. Above
them are eight more columns, much smaller and alternately Corinthian and Com-
posite. But the remarkable feature is the hemispherical dome, which is of two
contiguous shells of brickwork, each about one foot thick, the inner one being
made up entirely of brick arches, arranged fishscale fashion. This dome represents
the ultimate achievement in Roman vaulting, presaging Byzantine construction,
massive concrete having given way to compact, wide-jointed brickwork, systemati-
cally laid through the whole thickness of the vault. Above the brick shells however,
light concrete was used to sustain an octagonal, pyramidal roof (p. 231C).
The Tomb of ‘El Khasne’, Petra (c. A.D. 120) (p. 220N) is one of the most
interesting of all the rock-cut tombs in that district, which number over 750. The
facade, 65 ft high, is of a debased type of architecture; the lower storey has a hexa-
style Corinthian portico from which central and side doors lead into tomb chambers,
while the upper storey also has columns supporting a broken pediment and a
central circular structure surmounted by a conical roof and urn.
5. Sculptured Memorials. Minor tombs were extremely varied in their forms, but
though comparatively small, might be richly ornate outside. Many represented an
altar, with a sepulchral chamber contained in a high base; others appeared as semi-
domed niches, commemorative arches, pillars or as semicircular benches or walled
and paved enclosures.
The Tomb of Naevoleia Tyche, Pompeii (p. 220M) is of the altar type, the
sepulchral chamber in the base having a large niche opposite the doorway and
others elsewhere in the walls. In them, cinerary urns were discovered, as well as
upon stone benches at the foot of the side walls. Three of the urns were of glass,
protected by lead containers. The marble-faced altar above was raised upon a flight
of three marble steps, its front and sides decorated with reliefs, surrounded by
borders of acanthus scrolls.
Cenotaphs or memorial monuments to persons buried elsewhere were also occa-
sionally erected, as in the following instances:
The Tomb of the Julii, S. Rémy (c. 40 B.c.) (p. 220H), in Provence, is a ceno-
taph, and consists of a high pedestal ornamented with bas-reliefs and supporting
engaged Corinthian angle columns with arched openings between. Above is a
circular storey with fluted Corinthian columns and entablature, crowned with a
conical stone roof.
The Igel Monument, near Tréves (A.D. 250) (p. 220L), is of similar design,
erected by the Secundini family. It consists of a sculptured podium about 16 ft
square, supporting an intermediate stage with an Order of Corinthian pilasters,
enclosing a large sculptured panel above which comes an attic surmounted by a
sculptured pediment and crowned by a curved pyramidal roof, terminating at a
height of 75 ft above the ground.
TRIUMPHAL ARCHES
Monumental arches first occur about 200 B.c., but few now surviving are much
earlier than the reign of Augustus. Chief among them are the triumphal arches
erected to emperors and generals, commemorating victorious campaigns. Such
arches were adorned with appropriate bas-reliefs and usually carried gilt-bronze
statuary on an attic storey, the latter having a dedicatory inscription on its face.
They had either one or three openings, two of the latter being footways, and the
piers were ornamented with Corinthian or Composite pilasters or columns:
slightly detached, full columns often were used after the early second century A.D.
The Arch of Tiberius, Orange (c. 30 B.C.) (p. 226A). In A.D. 25, Tiberius added
222 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

his inscription to this monument, built before his reign. Triple openings, which
appear here, are rare before the second century A.D. The arch is very ornate, with
a double attic, and has Corinthian three-quarter columns flanking the central open-
ing and at the outer angles. There also are attached columns at the side, and,
remarkably for its early date, the inner pair carries a false arch above an entablature
broken back sympathetically to receive it.
The Arch of Titus, Rome (A.D. 82) (p. 223), of the single-opening type, com-
memorates the capture of Jerusalem. On each main face there are attached columns
flanking the opening and at the outer angles, and these are the earliest known
examples of the fully-developed Roman Composite Order (p. 223G). The soffit of
the archway is ornamented with deeply recessed coffers, and a relief in the centre
represents the apotheosis of Titus. On one side of the opening is a carved relief of
the Emperor in a triumphal car, and on the other is a representation of the spoils
taken from the Temple at Jerusalem. The keystones, which project considerably
to support the main architrave, are also richly carved and are faced with figures of
Roma and Fortuna (p. 223A). The attic storey, with the dedication, was originally
surmounted by a bronze quadriga (p. 223F).
The Arch of Trajan, Ancona (A.D. 113) (p. 224J) was erected astride a cause-
way in honour of that emperor, who had made the harbour. It is of marble and is
well preserved, although its bronze enrichments have disappeared. It is approached
by a flight of steps and has a high podium with an archway Io ft wide, flanked on
both sides by pairs of fluted Corinthian columns on pedestals, supporting an
entablature and attic stage for inscriptions. The total height is 61 ft.
The Arch of Trajan, Beneventum (A.D. I14) (p. 377D) is one of the_best-pre-
served Roman structures in South Italy; in arrangement it is similar to the arch of
Titus, Rome, and like it, has Composite column-capitals. It is of Greek marble;
and the profuse bas-reliefs commemorate Trajan’s Dacian wars and triumphs.
There are other single arches at Pola (c. 30 B.C.), Rimini (27 B.c.), Aosta (25 B.C.),
S. Rémy (c. 25 B.c.) and Susa (7 B.c.). The archways in London at Hyde Park
Corner and Constitution Hill are modern examples of the type.
The Arch of the Goldsmiths, Rome (A.D. 204) (p. 223H, J, K), erected in
honour of Septimius Severus, is not a triumphal arch, nor is it of arched construc-
tion, for the opening is spanned by a horizontal entablature; while the workman-
ship is poor and over-elaborated. It adjoins the Campanile of the Church of S.
Giorgio in Velabro.
The Arch of Septimius Severus, Rome (A.D. 203) (pp. I7IA, 182, 224A-G, 377E),
of the triple-arch type, was dedicated to the Emperor and his two sons to com-
memorate their Parthian victories. It is of white marble, and the three archways
rest on piers, in front of which are detached Composite columns on pedestals. The
central archway, with a richly coffered semicircular vault, has lateral openings
to the side archways. On the summit, all in bronze, were statues of the Emperor
and his two sons, Caracalla and Geta, in a six-horse chariot, with soldiers on either
side.
The Arch of Constantine, Rome (A.D. 312) (p. 224H), built in honour of Con-
stantine’s victory over Maxentius, is of fine proportions. It has eight monolithic
detached Corinthian columns supporting an entablature returned back to the wall,
and on the attic storey was a quadriga. Much of the decorative sculpture was
brought from earlier monuments of the time of Trajan, and represents incidents of
his reign.
Commemorative arches sometimes were erected on bridges, as at Saintes (A.D.
17), where there were twin passageways, or the Roman bridge at Alcantara (A.D.
105-16) (p. 239).
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 223

FE5SOy

ZG

K——43'-85—>
PLAN

lay
> of oun ak

N TAN

TW

FIGURE IN
SPANDRIL

( JELEVATION:
 224 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

ARCH OF SEPTIMIUS SEVERUS ; ROME ~76'- 4"

i PATRLE-PARTHOO- ARABICO-ET
ius)
“PROPAGATYM
“SP

,—
——
>}
—
-—
"3"
-——
—

Ee |< -
JM
a “all

eee: 25" aS) (}

6S
=
[<9 Roel

‘jae to CAPITOL
SCA

D PLAN
SCALE FOR ELEVATIONS & SECTION
FRONT AND SIDE. ELEVATIONS 0 5
OF KEYSTONE bene

i'
COFFERS
OF

| SOFFITE

as

DETAILS OF | UH
CENTRAL ARCH TEs Ses CAPITAL & ENTABLATL
OTHER TRIUMIPAAL ARCHES

) Va iis Le oe
(H)arcH © CONSTANTINE:ROM RCH? TRAJAN:“ANCONA |ARCH pCARACALLANTEBESSA: NAFR
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 225

TOWN GATEWAYS AND ARCHWAYS

Town gateways were of three main types: (1) those forming part of the protective
wall circuit, usually simple, but sometimes elaborated into commemorative monu-
ments; (2) ornamental portals to forums, market places or other large enclosures;
(3) arches built at main street intersections, particularly when the main streets were
colonnaded, as in many towns in North Africa and Syria. Gateways of the first
type, in town walls, might have one main archway and a footway on each side, or,
more often, two main archways, with or without a pair of side footways.
1. The Porte S. André (p.216G) and the Porte d’Arroux, Autun, probably of the
time of Augustus, have four archways, two for vehicles and two for pedestrians.
Above the openings are arcaded galleries, connecting the ramparts on either side,
decorated with pilasters of the Ionic Order in the case of the Porte S. André, and of
the Corinthian in the other.
The Porte de Mars, Rheims (first century A.D.), which now lacks its entabla-
ture and upper parts, is of grand dimensions, about 108 ft wide. It has three open-
ings, those on the flanks almost as large as that in the centre. The piers are deco-
rated with pairs of Corinthian attached columns on both back and front, and as too
there is a pair of attached columns on the sides, the arch must always have been
free-standing and is not an ordinary gateway.
Little survives of the gateways of the walled towns of Roman Britain, such as
London, York, Chester, Colchester and Lincoln.
The Porta Nigra, Tréves (c. A.D. 300) (p. 216F), though heavily ornamented
with tiers of crudely-carved Tuscan attached columns, enframing arcades above
the lowest stage, is truly a defensive gateway, with a double archway equipped
with portcullises and leading to an unroofed court which could be defended against
besiegers. Flanking semicircular towers form part of the structure, which is 115 ft
wide and reaches 9§ ft at its highest part.
2. The Portico of Octavia, Rome (p. 208A), erected by Augustus as a recon-
struction of an older arrangement, had a fine double colonnade, but only five
columns are still standing. The portico formed part of a rectangular peribolus
comprising 300 smaller columns, surrounding an enclosure in which stood temples
of Jupiter and Juno.
The Arch of Tiberius, Pompeii (p. 2268), one of several entrances to the forum,
is now divested of its former marbles.
3. The Arch of Caracalla, Tebessa (A.D. 214) (p. 224K), formerly stood at the
meeting of four roads in the centre of this ancient town in Algeria, but is now
attached to the city walls built by Justinian in A.D. 535. It occupies a square of
36 ft with archways 16 ft wide on each front, flanked by detached Corinthian
columns surmounted by an entablature having a frieze of unusual depth in order
to receive the inscription.
There was a similar four-sided arch at Palmyra, famous for its colonnaded
streets, as were Gerasa, also in Syria, and Timgad, in North Africa.
The Arch of Janus Quadrifrons, Rome (c. A.D. 315) (pp. 172A, 223M), in the
Forum Boarium, is another example of a four-way arch, but is of poor design. It
has a simple cross-vault (p. 223L) with embedded brick box-ribs at the groins,
affording a further instance of the progressive character of Roman constructive
techniques: such ribs are possibly the prototypes of Gothic ribbed vaults.

PILLARS OF VICTORY
Pillars of Victory or memorial columns were erected to record triumphs of victori-
ous generals.
H H.O.A.
226 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

B. Pompeii, the Forum, with the remains of the temple of Jupiter (/eft), the
covered market (right), and the Arch of Tiberius. See pp. 184, 225
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE Bar

Trajan’s Column, Rome (A.D. 113) (pp. 182B, 228), was adjacent to his
Basilica and stood in an open colonnaded court carrying galleries at different levels
from which the bas-reliefs on its shaft could be viewed (p. 2288). It is a Roman
Doric column, entirely of marble, with a total height of 115 ft 7 ins. In the pedestal,
ornamented with sculptured trophies, is an entrance to the tomb chamber of Trajan.
The shaft, 12 ft 2 ins in diameter, contains a spiral staircase lighted by small open-
ings and was originally surmounted by a bronze eagle, replaced by a bronze statue
of Trajan after his death. This in turn was removed at some time unknown, and
the present statue of S. Peter has crowned the column since 1588. The bas-relief
illustrating incidents of Trajan’s war with the Dacians were probably intended to
represent the unwinding of a parchment scroll (p. 228£, F). There were 2,500
human figures, full of dramatic vigour, and many incidents of military campaign-
ing by land and water, all carved on a spiral band over 800 ft long and about
3 ft 10 ins wide. There is a full-sized plaster reproduction in the Victoria and
Albert Museum.
The Column of Antoninus Pius, Rome (A.D. 161), of which the pedestal now
stands in the great hemicycle of the Giardino della Pigna of the Vatican (pp. 720A,
721B) was founded on the design of Trajan’s column.
The Column of Marcus Aurelius, Rome (A.D. 174) (p. 228), which stands in
the Piazza Colonna, commemorates the Emperor’s victory on the Danube. It
resembles Trajan’s column and formerly stood in front of a temple dedicated to
the Emperor. The marble pedestal is surmounted by a shaft 97 ft 3 ins high and
13 ft 2 ins in diameter, carved with remarkable spiral reliefs. The top is reached
by 197 steps and was crowned by the statue of Marcus Aurelius till it was replaced
(A.D. 1589) in the time of Pope Sixtus V by the existing statue of S. Paul. The
spiral band winds round the column in twenty tiers, and represents the campaigns
of Marcus Aurelius against the German tribes north of the Danube. One relief
(p. 228H) shows Marcus Aurelius, and another (p. 228J) represents a pontoon
bridge over which Roman troops with baggage are passing.
Rostral columns (pp. 171A, 228G) were frequently erected in the time of the
Emperors to celebrate naval victories, and took their name from the rostra, or
prows of captured ships, with which they were embellished, while an inscription
recorded the deeds which led to their erection.
PALACES
The Palaces of the Emperors, Rome (p. 232), are impressive even as
ruins, of which enough remain to show their vast extent and imposing character.
Excavations on the Palatine Hill have revealed remains of a group of magnificent
palaces to which successive emperors, notably Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula,
Domitian and Septimius Severus, made their contribution. The palaces, which
crowned the Palatine and looked down on the centre of civic life in the valley
below, were approached from the Forum Romanum by sloping ways of which the
chief was the Clivus Palatinus, which branched off from the Via Sacra, west of
the Arch of Titus.
Quite a little still survives of the modest house of the second half of the first
century B.c. which Augustus purchased for his own occupation (p. 232E 16) and
extended; but a substantial part of the remains on the Palatine are due to new
buildings and drastic reconstructions carried out for Domitian by his architect,
Rabirius. The main elements of Domitian’s palace (p. 232E) were the State Suite
(21); the private apartments (the so-called ‘Palace of Augustus’) (10), which at a
lower level had a grand segmental portico and stepped terraces overlooking the
Circus Maximus lying below the south-west slope of the hill; and a large walled
 228 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

COLUMN # TRAJAN (COLUMN ¢ MLAURELIUS

: \ROM | $ \
‘I

> |

nis
OB
rare
==
5
nas
—-—-—-—->
ha

=a=
—
—mas

waren —
[}
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 229
garden (8), with a great hemicycle (7) on one long side, behind which were baths
buildings. The latter were partly rebuilt by Septimius Severus, who also made
massive additions in this locality (9).
Domitian’s palace affords a splendid instance of Roman axial planning, with the
magnificent vistas it allowed, and of the devices used to mask awkward changes of
alignment. The grandest part of the palace was the State Suite. The north-eastern
portico (p. 232A; E 21 H), of cippolino columns, led into the public halls, the
Tablinum or throne-room (21 F), flanked on one side by the Temple of the Lares
or Imperial household gods (21 £), and on the other by the Basilica or Hall of
Justice (21 G). Thus, according to tradition, the Imperial power was firmly planted,
in architectural planning at any rate, between religion and justice. Directly beyond
the throne-room was the Peristyle (21 pD), a rectangular garden surrounded by
marble colonnades designed for court life and pageantry. This, in its turn, opened
into the Triclinium or Banqueting Hall (21 B), with its three couches for reclining
guests. This social sanctum of time-honoured hospitality was remote from the dis-
traction of the public courts and looked out into the peristyle and two nymphaea
or open gardens with flowering plants, playing fountains, and running water. Not
only were the Imperial palaces on the Palatine imposing in extent, plan, and pro-
portions, but both within and without they were decorated on the grand scale and
in a manner made familiar to us by the revelations of the buried city of Pompeii.
The floors were worked in conventional and pictorial mosaics for which the crafts-
men of Italy are still famous; the walls were relieved by marble columns and
painted with frescoes, and the ceiling vaults were modelled in low-relief stucco
picked out with bright colours, while everywhere there were niches for the splendid
statues brought from conquered Greece.
The Golden House of Nero, Rome (4.D. 65), built after the great fire in the
city, has become a synonym for all that is magnificent in royal palaces, but it was
destroyed by the Flavian Emperors and made room for the Colosseum and Im-
perial Thermae. Pliny describes the lavish ornamentation and fittings, and Raphael
drew inspiration from its buried frescoes.
The Palace of Diocletian, Spalato (Split) (A.D. 300) (p. 231) forms the greater
part of the Mediaeval town of Spalato in Dalmatia, which has therefore been called
a city in a house. This magnificent palace, with its imposing arcade, stretches along
the sea-front of the Adriatic and may be described as a royal country house, or a
chateau by the sea. Its original appearance can be well understood from the
restored view (p. 231C). The plan of the palace was approximately rectangular,
Occupying 8 acres, almost equal in extent to the Escorial in Spain (p. 853). There
was a square tower at each angle, and in the centre of the north, east, and west
sides were the ‘golden’, ‘silver’, and ‘iron’ gateways, flanked by octagonal towers
with sub-entrances to broad, colonnaded avenues, 36 ft wide, which met in the
centre and gave the palace the character of a Roman camp. The two northern
portions were probably for guests and principal officers of the household; while
across the southern portion there were the Imperial apartments, flanked by two
courts in one of which stood Diocletian’s Mausoleum, described earlier (p. 218),
and in the other, a temple dedicated to Jupiter. A vestibule, circular inside and
preceded by a porch of four columns in antis led to a suite of spacious rooms
fronting south on to a grand arcaded gallery, 524 ft long and 24 ft wide, overlooking
the sea, which probably contained works of art besides serving for leisurely pro-
menades (cf. Elizabethan gallery, p. 882). Centrally below the gallery was a water-
gate, the Porta Aenea or Brazen Gate. Elsewhere, the outer walls of the palace
were lined internally on three sides with cells for slaves and soldiers of the Imperial
retinue. Besides the novel construction of the vault of the mausoleum (p. 218)
230 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

there are other features of this fortress-like building which give it a transitional
character and foreshadow future developments. Its architecture is still classical,
but is debased and hints strongly of the Byzantine, especially in the flattened pro-
file of the mouldings and the fretted running ornament (cf. p. 300). Also, the arch
form appears here in a connection for which there are few precedents in earlier
Roman work. Above the northern gateway there are decorative arches springing
directly from the capitals of columns (p. 231A), and the portal itself has a decorative
archivolt above a flat lintel made up of joggled voussoirs. Similarly, the Corinthian
columns flanking the approach to the vestibule of the Imperial apartments carry
arches from their capitals, and over the central intercolumniation of the porch the
whole entablature is turned into an arch (p. 231B). Thus here are early instances of
a principle which was carried to its logical conclusion in the Romanesque and
Gothic styles.
ROMAN HOUSES
Roman dwelling-houses are of three types: (a) The domus or private house; (6) the
villa or country house; and (c) the insula or many-storeyed tenement.
(a) The domus or private house combined the features of the old Italic or
Etruscan dwelling with other elements derived, about the second century B.c., from
the Greek house. An atrium formed the more public portion of the building and
beyond was the peristyle of Greek origin, the centre of the family apartments.
The ‘Atrium Vestae’, Rome (c. A.D. 66) (pp. I7IB, 182B) or House of the
Vestals, much modified in the late second century A.D., was a special kind of
dwelling near the Forum where lived the six Vestal Virgins who tended the sacred
fire in the adjacent Temple of Vesta. Rooms were arranged in two storeys along-
side a great colonnaded court, 180 ft by 48 ft, with a large, vaulted hall and other
principal apartments across the rear short end.
The House of Livia, Rome (c. 55 B.C.) (p. 232E 16), on the Palatine, which the
Emperor Augustus purchased for his own use, is the most interesting of the remains
of a domus in the Imperial city.
Pompeii and Herculaneum were provincial towns buried by deposits of volcanic
ash at the devastating eruption of Vesuvius in A.D. 79. Pompeian houses were thus
remarkably preserved. Excavations show how the lay-out of the town was greatly
enlarged, c. fifth century B.C., either by the Etruscans or the Samnites, who secured
power in turn, from a small and irregular settlement of the Oscans, the earliest
inhabitants, into an extensive but still modest market town of some 160 acres. The
new part had a regular ‘grid-iron’ street arrangement, cutting the building sites into
rectangular blocks. The streets were very narrow, 8, 12 or 15 ft wide, while the
widest were 23 ft 6 ins with a roadway 13 ft 6 ins and paths 5 ft wide. Houses were
spaciously laid out at first, but as the town became congested, small houses and
shops grew up around them and lined the street frontages, while second storeys
became increasingly common. The Romans had become masters in 80 B.c. By
Imperial times Pompeii had become thoroughly Latinized, and Greek influences,
which had been important throughout, gave place to the Roman. In the last phases
before the eruption, commerce and industry were encroaching upon the dwellings
of the patricians, and they and the wealthy citizens had begun to move out beyond
the obsolete defensive walls to nearby suburbs and villas.
The rooms of a Pompeian mansion were lighted by openings on to internal courts,
as in Mediaeval times in England and France, and as in Eastern houses to this day;
some of the courts were small, but the light is strong in sunny Italy. Braziers were
used for heating. The domestic water supply was drawn from wells or was rain-
water collected from roofs until in the first century B.c. a branch aqueduct was
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 231

FALACE OF DIOCLETIAN : SFALATO

i

PERISTYLIUM

EET MTRS
7

| I
| F |
a
100 -- 60 " i

a ‘al ate

ji vin GYNAECEUM = , i “a5 Hi

5 * WOMENS - <i,
L si. APARTMENTS a = i. Le \

100-|. 30
ie
eo
aaeer
|
regi nated
,
©

sl c a
oO
oe
iy <a |
e! 2 a is |
i | om |
= ul aaa ee eee Sl :
PORTA PORTA
peo FERREA ARGENTEA
a | E

|Oo-+30 |

FREEDMANS|
ROOM

EMPERORS foscus OR HALL

BED CHAMBER < *
wooed? * * $Sbeoe i
ae eee ee e ATRIUM e eeceeeee '

+ BASILICA eo ° . eEGYPTIAN*
«FOR . . ° . .
ENTERTAINMENTS, { HACE
aes Se al aw ; eoeeeeee

GRAN GALLE
s PORTA AENEA UNDER
Sa 0 =I8) = Se
PLA RESTORE
592: One aa
232 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

c. The Basilica D. The Triclinium

REFERENCE REFERENCE
TABLE TABLE

1. CLIVUS 15. HOUSE OF

PALATINUS GERMANICUS
. SOLDIERS 16. HOUSE OF
BARRACKS LIVIA
GATEWAY 17 CRYPTO -
PORTICUS
| TEMPLE OF
APOLLO 18. HOUSE OF
TIBERIUS
. PERIBOLUS
OF TEMPLE 19. HOUSE OF
OF APOLLO CALIGULA

APOLLINE 20.TEMPLE OF
LIBRARIES JUPITER
STATOR
EXEDRA OF
DOMITIAN N |. STATE APART-
MENTS OF
. WALLED GARDEN DOMITIAN
OF DOMITIAN . NYMPHAEUM
PALACE OF
. TRICLINIUM
SEVERUS OR BANQUET- }.
PALACE OF ING HALL
AUGUSTUS NYMPHAEUM
. PEDAGOGIUM PERISTYLE
OR TRAINING
SCHOOL FOR LARARIUM
COURT PAGES i TABLINUM
OR THRONE
. ACADEMY
ROOM
. ACADEMY
avery BASILICA OR

Ke
TEMPLE OF HALL OF
JUPITOR
VICTOR eli JUSTICE
. PORTICO

E. Plan
The Palaces of the Emperors on the Palatine Hill, Rome (restored)
(Commenced A.D. 3 and continued by the Emperors till A.D. 212). See p. 227
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 233

made; profuse supplies then were carried in leaden pipes to domestic taps in all
but the smallest dwellings, and to street and garden fountains and basins. Despite
the three public baths in the town, most of the larger houses had their own bath-
room suites.
The House of the Surgeon, Pompeii (fourth century B.C.) (p. 249F), represents
the oldest type of house, as yet unaffected by Greek influence. All its chief rooms
were arranged around an ‘atrium’, a covered court of which only a small central
portion was open to the sky.
The House of Pansa, Pompeii (second century B.C.) (pp. 234, 238A), illustrates
the typical domus or family mansion, fully developed. It comprises two main
portions; the atrium, or forepart, which served for formal occasions as well as
normal use; and a rear or ‘peristyle’ portion, which was the more intimate, private
part. The first of these, the atrium, is the traditional Italic house, which in the
House of the Surgeon represents the entire dwelling; the second, the colonnaded
peristyle, is an additional chief element derived from the Greek house, becoming
common from the early second century B.c. From this latter time too, Greek influ-
ence caused columns sometimes to be used to support the margins of the roof
opening or ‘compluvium’ of an enlarged atrium, which in the original lacked
columns. Privacy was assured for the whole house since all the rooms, with rare
exceptions, faced inwards towards atrium or peristyle, light being gained for them
through tall doorways with metal grilles within their doors or hung with curtains.
Window glass was rare, even in Pompeii’s last days. Encircling the House of Pansa
on three sides were shops, bakeries and three smaller dwellings. A ‘prothyrum’ or
entrance passage led from the street to the atrium, where a central, shallow rect-
angular basin or ‘impluvium’ was sunk in the pavement directly below the com-
pluvium opening in the ‘lean-to’ roof above, which sloped down four ways towards
it. The atrium also contained the shrine of the family gods, and near to the im-
pluvium there stood a marble table, a traditional survival of the ancient banqueting
board (p. 249J). An open living-room or ‘tablinum’ was curtained off between the
atrium and the peristyle, and at the side was a passage, the ‘fauces’. The peristyle,
enframed by sixteen Ionic columns, was laid out with flower beds and graced with
statuary, fountains and water-basins. ‘Cubicula’ or bedrooms, ‘triclinia’ or dining-
rooms with different aspects for summer and winter, the ‘oecus’ or reception-room,
and ‘alae’ or recesses for conversation surrounded the peristyle. Dining-rooms were
fitted with three couches for nine people, the recognized number for a Roman
feast. Floors were decorated with mosaics and walls with fresco paintings. The
kitchen and pantry were at the side of the peristyle, farthest from the entrance,
but convenient for the side street. There was a series of small upper rooms round
the atrium and peristyle.
The House of the Vettii, Pompeii (A.D. first century) (p. 234D, F) differs
from others in that the atrium, owing to the restricted site, adjoins the peristyle.
The kitchen, with its cooking apparatus still 7 stu, and the triclinium, with its
wall frescoes representing Classical myths, are typical of many other houses.
The Houses of the Faun, Diomede, Sallust, and the Tragic Poet are
typical residences, with floors, walls, and vaulted ceilings decorated in the char-
acteristic Pompeian style, and furnished with candelabra, lamps, vases, statues,
and fountains, many of which are in the Naples and Pompeii Museums (pp. 249,
250). The floors were of patterned mosaic, in black and white (p. 249H, K) or
coloured marbles. The walls were painted, unpretentiously at first, but from c. 200
B.c. in fresco decorations in a series of ‘styles’: the first imitated coloured marble
veneering, in paint and modelled stucco (second century to 80 B.C.)5 the second
shows either architecturally-enframed panels of large paintings or the realistic and
 234 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

HOUSE OF PANSA: POMPEII

a See(UT Sw IUFUDVONNVONGDOROERUOAGOUOAGTNGTOOOAOGOUDS! —
isi l
atl ee |

dee MM a YLT, «sR WH HM NM a 4 mem YI"

LONGITUDINAL Se os a
| eae

‘ ATRIUM

PROTHYRUM

HOUSE OF TIAIE WETIM:

POMPEM -° (ROMAN)
Fr mts
SOnIS

O75 IS

XTERIOR ai Pec anes

FROM N.
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 235
robust representation of architectural elements, in the shape of arcades, colonnades
and other spatial scenes (80 B.C.-A.D. 14); in the third, wall panels have architectural
frames but of unrealistic, slender and often grotesque ‘Egyptian’ elements sur-
rounding small, isolated pictures of Greek character, though vistas still appear,
especially in the frieze (A.D. 14-63) (p. 249G); and in the fourth, vistas of
fantastically-slender and fragile shrines, porticoes and similar structures occupy
the whole body of the wall (overlaps with third style—a.D. 50-79) (cf. p. 249B). Ceil-
ings and vaults, covered with stucco, had frescoed decoration related to that of the
walls. Roofs were covered externally with tiles. The remains of these houses, as
excavated in such cities as Pompeii and Timgad, reveal in the details of their
arrangement the everyday life of Roman citizens.
(6) The villa or country house. Hadrian’s Villa, Tivoli (A.D. 124) resembled a
city, for, with its surroundings and gardens (p. 24ID), it occupied about seven
square miles. Besides the Imperial apartments there were terraces, colonnades,
palaestrae, theatres, and thermae. Apart from this exceptional palatial example,
villas abounded in the more attractive parts of the Empire, once peaceful condi-
tions had been securely established. In type they ranged from luxurious country
retreats, replete with every urban innovation, to modest farmsteads with a minimum
of residential refinement. Few villas were erected in Britain primarily for pleasure.
The average villa, however, combined comfort with utility, the elegant suite of
rooms of the well-to-do owner being segregated from the working parts, operated
by slaves in the charge of an overseer. Buildings were arranged around a court or
a peristyle, or, after the first century A.D., were often of the ‘corridor’ type in which
a single bank of rooms was connected by open or closed porticoes running exter-
nally. Adaptations were made for climatic conditions; a bath house was regularly
present in the later villas of Roman Britain (Ch. x11).
(c) The insula or apartment block was far more common than the domus in
Rome, where space was very precious; and also in Ostia, the port of Rome, where
large numbers of workers had to be adjacent to the docks (pp. 237A, 241C). Flat
blocks rose four, five and even more storeys high, and Augustus and Nero in turn
vainly placed restrictions of 68 ft and 58 ft upon them. Built economically of brick-
faced concrete, with architectural dressings in a deeper colour, their appearance
was surprisingly modern. Continuous balconies in concrete or timber, sometimes
enclosed, were a frequent feature (p. 237A). Rooms of each flat were reached one
through the other from common stairs (p. 237A), and numerous large windows
faced both ways to surrounding streets and alleys and on to large internal, garden
courts. Window glass was rare, and folding shutters or hanging cloths must largely
have been used. Ground floor flats sometimes were occupied by the wealthy, but
otherwise served, as at Pompeii, for workshops and bakeries or for “tabernae’,
shops or miniature dwellings of one open-fronted room, with a wooden-floored
loft over, reached by a few stone steps and a ladder (pp. 185D, 186). Well water
sufficed until the aqueducts came, but even then, water did not reach upper floors
and their tenants had to use street fountains and public baths and latrines. Fire risk
was very high. Heating and cooking were by brazier and stove.

AQUEDUCTS
Ruined aqueducts throughout the Empire show the importance attached by the
Romans to an adequate water supply. Immense quantities of water were required
for the great thermae and for public fountains, to say nothing of the domestic
supply for the large population, and it has been computed that 350,000,000 gallons
were daily poured into Rome through the eleven great aqueducts. The Romans
were acquainted with the simple hydrostatic law that water rises to its own level
236 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

in closed pipes, and in towns, water was distributed to public buildings, street
fountains, workshops and the ground floor of dwellings by lead pipes (or some-
times of terra-cotta or wood) from large reservoirs and cisterns located in suitable
positions for the regulation of supplies. Occasionally too, the trunk supply was
siphoned across deep valleys, the water being divided for the purpose into nine or
ten small-bore (c. 14 ins) lead pipes between reservoirs at each side; for the Romans
were unable to make cast-iron pipes or to devise other trustworthy means of with-
standing the great pressures occasioned in the process. Usually, since labour was
abundant, it was more practicable to build tiers of stone or concrete arches, some-
times 100 ft high, over ravines and low-lying places, to make tunnels through
obstructions of earth or rock, and otherwise by the most direct means to maintain
a slight but consistent fall for the water-conveying duct or ‘specus’ from the
springs or rivers at the source to the reservoir where distribution began. Circuitous
routes were often necessary. Across plains, particularly outside towns, an aqueduct
had to be raised high enough to give a sufficient ‘head’ to the supply, and the use
of arches obviated obstruction to traffic. The ducts varied in dimension according
to need—from 13 ft to 4 ft wide and from 2 ft to 8 ft high—and were lined with a
very hard hydraulic cement.
The Aqua Marcia, Rome (144 B.c.), forms part of a triple aqueduct which, by
the Porta S. Lorenzo, carried the Aqua Marcia, the Aqua Tepula (127 B.c.), and
the Aqua Julia (33 B.c.)}—an economical arrangement by which several channels,
one above the other, are carried by one series of arches.
The Aqua Claudia, Rome (A.D. 38) (p. 242A), built by the Emperors Caligula
and Claudius, brought water to Rome from Subiaco, 45 miles distant; part of its
length is on solid masonry, and for 94 miles it is borne on lofty arches, great
lengths of which remain in the Campagna. It is probably the finest of all Roman
aqueducts, and some of the arches are over 100 ft high. Three miles from Rome it
is joined by the Anio Novus (A.D. 38), 62 miles in length.
The Pont du Gard, Nimes, France (c. A.D. 14) (pp. 216E, 2428), forms part of
a magnificent aqueduct, 25 miles long, constructed to bring water to Nimes from
the neighbourhood of Uzes. It is well preserved, 882 ft long, and formed of three
tiers of arches, crossing the valley 155 ft above the river Gard. In the two lower
tiers the arch above the river is the widest and the others vary in width, while in
the uppermost tier there are thirty-five arches of 14 ft span, supporting the ‘specus’
or water channel. Except for the top tier, the masonry is laid dry, without mortar,
and some of the arch voussoirs of the intermediate tier were made to project to
carry the temporary wooden framing or centering on which the arch was formed
(p. 242B).
Aqueducts at Tarragona, Segovia (c. A.D. 10) (p. 241B), Spalato, and elsewhere
testify to the importance attached to a good water supply, and the regulations
throw a light on Roman administrative methods in the Imperial City and Roman
Provinces.

BRIDGES
Roman bridges were simple, solid, and practical in construction and designed to
offer a well-calculated resistance to the rush of water. The roadway usually sloped
upwards a little at the approaches, but otherwise was level. Early bridges were of
timber, which was used too for the lesser constructions at all times, though often
with stone piers. The finest were of stone. Very great spans were achieved when
necessary; the arch of an Augustan bridge near Aosta, in north-west Italy, was
117 ft across.
The Pons Sublicius, Rome (p. 245A), was for long the only bridge across the
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 237

ipa Wek re ee VN Irnras Da tod AL eds LP IN AULT Se MA

c. Mausoleum of Hadrian, Rome (restored) (c. A.D. 135). See p. 217

 238 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

XYSTUS OR GARDEN

OECUS OR PERISTYLE
RECEPTION ROOM

. : at =e

B. Roman bridge over the Tagus, Alcantara, Spain (A.D. 105-16). See opposite page

c. (Right) Pons Fabricius, Rome (62-21 B.C.). See opposite page

(Left) Pons Cestius
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 239
Tiber, and Livy records its destruction by the Roman garrison when the Etruscans
were advancing upon Rome; while Macaulay has immortalized the incident of its
defence by Horatius Cocles.
The Pons Mulvius, Rome (109 B.C.) (p. 2458), now known as the Ponte Molle,
has semicircular arches over massive piers with protecting ‘starlings’ or cut-waters
and extra arches above them to allow the flood waters to pass through. It was here
that Cicero arrested the Gaulish ambassadors and Maxentius met death and defeat
at the hands of Constantine (A.D. 312).
The Pons Fabricius, Rome (62-21 B.c.) (pp. 238, 241E), with its flood water
aperture and starlings, is one of the best preserved Roman bridges. Each of its
twin arches spans about 80 ft.
The Bridge of Augustus, Rimini (A.D. 14—20) (p. 245C), is the best preserved and
one of the finest ancient structures in Italy, with its stretch of five arches over the
river Marecchia.
The Roman Bridge, Alcantara (A.D. 105-16) (pp. 222, 238B), the larger arches of
which are nearly 90 ft wide, exemplifies one of two impressive types found in
Spain, viz. (a) the many-arched type, of which that at Salamanca (p. 634A), of
extreme length, is an example; (b) the single-arched type, such as the later Moorish
and Gothic bridge at Toledo which, with the romantic sweep of its gigantic arch,
spans the rocky valley of the Tagus (p. 645B).

FOUNTAINS
Fountains (Ch. xx) are striking features of ancient and modern Rome, on
account of their graceful design and the splashing of clear water in a hot and
crowded city. Public fountains, which were numerous, amounting to many hun-
dreds in the various Roman cities, were designed either as a large basin of water
(‘lacus’), or as spouting jets (‘salientes’), or the two were combined with marble
columns and statues. Private fountains existed in great numbers, mainly in the
courts and gardens of houses, with great variety of design in coloured marbles and
porphyries, and were often decorated with bronze statuettes. The water sometimes
issued from fishes, shells, or other objects supported by a figure of a nymph and
sometimes from lions’ heads in wall niches lined with mosaics, as at Pompeii.
The ancient Roman regard for running waters, which almost amounted to
adoration, found expression not only in triumphant aqueducts and monumental
thermae, but also in these numberless fountains in the cities which made up that
great Empire. Water, ever fresh and ever changing, was used to commemorate
great men and noble deeds. Water-shrines as sculptured fountains honoured the
dead and served the living. This cult of water in Classic times became a continuous
tradition, and we have only to look on the fountains of Mediaeval and Renaissance
Rome to realize how much the city owes of charm to this universal display of
gushing and falling waters. Great is the mystery of water and its courses and there
are other waters in this city of many centuries, which, buried under much building
are now only known as the hidden waters of Rome (pp. 730B, 754F; H).
240 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
GREEK ROMAN
PLANS. Plans display simplicity, beauty, PLANS. Plans convey an impression of
and perfection of proportions which give vastness and magnificence, and are char-
dignity and grandeur in spite of small- acteristic of a powerful and energetic
ness of scale. Unity and symmetry re- race. The Romans were pre-eminently
sulted from the self-contained character great constructors, and by their concen-
of the temples, while varied and unsym- tration on practical problems were able
metrical planning occurs only in certain to erect public buildings of enormous
buildings like the Erechtheion (pp. 109, size, like the thermae and basilicas (pp.
134F). The Greek ideal of life lent much 200B, E, 203B), besides temples (pp. 189B,
more importance to religious than to E, H, 199B) and many types of utilitarian
utilitarian buildings, for which there was structures, such as aqueducts and bridges
only a restricted need, due to the inde- required by the expanding civilization of
pendence of the numerous city-states. the Roman Empire (pp. 238B, C, 242).
The post and beam or trabeated form of The arch, vault, dome and roof-truss were
construction made for simplicity and did the keynotes to the system of construc-
not allow such variety and boldness of tion. The arch and the timber roof-truss
plan as did the arcuated Roman style. made it possible to span wide openings;
There is no mingling of constructive vaults and domes could be thrown over
principles in Greek buildings, and the large and complicated plans in which
structural limitations of the trabeated square and semicircular recesses (p. 203B)
style prevented the novel developments gave boldness and variety, while the com-
to which the arcuated style gave rise. bination of trabeated and arcuated styles
permitted novel types of plans.
The true arch with voussoirs was rarely The true arch with wedge-shaped blocks
used before 300 B.c., though the prin- was continued from Etruscan times. In-
ciple was known by Sth cent. B.c. if not tersecting vaults concentrated the weight
before; while ‘false’ or corbelled arches of the superstructure on piers (p. 200C-F),
were quite frequent in Aegean architec- instead of distributing it along a contin-
ture. The Treasury of Atreus, Mycenae, uous wall as in the ‘Temple of Diana’,
has a domical, pointed vault of diminish- Nimes (p. 192) (a step towards Gothic
ing rings of stones laid on horizontal beds methods of construction).
(p. 100A).
Greek temples were usually orientated, so Roman temples, regardless of orientation,
that the rising sun might light up the faced the adjacent forum so as to be easy
statue (p. 122G). of access.
WALLS. As walls were built without mor- WALLS. The Romans revolutionized wall
tar, there was a tendency to employ large construction by the use of concrete. This
stones, so as to reduce the number of novel and durable building material
joints and thus minimize the weakness was not special to any country, as suit-
they might cause. Aegean defensive able ingredients could be had almost any-
walls were of massive, ‘Cyclopean’, uncut where. Walls were very thick and their
boulders; the Greeks perfected ‘Poly- outer casings might be of regular coursed
gonal’ masonry, an advanced type with rubble or of brick, whilst fragments of
extremely fine joints. For the best work, these materials served for cores, laid in a
large, rectangular blocks of stone or lavish mortar of lime and ‘pozzolana’ or
marble were carefully bonded and secured sand (p. 168). These walls were com-
together by metal cramps and dowels. posite in character, and thus differed
Coarse stone frequently was covered with essentially from those of the Greeks.
polished stucco; marble blocks were fitted Ashlar masonry still was used forthe finest
so exactly together that the joints were structures, following methods similar to
almost invisible. the Greek.
The Anta was employed to emphasize and The Pilaster, which corresponded to the
strengthen the angles of naos walls (pp. Anta, was used decoratively on walls in-
132C, 135A). stead of half-columns (pp. 189F, 196B).
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 241

x : : 2 }
| ___ SASo rmmemd
E § a et
I ae % ;
eboe
A. Basilica of Constantine, Rome (A.D. B. Aqueduct at Segovia, Spain, (c. A.D. 10).
310-13) (c. A.D. 66). See p. 201 See p. 236

c. West side of the ‘Casa di Diana’, a Dp. ‘Teatro Marittimo’, in the Villa of
block of flats at Ostia. See p. 235 Hadrian, Tivoli (A.D. 124). See p. 235

Carr ae Aircon DE Dy
E. Pons Fabricius, Rome (62-21 B.C.). F. Marine mosaic in the Baths of
See p. 239 Neptune, Ostia. See p. 179
242 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

Oe

B. The Pont du Gard, Nimes (c. A.D. 14). See p. 236

 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 243
GREEK ROMAN
OPENINGS. Colonnades, by providing OPENINGS. Colonnades and the new
variety in the play of light and shade, system of arcades were both in use in-
rendered openings in walls of minor im- ternally and externally, and the latter
portance in the design of the exterior, occur in storeys one above the other as
and indeed colonnades are the outstand- in the Colosseum (pp. 166A, 211A). Thus
ing features of Greek Architecture (p. colonnades were largely superseded by
103A),and were sometimes superimposed. arches and column-faced piers.
Doorways were square-headed and often Doorways were both square and semicir-
crowned with a cornice supported by cular-headed and became decorative fea-
consoles, as in the fine north doorway of tures of importance in the external design
the Erechtheion, Athens (p. 159D). of large public buildings, as in the Pan-
theon, Rome (p. 159A).
Windows, except on rare occasions (p. 107), Windows, generally semicircular-headed,
were not often used in temples, as light were frequently divided vertically by two
was obtained from the tall doorways, or mullions; but sometimes they were seg-
from metal grilles within the double mental, a shape produced after the re-
doors when the latter were closed. Some- moval of the wooden centering, by filling
times the naos was too large to be roofed in the side space vertically above the
(p. 107). springing line (p. 177F).
Roogs. These were always of timber fram- Roors. With vault, dome and roof-truss
ing (p. I54B) covered with terra-cotta or great spaces could be covered without
marble tiling, finished at the eaves with intermediate supports, and this repre-
antefixae (pp. IIOH, I117G)—or, in Ionic sented a tremendous architectural change.
temples, with a gutter-moulding or The concrete vaults demanded the de-
cymatium (p. 127D,E,F)—and at theangles velopment of methods of buttressing
of the pediments with acroteria (pp. which in certain respects resembled those
II7A, B, C, 122D). As the principle of the employed in western Gothic architecture
roof-truss was unknown before c. 3rd of later times; spans achieved by Roman
cent. B.C., interior columns had often to vaults were two to three times greater
be introduced to support the roof than those of English cathedrals. Roof
timbers of temples, usually arranged in coverings normally were terra-cotta tiles,
two tiers, divided by an architrave, not a but occasionally marble, or bronze, as in
full entablature. the Pantheon.
Ceilings of peristyles were coffered in Ceilings of temple peristyles had stone or
square or rectangular panels of carved marble coffers, at times elaborated into
stone or marble, as in the Theseion (p. geometrical patterns (p. 193C). Coffering
120H, J), the Parthenon (p. 122E, F), and was usual too on the underside of
Temple of Apollo Epicurius (p. 1248, C). vaults, domes and half-domes, or for
Coffered timbered ceilings were prob- timber ceilings, which alternatively
ably employed over the naos. might be flatly covered with low-relief,
painted stucco.
CoLUMNS. Primitive columns were of COLUMNS. The Orders (p. 160) were
timber, like the Aegean, but were com- often used in conjunction with the pier
paratively stumpy when first converted and arch, and then lost their structural
into stone. Their proportions became importance and became chiefly decora-
progressively lighter. The column with tive, as in the Colosseum and Triumphal
its entablature is the essence of Greek Arches. Columns were frequently un-
trabeated architecture (p. 160). Columns fluted monoliths, fluting being unsuitable
were usually constructed in ‘drums’, the to granite and veined marble.
flutes being cut after erection.
Orders were never superimposed in the Orders were often superimposed, as in the
Hellenic period, unless for construc- Colosseum (p. 212A). The Romans intro-
tional reasons, as in the interior of duced pedestals on which they placed the
temples, to support the roof timbers (pp. column to secure greater height. Canons
II4A,B, I16B, 117E, F, 122E, F, 154B), or in of proportions, as formulated by Vitru-
stoas of two storeys. They stood on vius, were gradually standardized for all
stepped crepidomas and instances of the Orders, which the Romans increased
 244 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

GREEK ROMAN
pedestals supporting columns are rare to five by adding the Tuscan and Com-
(e.g. the Temple of Artemis, Ephesus, posite.
p. 130). There were only three Greek
Orders.
The Tuscan Order, an even simpler form The Tuscan Order (p. 174) is a simplified
than the Doric, was not used by the version of the Greek Doric, due to the
Greeks. Etruscans (p. 181], K).
The Doric Order (pp. 113, 160A), sturdy The Doric Order (p. 160B), little used by
and dignified, was, with the Ionic, an the Romans, was too severely simple for
original Order from which the others the buildings they required. The Temple
developed later. It is without a base but of Hercules, Cora (p. 1608), is the only
stands ona crepidoma, and the capital has Roman temple in this style, but quasi-
a plain, square abacus, beneath which is Doric columns occur in the Theatre of
the echinus, which has a varying outline Marcellus (p. 208A). The Romans
(p. 113). Columns are usually fluted, and added a base, varied the abacus and
from being extremely sturdy became echinus, and sometimes used dentils
more slender in their proportions. The instead of mutules in the cornice. The
vertical plane of the architrave projects columns were usually unfluted. The
in advance of the face of the column, and architrave does not project beyond the
the triglyphs are over the central axes of face of the column, but is in the same
the columns except at the angles, where plane with it, and the triglyphs in the
the triglyph is at the extremity of the frieze were over the central axes of the
frieze (p. 144B). columns, even at the angles.
The channels in triglyphs are rounded at the The channels in triglyphs are rectangular
top. at the top.
The mutules, over triglyphs and metopes, The mutules, when present, usually occur
slope downwards with the soffit and pro- over triglyphs only and are but slightly
ject beneath it. inclined, not projecting below the
soffit.
The Jonic Order (pp. 127, 160C) was used The Ionic Order (p. 160D) of the Romans
with great refinement of line by the was less refined. Some late examples,
Greeks. The distinctive capital has the such as those at Pompeii and the Temple
scrolls showing on two sides only, al- of Saturn, have angle volutes, thus show-
though angle volutes are found at Bassae ing the scroll on all four sides (p. 1896, J).
(p. 127C).
The Corinthian Order (pp. 138, I160E) was a The Corinthian Order (p. 160F) was. the
development out of the Ionic Order, in- favourite of the Romans, and was used in
troduced late in the Hellenic period, al- the largest temples, as those of Castor
though the earliest known example in the and Pollux (p. 191) and Vespasian, Rome.
Temple of Apollo Epicurius, Bassae, The capital is very ornate and the leaves
dates from c. 450-425 B.c. The Order surrounding the ‘bell’ are often natural-
appears to have been used principally in istic and derived from the leaves of the
small buildings, such as the Monument of Acanthus mollis, which are blunt-ended
Lysicrates, Athens (334 B.C.)(p. I4IA-E). and flat in section (p. 1388), or from the
This is the first known instance of the Olive leaf, as in the Temple of Castor and
Order used externally, complete with its Pollux. The entablature is rich in carved
own entablature, which nevertheless is ornament (p. 191); in the cornice there
Tonic in character. In the Greek Corin- are ‘modillions’ (consoles or brackets),
thian the acanthus leaves surrounding first introduced in Rome in the late rst
the ‘bell’ of the capital were of the cent. B.c., which serve to distinguish it
prickly acanthus type (Acanthus spinosus) from the Ionic cornice. Between the
having pointed leaves of V-shaped section modillions, on the soffit of the corona,
(p. 138D). Shafts of columns were fluted, are sculptured coffers. Shafts of columns
as described at the commencement of were fluted or plain, whether in stone or
this section. marble.
The Composite Order was unknown to the The Composite Order (pp. 174, 223G, 224G),
Hellenic Greeks, but a somewhat similar invented by the Romans, first appears in
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 245

eo A
A. Pons Sublicius, Rome (restored). See p. 236

# ce

B. The Pons Mulvius (Ponte Molle), Rome (109 B.C.). See p. 239

cs 4 is iFa i

c. Bridge of Augustus, Rimini (A.D. 14-20). See p. 239

 246 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE

7 TNA

t s J Tmt ( if
Shy Pa

a ce |
LoomBANS yk6(P corniNERVA! Peony 7 oh
eae|FORUM_OF
OACIOIIOIOHC
l@ ORM OE bee =
Deee TG
ny
A Z ==

EC
SS 2p

PSTeT N= G
|
FENG, Oiouane —

any SHALE CAPITAL -

gues ‘ULTOR:ROME

=4

nednuvanevateranavar

CAPITAL: PORTION OF FRIEZE CAPITAL.

POMPEII TEMPLE OF ANTONINUS AND FAUSTINA POMPEI
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 247
GREEK ROMAN
treatment is seen in the carved anthemion the Arch of Titus, Rome (A.D. 82). The
ornament on the necking of the capitals entablature resembles the Corinthian;
in the Erechtheion. neither Order followed any strict rule.
MOULDINGS (pp. 164, 165). The Greeks MOULDINGS (pp. 164, 165). The Romans
relied for effect on the graceful contour on the contrary relied for effect on the
of their mouldings, which approach abundant carving on their mouldings
conic sections in profile and are often rather than on the contours, which are
decorated with carving of so delicate a usually parts of circles in profile. Osten-
character as not to obscure but enhance tation replaces refinement. Workman-
the grace of the outlines, as clearly shown ship frequently was coarse, due in part
in the illustrations. Executed in fine to the vast extent of Roman undertak-
marble, mouldings were often undercut ings and sometimes to the quality of the
so as to produce a fretted effect. stone employed.
Greek dentils are large, far apart and oc- Roman dentils are small, close together,
cupy the whole depth of the moulding. and finished with a fillet below (p. 223G).
Greek consoles were used only as vertical Roman consoles were used also horizon-
brackets to door cornices, as in the tally as modillions in cornices (p. 191C)
Erechtheion (p. 159E). and vertically as keystones (p. 223A).
ORNAMENT (pp. 157, 162, 163). The sculp- ORNAMENT (pp. 246, 249, 250). The Ro-
ture of the Greeks has never been mans recognized the pre-eminence of the
equalled, whether executed in isolated Greeks in sculpture or painting, and so
groups of statuary or within the boun- Greek artists were employed and Greek
daries of an architectural framing, as in sculpture was much prized and copied.
the pediments, metopes, and friezes of Both vaults and floors were often covered
the Parthenon. It is generally held that with mosaic (p. 241F). In the marble
exteriors of temples were coloured, at wall-facings and floors good effects were
least in part, and this must have added produced, as the Romans were connois-
greatly to the general effect. Polygnotos seurs in the use of marble. The ox-heads
and other great artists were employed for connected by garlands, so frequently
decorative painting upon temples and carved in Roman friezes, originated in
other buildings, and part of the Pro- the actual skulls and garlands hung on
pylaea was known as the ‘pinacotheca’ (see the altars after the beasts themselves had
Glossary). The early frescoes were prob- been slain. A fine marble cement was
ably in the style of the vase paintings of frequently used as a covering to walls and
that period, while the later, if judged from stone columns, to form a ground on
the provincial imitations at Pompeii, must which paintings could be executed, as at
have been grand and decorative. See Pompeii. The modelled plasterwork and
‘Comparative Analysis’ under Greek frescoes on the walls and vaults of the
Architecture (p. 156). Mosaic decoration Roman Thermae largely influenced the
for floors and walls was well-developed mural decorations of the Renaissance
by Hellenistic times. period (p. 249B).
The Anthemion or Honeysuckle was the The Acanthus scroll, boldly carved with
characteristic motif of Greek surface continuous stem and spirals, is specially
ornament and also of cyma recta mould- characteristic of Roman ornament and
ings (pp. 162D, 165A). friezes (p. 246E, G, M).
The Greeks, consciously or unconsciously, The Romans never seem to have been
practised extreme simplicity in art, and satisfied till they had loaded their monu-
the fine-grained marble in which much mental buildings with every possible
of their work was done encouraged the ornamental addition. Here too again the
tendency to leave purity of outline to influence of material is apparent; for con-
speak for itself. Thus, whether on the crete demanded a disguise, and coarse
grand scale of a temple building like the limestone did not permit of delicate
Parthenon or in the single human figure purity of line and thus called for extrane-
as the Hermes of Olympia, they were ous ornament, so the Romans completed
content with beauty unadorned by dis- the magnificence of their monuments by
tracting ornament. a wealth of decoration.
The perfection of Greek art lies in its The characteristic of Roman art lies in its
248 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE
GREEK ROMAN
simplicity. The Greeks were artists by forcefulness. The Romans were rulers by
nature, and Greek art was the outward nature, and Roman art was the outward
expression of the national love of beauty. expression of the national love of power.

REFERENCE BOOKS
ADAM, R. Ruins of the Palace of Diocletian at Spalato. London, 1764.
ANDERSON, W. J., SPIERS, R. P. and ASHBY, T. The Architecture of Ancient Rome.
London, 1927.
Baalbek. 2 vols. 4to, Berlin and Leipzig, 1921-3.
BLAKE, M. E. Ancient Roman Construction in Italy from the Prehistoric Period to Augustus.
Washington, 1947.
BIEBER, M. The History of the Greek and Roman Theatre. Princeton, N.J., 1939.
BLOUET, G.A. Restauration des Thermes d’ Antonin Caracalla 4 Rome. Paris, 1828.
BROGAN, O. Roman Gaul. London, 1953.
CAMERON, C. Description of the Baths of the Romans. London, 1772.
CARCOPINO, J. Daily Life in Ancient Rome, trans. Lorimer, E. O. London, 1946.
CARRINGTON,R.C. Pompei. Oxford, 1936.
CARY, M. Geographic Background of Greek and Roman History. Oxford, 1949.
CHOISY, A. L’ Art de bdtir chez les romains. Paris, 1856.
CORDINGLEY, R.A. and RICHMOND,I. A. ‘The Mausoleum of Augustus’. Fournal of the
British School at Rome, vol. X., 1927.
COURTOIS, Cc. Timgad. Algiers, 1951.
C0ZZO, G. Ingegneria romana. Rome, 1928.
D’ESPOUY, H. Fragments del’ architecture antique. 2 vols., folio. Paris, 1899.
D’ESPOUY et SEURE. Monuments antiques, 4 vols., Paris (1I9—).
DURM, J. Die Baukunst der Etrusker und Romer. Leipzig, 1905.
—. Handbuch der Architektur. Vol 2., Leipzig, 1905.
DUTERT, F. Le Forum romain et les forums de Fules Caesar, d’Auguste, de Vespasian, de
Nerva, et de Trajan. Paris, 1876.
FYFE, T. Hellenistic Architecture. Cambridge, 1936.
GIOVANNONI, G. La Tecnica della costruzione presso 1 Romani. Rome, 1925.
HAYNES,D.E.L. The Antiquities of Tripolitania. Rome, 1924. 1955.
HEBRARD, E. et ZEILLER, J. Spalato: Le palais de Dioclétien, relevés et restaurations. Paris,
1912.
LANCIANI,R. Ruins and Excavations of Ancient Rome. London, 1897.
MAU, A. Pompeu: Its Life and Art, trans. Kelsey, F. W. New York, 1902.
MEIGGS, R. Roman Ostia. Oxford, 1960.
MIDDLETON, J.H. The Remains of Ancient Rome. 2 vols., London, 1892.
MINOPRIO, A. ‘A Restoration of the Basilica of Constantine, Rome’. Journal of the British
School at Rome, vol. xii, 1933.
OVERBECK, J. Pompeii, revised Mau, A. Leipzig, 1884.
PALLADIO, ANDREA. I Quattro libri dell’ architettura. Venice, 1570, and other editions.
PALLOTTINO, M. The Etruscans, trans. Cremona, J. Penguin Books, Harmondsworth,
1955.
PAULIN, E. Thermes de Dioclétien. Paris, 1877.
PIERCE, S.R. “The Mausoleum of Hadrian and the Pons Aelius’, fournal of Roman Studies,
vol. xv, part I. 1925.
PLINY. Historia naturalis (A.D. 23-79).
RANDALL-MACIVER, D. The Etruscans. Oxford, 1927.
RICHMOND, I. A. Roman Britain. Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, 1955.
RIVOIRA, G. T. Roman Architecture. Oxford, 1925.
ROBERTSON, D.S.A Handbook of Greek and Roman Architecture. Cambridge, 1943.
STRONG, MRS. A. Roman Sculpture from Augustus to Constantine. London and New York,
1907.
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 249
Fe SS TS
<ce =<. rT o>
LEN
Ne ape oS
EE ZA} RTA CACA
GL LY EV LID iPoa
tm & ¥ As Y h Q

3
EE
¢0
LEE

‘i
LUN J Une
Nc aI AL ee <a
mT PUr

: | af A] i | b vanes ‘| IR) i

=. A
\
AOWRESTLE (C)WRESTLER
HERCULANEUM (B FRESCO: THERM OF TITUS: ROME HERCULANEUM

2. ATRIUM
3. ALAE

= 4, TABLINUM

i
PLAN: HOUSE OF THE
SURGEON POMPEII.

K)POMPEIAN MOSAIC een cti aE

PAVING
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE
cigs sii

WN a)
€

i
\ a
PLE @» ASCULAPIUS:
ALTAR:TEMPLE.
POMPEI!

Ob
BRONZE POMPEIAN
N e
GLADIATOR'S GLADIATORS
ae :
BRONZE ETRUSCAI
CANDELABRUM HELMET A MARBLE SEAT HELMET CANDELABRUM
 ROMAN ARCHITECTURE 251
TAYLOR, G.L. and CRESY,E. The Architectural Antiquities of Rome. London, 1821-2.
TOYNBEE, J. and PERKINS, J. Ww. The Shrine of St. Peter. London and New York, 1956.
VITRUVIUS. De Architectura. First printed (in Latin), Rome, c. 1486. Various English
translations.
WHEELER, SIR M. Rome Beyond the Imperial Frontiers. Penguin Books, Harmondsworth,
1954.
WISEMAN, F.J. Roman Spain. London, 1956.
WOOD,R. The Ruins of Palmyra; and the Ruins of Baalbec. 2 vols., London, 1753-7.

For Classic Orders, see:

NORMAND, C. A New Parallel of the Orders of Architecture. First printed London, 1829.
Various editions.
SPIERS,R.P. The Orders of Architecture. 5th ed., London, 1926.
STRATTON, A. The Orders of Architecture. London,'1931.

Temples of Portunus (left) (c. 31 B.C.) (p. 197) and Fortuna Virilis
(c. 40 B.C.) (p. 187), in the Forum Boarium, Rome
252 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE

inc 3AE SENS IETS

A. The basilican church of S. Apollinare in Classe, Ravenna (534-9). See p. 262

B. The basilican church of S. Apollinare in Classe, Ravenna. Nave looking E.

 d&
wa

3 Jerusalem
Bethleheln®
A

ae
28 Land over 3,000 fr, WE
fe) Miles 300
el

The Early Christian World

V. EARLY CHRISTIAN
ARCHITECTURE
(313-800)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. Christianity had its birth in Judaea, an eastern province of the
Roman Empire, but directly it became a living organism it was naturally carried by
S. Peter, S. Paul, and other missionaries to Rome, as the centre of the World-
Empire. There at the fountain-head of power and influence, and in spite of opposi-
tion and persecution, the new religion took root and grew, till it was strong enough
to become the recognized universal religion of the whole Roman Empire. Early
Christian architecture in Rome was influenced by, and was the logical outcome of,
existing Roman art, and it was modified in other parts of the Empire according to
the type already recognized as suitable for the geographical situation of those
countries, such as Syria, Asia Minor, North Africa, and Egypt.
GEOLOGICAL. Geological influences may be said to have acted indirectly rather
than directly on Early Christian architecture, for the ruins of Roman buildings
often provided the quarry whence materials were obtained. This influenced the
style, both as regards construction and decoration; for columns and other architec-
tural features, as well as fine sculptures and mosaics from older buildings, were
worked into basilican churches of the new faith.
254 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE

CLIMATIC. The climate of Italy, the most important centre of building activity
in this epoch, has been dealt with in the chapter on Roman architecture (p. 169).
The climatic conditions of such Roman provinces as Egypt, Syria, and North
Africa where Christianity was established naturally modified the style. The fiercer
sun and hotter climate necessitated small windows and other eastern features.
RELIGIOUS. In all human history there is no record so striking as that of the
rise of Christianity, and no phenomenon so outstanding as the rapidity with which
it was diffused throughout the civilized world. Not only in this period but also in
all subsequent ages, Christianity has inspired the building of some of the greatest
architectural monuments. The number of Christian communities established by
the Apostle Paul in his missionary journeys round the Eastern Mediterranean, in
Syria, Asia Minor, Greece, and Italy, might lead us to expect many more ruins of
Early Christian basilican churches throughout these districts. In this connection,
however, it must be remembered that the god preached by S. Paul was ‘not like un-
to gold or silver or stone graven by art and device of man,’ nor a god dwelling
‘in temples made with hands’ like those of the old Greeks and Romans which were
built to shelter the statues of the gods. The purpose of the Christian church was to
shelter worshippers who met for prayer and praise to an unseen deity, and, during
the unsettled conditions at the beginning of Christianity, various places were
adapted for this worship. Thus the building of pagan temples ceased before any
attempt was made to build Christian churches. In 313 Constantine and Licinus
issued their celebrated Edict of Milan, giving Christianity equal rights with other
religions, and in 326 Constantine made it the official religion of the Roman Empire.
Fortified by its official position and thus freed from the need for unity within,
which had been engendered by persecution from without, the Church was soon
divided by doctrinal differences and the Council of Nicaea (325), called by Con-
stantine, was the first of several such councils for the settlement of disputes about
heresies. The steady progress of Christianity was temporarily arrested by a reaction
(361-3) under Julian the Apostate, and then for several generations religion suf-
fered an eclipse as a power in European civilization, and the whole continent was
given over to war and anarchy. Pope Gregory the Great (590-604) employed the
Imperial army of Constantinople to defend Rome against the Lombards, and thus,
by making common cause with the people, early laid the foundations of the
temporal power of the Papacy, which steadily increased, especially under Popes
Adrian I and Leo III. Throughout the whole Early Christian period the power of
the eastern, or Byzantine, half of the Empire, with Constantinople as its centre,
had been growing, and rivalry between East and West led to a schism in the Church
which culminated in the coronation of Charlemagne in 800, under the title of
Emperor of the Romans.
SOCIAL. Constantine changed the capital of the Empire from Rome to Byzan-
tium in 330, when the old Roman political system came to an end, and this royal
convert reigned as an absolute monarch till his death in 337. Besides the troubles
caused by Julian the Apostate, Christianity suffered further disabilities during the
unsettled conditions consequent upon the division of the Roman Empire, which
first took place in 364 when Valentinian became Emperor of the West and his
brother Valens of the East. Theodosius the Great (379-95) reunited, for a time,
the Eastern and Western Empires, and in 438 Theodosius II published his legal
code, an important work on the constitutions of the Emperors from the time of
Constantine. The series of Emperors in the West came to an end in A.D. 476, and the
Eastern and Western Empires were nominally reunited by Zeno, who reigned at
Constantinople. Then again the seat of power was changed, and Theodoric the
Goth reigned in Italy (493-526) during a period of peace and prosperity. In the
 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE 255

S. CLEMENTE -ROME

GOSPEL NEO

[ezaxexc)
(8)
.

SECTION

PANEL AT x.

See ee

| [ose o) [eis loans f

-OLOLDER
DER BUILD!
BULDNGS— (J LONGITUDINAL SECTION
SCALE FOR PLAN & SECTION
19.0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100FT —
5 0 5 10 15 20 25 <,
er 7, = “i

NAVE

GosP te“AMBO <

a a a Se Se mane —
i eg
' aS
AISLE I bq
Weak
= 12 Ss a a _ = =
: |
256 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE

A. The basilican church of S. Clemente, Rome

(rebuilt 1084-1108 over a sixth century church). See p. 258

B. The basilican church of S. Maria Maggiore, Rome

(432, with later alterations). See p. 261
 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE 257

wake of this change, Byzantine art influenced Early Christian art by way of
Ravenna, which rivalled Rome in importance and was the capital of the Gothic
rulers, 493-553, with the exception of a short period when it was subdued by
Justinian (537). Kings were now elected for the separate states of Spain, Gaul,
Northern Africa, and Italy. The emancipation of Western Europe from direct
Imperial control resulted in the development of Romano-Teutonic civilization,
which facilitated the growth of new states and nationalities, gave a fresh impulse to
Christianity, and eventually strengthened the power of the bishops of Rome. The
formation of these new states resulted also in the growth and development of
Romance and Teutonic languages, which, for general use, largely replaced Latin.
It is clear that these many social changes and political disturbances could not fail
to be reflected in the architecture of a period in which great formative forces were
at work.
HISTORICAL. The Early Christian period is generally taken as lasting from
Constantine to the coronation of Charlemagne (800). The incursions of the Huns
into Europe about 376 eventually brought about invasions from the north into
Italy, and in 410 Rome itself was sacked by the Goths under Alaric. So many con-
flicting forces were at work in Europe that the spread of the new religion was
arrested during this period of change and upheaval, till 451, when the defeat of
Attila, king of the Huns, at the battle of Chdalons aided in the consolidation of
Christianity in Europe. In 568 the Lombards penetrated into Italy and held the
northern part for 200 years. Then in 800 Charlemagne was crowned by the Pope
in Rome, and from this date the Empire was styled the Holy Roman Empire, a
title which survived until 1806. From 800 to 1000, the dominant architectural
influence was no longer Rome but Lombardy, and the style which developed
there was Romanesque (pp. 303 ff.).

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The character of Early Christian architecture is chiefly to be seen in buildings
of the fourth to the ninth century, though the style persisted in Rome up to the
Renaissance.
Each age of human development inevitably modifies the art it has inherited, in
its effort, sometimes conscious and sometimes unconscious, to adapt the art of the
past to express the outlook of the present. Thus in architecture one style is generally
evolved from that preceding by a series of gradual changes. The early Christians,
as Roman craftsmen, continued old Roman traditions, but prosperity was declining
and it was natural that for their new buildings they should utilize as far as possible
the materials from Roman temples which had become useless for their original
purpose. Further, in their churches, modelled on Roman basilicas, they used
old columns which by various devices were brought to a uniform height (p.
256A). On this account, although extremely interesting from an archaeological point
of view, Early Christian buildings hardly have the architectural value of a style
produced by the solution of constructive problems. Basilican churches had either
closely spaced columns carrying the entablature (p. 256B), or more widely spaced
columns carrying semicircular arches (p. 256A). The basilican church with three or
five aisles, covered by a simple timber roof, is typical of the Early Christian style
(p. 269B) as opposed to the vaulted Byzantine church with its central circular dome
placed over a square by means of pendentives (p. 276).
The architectural character of the basilican churches is rendered impressive and
dignified by the long perspective of columns which carry the eye along to the
sanctuary; a treatment which, combined with the comparatively low height of
I H.O.A.
258 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE

interiors, makes these churches appear longer than they really are, as is seen in S.
Paolo fuori le Mura (p. 259F), and S. Maria Maggiore (p. 256B). An ‘arch of
triumph’, figurative of the transition through death to life eternal, gave entrance
to the sanctuary with the high altar in the centre standing free under its balda-
chino upheld by marble columns. The vista was rounded off by an apse lined with
marble slabs and crowned with a semi-dome encrusted with glittering golden
mosaics in which Christ appears surrounded by prophets, saints, and martyrs (pp.
252B, 256A).

EXAMPLES
BASILICAN CHURCHES
Basilicas or Roman halls of justice probably served the early Christians as models
for their churches, which thus form a connecting link between buildings of pagan
Classic times and those of the Romanesque period which followed. The term
‘basilica’ (Gk. basilikos =kingly), which was applied to a Christian church as early
as the fourth century, was a peculiarly appropriate designation for buildings dedi-
cated to the service of the King of Kings. Some authorities, however, believe Early
Christian churches to have been evolved from Roman dwelling-houses, where the
community had been in the habit of assembling, from the ‘scholae’ or lecture-
rooms of the philosophers, or even from pagan temples (p. 190C). Others trace
the general plan and arrangement to the catacombs outside Rome, where some of
the earliest Christian services were held. A basilican church was usually erected
over the burial-place of the saint to whom the church was dedicated, and immedi-
ately over this burial-place, crypt, or ‘confessio’ was the high altar covered by a
ciborium, also known as a tabernacle or baldachino (p. 256B). There were thirty-one
basilican churches in Rome alone.
S. Clemente, Rome (1099-1108) (pp. 255, 256A), was rebuilt over a much
earlier church, some of the foundations of which still survive in the crypt. The
present church retains the original arrangement and fittings and shows the suit-
ability of the basilican plan for Christian ritual and for sheltering a number of
worshippers. An atrium or open rectangular forecourt (p. 255B), surrounded by
arcades, forms an imposing approach to the church, and in the centre is a fountain
of water for ablutions—a custom which is still symbolized amongst Roman
Catholics by the use of the stoup of holy water at the entrance to the church. Next
came the covered narthex, between the atrium and the church, which was assigned
to penitents. The narthex opened into the nave, lighted by a clear-story of small
windows, with an aisle on either side, usually half the width of the nave. Occasion-
ally there are two aisles on each side of the nave, as in the basilicas of Old S. Peter
(p. 259B, C), S. Paolo (p. 259, F), and S. Giovanni in Laterano. Galleries for women
were sometimes placed over the aisles, as at S. Agnese (p. 264A, C, D, E) and S.
Lorenzo, Rome (p. 263A), but otherwise the sexes sat on opposite sides of the nave.
There is no ‘bema’ (Gk. platform) in S. Clemente, but this feature is found in other
basilicas such as S. Peter’s, Rome (p. 261), and may have been the germ of the
Mediaeval transept which later converted the plan into a Latin cross. Some con-
sider, however, that this cruciform plan was derived from buildings which had been
erected for sepulchral purposes, as, for example, the Tomb of Galla Placidia
(p. 297). A choir, which became necessary owing to the growth of ritual, was
enclosed by low screen walls or ‘cancelli’ (hence ‘chancel’) and was provided with an
‘ambo’ or pulpit on either side, dating from the first church, from which the Gospel
and Epistle were read (pp. 255H, K, 256A). In the apse or sanctuary the bishop took
the central place, which had been that of the ‘praetor’ in the Roman basilica, and the
 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE 25

BASILLICsia CHURCH F 8. PETER ROME

eeereereereeeeeeeseeeeeee

ATRIUM
NARTHEX
eeeeeeeeee eee eoeseeeeeeeen

a eee
e reese

€ PLAN (restored)
SCALE FOR BOTH PLANS
ei 0 HO 2005030 FEET
50 i 2 30 40 50 60 7 80 SOMETRES
dl SCALE FOR BOTH SECTIONS
O. . 50 is 150FEET
Gh ed, ai 20 40 METRES 5

S. PAQLO
PAOLO FUL al LE |MURA: ROME
‘ = _

S. FU I FE
TO OSTIA> ne

aw —
DOUBLE Roe nt J
3:56:02 Ba eekvosrets
BEMA
S54 gos
, = LI
haa «
i a <
* a
* ;* ”
* | # *
« * . 4

wee
2) x at
ow See
> eS 2 at * oy

ea
0) « W « Auer ” * ”

<li , 4 #
| , *
~_ # ie
* « ;= «@
= ae) .
Fe OOO ea
. | w

ee
|

NARTHEX
= Sees

Pl Set: LONG- SECT™

eum ——

(E Pian
 260 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE

CHURCH OF ‘THE, phat: BETHLEHEM

FI MTBS
60]

y as
50]

n
i
40.
30}

LQ ATRIUM I s
| Homo F fanraretness
petsNE. Ee

190 150 200FEET Omi

10 é ae Jo 30 40 50 oh ree INTERIOR SHowIN¢
SEPULCHRE.

ARCH-MOULD ara. M LONGITUDINAL SECTION CAP at b

 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE 261
presbyters, or members of the church council, occupied seats on either side corres-
ponding to those used by the Roman ‘assessors’. The altar, in front of the apse,
which in the basilica had been used for libations or sacrifices to the gods, was now
adapted for the celebration of Christian rites, and a baldachino or canopy, sup-
ported on marble columns, was erected over it. The interiors of S. Clemente and
other churches owe much of their rich effect to the use of glass mosaic (‘opus
Grecanicum’) in the semi-dome of the apse (p. 256A), with figures of saints in glory
against a golden background, as at S. Agnese (p. 267A) or S. Maria Maggiore
(p. 267B).
The timber roofs were plainly treated with visible rafters (pp. 264A, 269B) often
cased, in Renaissance times, with richly gilded coffers (pp. 256A, B, 269A). The
pavement was formed from the abundant store of old marbles in Rome, and slices
of columns were laid as centres to surrounding bands of inlay in intricate geometric
patterns (p. 256A) as at S. Lorenzo (p. 267Q) and SS. Giovanni e Paolo (p. 2677).
The Basilican Church of S. Peter, Rome (330) (p. 259A-C), erected by Con-
stantine near the site of the martyrdom of S. Peter in the circus of Nero, was pulled
down to make way for the present cathedral (p. 714). The atrium led
through the narthex to the great nave with double aisles terminating in five arches,
the central of which was called the arch of triumph (p. 259B, Cc). Beyond was the
bema (see Glossary) and the sanctuary or semicircular apse with the Pope’s seat
against the centre of the wall. The priest, as in all Early Christian basilican
churches, stood behind the altar and faced east, as the chancel was in this case at
the west end (p. 259c).
S. Giovanni in Laterano, Rome (330) is alsoa double-aisled basilica, but has been
so much altered at various times as to have lost its original Early Christian character.
S. Paolo fuori le Mura, Rome (pp. 259D-G, 267G), founded in 380, was
destroyed in 1823, but was rebuilt on the original design, and is the largest
and most impressive of all basilican churches. The nave has eighty great columns
of Simplon granite, with mosaic mural medallions of the Popes above. The arch
of triumph with fifth-century mosaics, the double bema, the apse with mosaics of
the thirteenth century, and the remarkable high altar with its double baldachino
over the confessio of S. Paul, all contribute to the grandeur of the interior.
S. Maria Maggiore, Rome (432) (pp. 256B, 267B), was built by Pope Sixtus III
and is the only church of which there is evidence that it was originally a pagan
basilica. It is one of the most typical of basilican churches. The interior (p. 256B)
is the most beautiful of the single-aisled basilicas, with its ranges of Ionic columns
of Hymettian marble and entablature surmounted by the original mosaics of Sixtus
III dealing with Old Testament history, culminating in the arch of triumph, high
altar, and baldachino, beneath which is the confessio.
S. Lorenzo fuori le Mura, Rome (p. 263A), is the product of two churches
with their apses placed back to back, as in the temple of Venus and Rome, Rome
(p. 188). The two churches, of which one was founded in 432 and the other rebuilt
in 578, were joined in 1216 by the removal of the apses and insertion of columns.
Because of differences in level of the two churches, the eastern half was provided
with a gallery.
S. Sabina, Rome (425) (p. 269B), although often altered, retains its original
character. The basilican plan has nave and aisles separated by twenty-four Corin-
thian columns of Hymettian marble supporting semicircular arches, plain clear-
story walls, and a simple open timber roof. The bareness of the interior is relieved
by the eleventh-century chancel screen and high altar, and the mosaics of the apse,
which date from 822.
S. Agnese fuori le Mura, Rome (625-38) (pp. 264A-E, 267A), was founded by
262 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE
Constantine in 324 over the tomb of S. Agnese. It shares with S. Lorenzo fuori le
Mura the peculiarity of having aisles in two storeys. Between nave and aisles are
sixteen ancient columns supporting arches, with smaller gallery columns above. The
apse with altar and baldachino is at the western end, and mosaics in the semi-dome
(1525) represent S. Agnese between two popes (p. 267A). The exterior, with simple
clear-story windows, is plain and the apse is flanked by a campanile (776) (p. 2648). 1
S. Stefano Rotondo, Rome (468) (p. 295A—D), is exceptional in that it has
a circular plan. This is the largest circular church in existence, having a diameter
of 210 ft, and there is reason to believe that it may be a rebuilding of a Roman
market hall of the first century. Its high central and lower aisle roofs are supported
by two rings of columns from older buildings; the outer range supports arches and
the inner a horizontal architrave. Two central columns and a cross wall give addi-
tional support to the main roof timbers. The suggested restoration (p. 295B) shows
a possible original arrangement.
S. Apollinare Nuovo, Ravenna (493-525) (p. 269A), was erected by Theodoric
the Great and has many points of resemblance to its neighbour, S. Apollinare in
Classe, especially in the remarkable campanile and world-famous band of mosaics
above the nave arcade.
S. Apollinare in Classe, Ravenna (534-9) (pp. 252, 264F-K, 267E, H; J),
was erected by the Emperor Justinian on the site of a temple of Apollo and, like the
sister church S. Apollinare Nuovo, was probably built by Byzantine craftsmen, for
here the influence of Constantinople was strong. The simple plan forms a single-
aisled basilican church, 150 ft long and 98 ft wide. The atrium has disappeared,
but a narthex leads into the church. The eastern apse, which is circular internally
and polygonal externally, is raised above the crypt and contains the high altar
with ciborium. On the north is one of the earliest circular campanili, of the same
date. The interior is impressive with nave arcade of cipollino columns, Byzantine
capitals, and dosseret blocks (pp. 252B, 267E, J) supporting arches, above which is
the band, 5 ft high, of portraits of bishops of Ravenna, while the apse retains its
original mosaics showing the saint preaching to his flock.
Torcello Cathedral (rebuilt 1008) (pp. 268A, B, 270), still has the foundations
of the original bishop’s throne flanked by six rising tiers of seats in the apse, which
give a good idea of Early Christian arrangements. This church, with the towering
mass of the campanile and the Byzantine church of S. Fosca (pp. 270, 290), compose
an historic group.
Syracuse Cathedral, Sicily (p. 268c), still clearly shows how a pagan temple of
Athena (p. 112) was converted in 640 into a Christian church, by the construction of
a wall between its peristyle columns and the formation of openings in its cella walls.
The Church of the Nativity, Bethlehem (330) (p. 260A—D), founded by Con-
stantine over the traditional birthplace of Christ and rebuilt 527-65, is one of
a number of basilican churches in Palestine and Syria erected between the third
and seventh centuries, before the Muslim hordes overran the country. It is sur-
rounded by a high wall which encloses the precincts of the Latins, Greeks, and
Armenians, who jointly own the church. This historic building, with the mono-
lithic Corinthian columns, 19 ft high, of the nave and double aisles, and the three
apses of the sanctuary, is still, in spite of restorations, grand in its simplicity of
plan and must have been peculiarly suitable to receive the immense number of
worshippers at the birth-shrine of the founder of Christianity.
The Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem (p. 260E-G), erected by Con-
stantine over the reputed tomb of Christ, defaced and damaged by the Persians
and Muslims, rebuilt by Crusaders and often restored, appears to date from the
twelfth century, for its architecture resembles that of Sicily in that period. The
 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE 263

ee a
EY:
oh a me te ae

A. S. Lorenzo fuori le Mura, Rome. Interior looking towards sanctuary. (Two

churches dating from 432 and 578 respectively, joined together in 1216). See p. 261

B. S. Francesco, Ravenna (560). See p. 265

 264 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE

S AGNES PUOR! ee plas ROME

C )TRANSV®=: SECT™ CDsPLANS arcrF)ALONGITUDINAL cro

S. POLAR: at S S E :RAVENNA

lat
INTERIOR K JDONGITUDINAL SECTION
ae
=a FOR PLANS SCALE FOR ALL SECTIONS
FEET: |
METRES 30 M™™ | |
 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE 265
entrance (1140) (p. 260E) leads into the transept, to the left of which is the rotunda,
rebuilt by the Crusaders 1099, with the Holy Sepulchre itself, reconstructed in
recent times; while on the right is the church of the Crusaders. This circular
type was copied at S. Gereon, Cologne (p. 587); Little Maplestead, Essex;
S. Sepulchre, Cambridge; Northampton; Ludlow Castle Chapel, and the Temple
Church, London (pp. 305, 388).
The Church at Qalb Louzeh (sixth century) (p. 260H-N), in Syria, has a
basilican plan with entrance flanked by two towers, and nave separated by piers
carrying semicircular arches. Above are corbels supporting short columns to carry
the roof trusses. The church exhibits many points common to all Syrian churches,
which broke away from the Roman type owing to distance from the capital.
S. Francesco, Ravenna (560) (p. 263B) was erected by Bishop Neone, and is
divided by two rows of columns of Greek marble. In 1261 it was granted to conven-
tual friars, who gave it its present name.
S. Demetrius, Salonica (500-50) (damaged 1917, and since completely re-
stored) is a five-aisled basilican church with transepts and galleries, and shows the
variety of treatment during this period.
In Asia Minor, as at Ancyra, Pergamon, and Hierapolis; in North Africa as at
Algiers; and also in Egypt, where the early Christians were known as Copts, there
are a number of basilican churches of the period, but in all the style died out owing
to the Muslim conquest in the seventh century.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. The Early Christians followed the basilican model for their new churches
(pp. 255, 259), and may also have used old Roman halls, baths, dwelling-houses,
and even pagan temples as places of worship. The basis was a long nave with
either single or double aisles on either side, culminating in an apse and preceded
by an atrium or forecourt.
WALLS. These were still constructed according to Roman methods of using
hand-laid rubble-concrete of brick or stone, sometimes faced with plaster (p. 252A).
Mosaic decoration was added internally (p. 269A), and sometimes also externally on
west facades; though little regard was paid to external architectural effect (p. 264G).
OPENINGS. Arcades, doors, and windows were spanned either by a semi-
circular arch which, in nave arcades, often rested directly on the capitals without
any entablatures (pp. 267E, 269B), or by a lintel, as in the doorway of the Tomb
of Theodoric, Ravenna (p. 267R). The marble doors at Cividale, near Udine, in
north-east Italy, show the ornate character sometimes attempted (p. 267M).
Windows, filled in with pierced slabs of marble, alabaster, or plaster, were small
(p. 267L, P); those of the nave were in the walls above the aisle roofs (pp. 252A,
264B). This system was developed in the wonderful clear-storeys of Gothic archi-
tecture (p.372).
Roors. Timber roofs (pp. 264A, H, 269B) covered the central nave, and only
simple forms of construction, such as king and queen post trusses, were employed.
It is believed that the decoration of the visible framework was of later date, as at
S. Miniato, Florence pp. 320, 321A, B). The narrower side aisles were occasionally
vaulted and the apse was usually domed and lined with beautiful glass mosaics,
which formed a fitting background to the sanctuary (pp. 252B, 256A, 267A, B).
CoLUMNS. These differ both in design and size, as they were often taken from
earlier Roman buildings, which had either fallen into ruin or been purposely
destroyed (pp. 256A, 263, 269). It was natural that early Christian builders should
use materials and ornament of the pagan Romans, and, as these belonged to the
266 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE

later period of Roman art, a grand effect was obtained though the details of the
design were not necessarily homogeneous. It is possible that all the fine marble
columns, whether Doric, Ionic, or Corinthian, in the churches of Rome were taken
from ancient Roman buildings, except those in S. Paolo fuori le Mura.
The carved capitals are governed by Roman pagan precedent (p. 267G) and
sometimes by Byzantine (pp. 252B, 267J), and in both the acanthus leaf forms an
important part (p. 267C, D).
MOULDINGS. These are coarse variations of old Roman types, and the carving,
though rich in general effect, is crude; for the technique of the craftsman had
gradually declined (p. 267R). Enrichments were incised on mouldings in low relief,
and the acanthus ornament, although still copied from the antique, became more
conventional in form.
ORNAMENT. The introduction of colour gave richness and glimmering mystery
to interiors. The mosaics which lined the domed apses generally represented Christ,
the Virgin, apostles or saints with all those symbolic emblems which now entered
largely into decoration (pp. 252B, 267A, B). The arch of triumph, separating
the nave from the bema, was ornamented with appropriate subjects (p. 256);
long friezes of figures lined the wall above nave arcades (p. 269A), and the wall
spaces between the clear-story windows often had mosaics illustrating Christian
history or doctrine. The figures were treated in strong colours on a gold back-
ground in a bold and simple design, and an earnest and solemn expression, fitting
well the position they occupy, characterized the groups. The method of execution
was coarse and bold, and no attempt was made at neatness of joint or regularity of
bedding of the mosaic cubes. The mosaic work is comparable with that in Byzan-
tine churches (p. 292B) and was usually executed by Greek workmen. The coloured
pavements were largely formed of slices from old Roman porphyry or marble
columns, worked into designs by connecting bands of geometrical inlay on a field
of white marble (p. 267Q, S, T), and were highly decorative. The glass mosaics of
the high altar, ambones, screens, Easter candlesticks, and episcopal chairs, as in
the fittings of the church of S. Clemente, Rome (p. 255c-H), were of a more
delicate description. Fonts, as in the Venice Museum (p. 267K), and well-heads, as
that from the cloisters of S. Giovanni in Laterano, Rome (p. 267N), were subjects
upon which much skilful carving was expended. The sculptured sarcophagi of the
Early Christians belonging to the great families of Rome, though of small artistic
merit, had carved bas-reliefs in the quaint and crude craftsmanship of the period
(p. 267H), and it is not unusual to find, crowded together on one and the same sarco-
phagus, such various incidents as Adam and Eve in the Garden, Moses striking the
rock, Daniel in the lions’ den, the Virgin and Child worshipped by the Magi, and
the denial of Peter. Sometimes, as in S. Apollinare in Classe, Ravenna, the Cross,
the symbol of Christianity, was accompanied by other Christian symbols (p. 2528)
such as the emblems of evangelists and saints, which now replaced the attributes of
heathen deities, and became usual features in the decorative scheme (p. 267D, E,
K, N). The Angel of S. Matthew, the Lion of S. Mark, the Ox of S. Luke, and the
Eagle of S. John, as well as the dove, peacock, anchor, olive branch, and monogram
of Christ (the Chi-rho), are woven into the scheme of symbolism of the new reli-
gion. Pictures, emblems and symbols are all used miscellaneously to represent the
various aspects of the Christian faith. Besides all this sumptuous decoration of
church apses, roofs, walls, piers, and floors, there was the more delicate ornamental
work in ivory and precious metals for diptychs, croziers, pyxes, chalices, and patens,
and all the small appurtenances of Christian ritual, of which many beautiful specimens
are to be seen in museums.
 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE 267

\ Sa I A "i a
h is ‘ eS ae) D

iy} AN A

ShaeUREA COR S.,

a SAM eS
Ron} I 4)

ee
ign ee (4 =e i t yi I he. 4

-— ~ — oot
ONCISIS SVRGITPICTVRAMEL SIE a
dat WiIf By! aS

AICSMM
TSea 2

A MOSAIC:S. AGNESE: ROME

ee
ie
ARCADING:S.APOLLINARE
IN CLASSE RAVENNA
_ es (|. e5=
GIP LE eke eee zal

Dy Vinma sl
— BP eel
(eee eae|
— = "Er CAP:
S, APOLLINARE cr'tSse:
c RAVENNA
Cee

Y.OAor:
SIM |Si ll

eS (APN ~diialial a
il |(N)Weit HEAD:
i ae Ui
S. JOHN LATERAN
Lt st CLOISTER!ROME, =
MARBLE. DOORS: WINDOW: VENICE
(Vil CENTURY)

MOSAIC ik
FROM PARENZO ri PLOT NLet
ee
O 3 WAY, TOMB MOSAIC. PAVING:
Q FUOR! LE MURA: ROME ? THEODORIC: RAVENNA SS.GIOVANNI-E: PAOLO: ROME
268 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE

A. Torcello Cathedral, near Venice (rebuilt 1008). Apsidal end. See p. 262

B. Torcello Cathedral: interior c. Syracuse Cathedral. Converted

showing screen and sanctuary (640) from Greek Doric Temple of
Athena (c. 480 B.c.). See p. 262
 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE 269

B. The basilican church of S, Sabina, Rome (425). See p. 261

270 EARLY CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE

REFERENCE BOOKS
BROWN, G. BALDWIN. From Schola to Cathedral, Edinburgh, 1886.
BUNSEN,C.C. J. Die Basiliken des christlichen Roms. Munich, 1843.
BUTLER,A.J. The Ancient Coptic Churches of Egypt. 2 vols., Oxford, 1884.
BUTLER,H.C. Ancient Architecture in Syria: Expedition 1904-5. 2 vols., Leyden, 1907-20.
CLAUSSE, G. Les monuments du christianisme au Moyen Age. 2 vols., Paris, 1893.
CUMMINGS, Cc. A. A History of Architecture in Italy. 2 vols., New York, 1901; London,
1928.
DAVIES,J.G. The Origin and Development of Early Christian Architecture. London, 1952.
FROTHINGHAM,A.L. Monuments of Christian Rome. New York, 1908.
HARVEY, W. Church of the Nativity, Bethlehem. Oxford and London, 1935.
—. Church of the Holy Sepulchre, ferusalem. Oxford and London, 1935.
HUBSCH, H. Monuments de l’architecture chrétienne depuis Constantin jusqu’a Charlemagne.
Paris, 1866.
LEROUX;,G. Les origines de l’édifice hypostyle. Paris, 1913.
MARUCCHI, O. Basiliques et églises de Rome. Paris, 1902.
MEER, F. VAN DER and MOHRMANN, CHRISTINE. Atlas of the Early Christian World.
English translation by Mary F. Hedlund and H. H. Rowley. London, 1958.
MICHEL, A. Histoire del’ art, vol. i, pt. i. Paris, 1905.
RIVOIRA,G.T.Lombardic Architecture. English translation by G. McN. Rushforth. 2 vols.,
London, 1910.
STEWART, CECIL. Early Christian, Byzantine and Romanesque Architecture (vol. ii of
Simpson, F. M., History of Architectural Development). London, 1954.
STRZYGOWSKI, J. Orient oder Rom. Leipzig, 1901; Kleinasien. Leipzig, 1903. Byzan-
tinische Denkmdler. 3 vols., Vienna, 1891-1903; and Early Church Art in Northern
Europe. London, 1928.
VOGUE, MARQUIS DE. Les églises de la Terre-Sainte. Paris, 1860.
—. Syrie centrale. 2 vols., Paris, 1865-7.
WULFF,O. Altchristliche Kunst. Berlin and Potsdam, 1914.

S. Fosca, Torcello (see p. 290).

The basilican cathedral and campanile on the left (see p. 262)
 “Aix la C hapelle

#8" Land over 3,000 Feet

° Miles 450
—<—$——— a

‘The Byzantine Empire

VI. BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

(330 to 1453 and later)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. Byzantium, renamed Constantinople* after Constantine the
Great, its Imperial founder, and also called ‘New Rome’, was inaugurated as
capital of the Roman Empire in 330. It stood at the junction of the Bosphorus and
the Sea of Marmora, where Europe and Asia are divided by only a narrow strip of
water. This gave it a commanding and central position for the government of the
eastern and most valuable part of the Roman Empire. It was also at the intersection
of two great highways of commerce, the water highway between the Black Sea and
Mediterranean, and the trade route between Europe and Asia; and thus it con-
trolled the corn trade from the northern shores of the Euxine. The natural harbour
of the Golden Horn possesses unusual advantages for commerce; for it is four
miles in length, unaffected by tides, and of sufficient depth to render its quays
accessible to ships of deep draught. Byzantine art pervaded all parts of the Eastern
Roman Empire and was carried by traders to Greece, Serbia, Russia, Asia Minor,
North Africa and further west, where it is found in Venice, Ravenna, and Péri-
gueux, and it had considerable influence on the architecture of these districts.
Venice, by her situation, was a connecting link between the Byzantine and Frankish
Empires, and a depot for merchandise from both East and West.
GEOLOGICAL. Constantinople had no good building stone, and local materials
* The name Constantinople is retained in the text of this chapter, but the city has
been renamed Istanbul.
272 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

such as clay for bricks and rubble for concrete were employed. Other materials
more monumental in character had therefore to be imported; marble was brought
from the quarries in the islands and along the shores of the Eastern Mediterranean
to Constantinople, which was the chief marble-working centre and supplied all
parts of the Roman Empire. Byzantine architecture was further considerably influ-
enced by the multitude of monolithic columns of such sizes as were obtainable
from the different quarries. These were even introduced into the underground
cisterns for the water storage of this Imperial city.
CLIMATIC. The Romans adapted their methods of building to suit the needs of
the new eastern capital and to those conditions of life which had there already
created traditional forms of art: thus flat roofs for summer resort were combined
with oriental domes, and these, with small windows often high up in otherwise
unbroken walls, formed the chief features of the style, and sheltering arcades sur-
rounded the open courts.
RELIGIOUS. In the year 313 the Edict of Milan was issued, which granted
toleration to Christians, and in 330 Constantinople became the capital of the first
Christian Empire. It follows that the chief buildings erected in the new capital
were churches for the new religion. At first they were of the basilican Early Chris-
tian type, but later the domical Byzantine style was developed. Disputes and differ-
ences soon sprang up in the Church and became so rife that the Council of Nicaea
(325) was only the first of a series called to suppress heresies. The political division,
too, between East and West was followed by a division of the Churches, due in part
to the ‘Filioque controversy’ which developed in the ninth century and eventually
culminated in the ‘Great Schism’ in 1054. The Western Church held that the Spirit
proceeded from the Father and Son, while the Eastern Church maintained that the
Spirit proceeded from the Father only. The Eastern and Western Churches had been
further divided by the ‘Iconoclastic movement,’ which resulted from the decree of
the Eastern Emperor, Leo III (717-41), who, fearing that idolatry would be fostered
by the use of sculpture, forbade all representations of human or animal forms.
Many Greek artists thereupon left Constantinople for Italy, where, under Pope
Gregory II, they could carry on their art unmolested by Imperial decrees. This
movement resulted in the admission of painted figures in the decoration of Eastern
churches, but all statues were still excluded. These controversies and other differ-
ences in ritual have vitally affected Byzantine church architecture up to the present
day. Byzantine architecture, devoid of statues, has always been and still remains
the official style of the Greek or Orthodox Church of eastern Europe which has
conserved unchanged its doctrines and ritual. Therefore the architecture also be-
came stereotyped in form through all periods, in sharp contrast with the changes
and additions which characterize the developments of mediaeval architecture to
suit it to the varying requirements of church economy and ritual in western
Europe.
SocIAL. Constantine reviewed the attempt initiated by Diocletian (284-305)
to provide adequate civil government and military protection throughout the wide-
spread Roman Empire and showed his statesmanship in his manner of dealing
with this political problem, just as he did in securing support for himself from the
growing power of Christianity by establishing it as the state religion. Diocletian’s
attempt, however, to solve the difficulty of managing the Eastern Empire from the
west of Italy by instituting three seats of government, in addition to that of Rome,
had proved ineffectual and open to abuse, and therefore when Constantine in his
turn was confronted with the same difficulty he took the bold course of transplant-
ing his capital from Rome to Byzantium (330) because he recognized the political
value of its central position in the Empire. Byzantium was an old Greek city,
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE 273

tie
ye
,e

PSs

S. Sophia, Constantinople, from S.W. (532-7). See pp. 280 ff.

The minarets are a Turkish addition
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

S. Sophia, Constantinople: interior looking towards apse (532-7). See pp. 280 ff.
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE 275
and so the new Imperial buildings were executed by Greek craftsmen untram-
melled by Roman traditions. Within the fortifications of Constantine, the new
city was laid out on Roman lines, so far as the hills and site allowed. There was
the central dividing street running through a succession of six forums of which
the original Augusteum was adjoined, not only by S. Sophia, the greatest glory of
early Christendom, but also by the Imperial palace, senate house, and law courts.
The Forum of Constantine, with its great porphyry column, was the centre of
commercial life, while, in the Hippodrome hard by, the chariot races took place
which were the chief amusement of New Rome, as gladiatorial combat had been
of Old Rome. The Hippodrome held the same position in the social life of New
Rome as the Colosseum and thermae did in Old Rome, and was indeed used for all
purposes and on all occasions—for the election of emperors, burning of martyrs,
execution of criminals, and for triumphal processions—and so was truly termed
the axis of the Byzantine world. The emperors paid the same attention to the water
supply of their new as of their old capital, for water was brought by aqueducts and
stored in enormous underground cisterns with roofs upheld by many hundreds of
columns. As time went on and the population increased the city of Constantine
was extended, and the Great Wall with its famous military gates and many towers
was built by Theodosius II (413) to set a circle of land and water fortifications
against the attacks of Huns and Goths. Constantine, the strong man and
despotic ruler, was followed by emperors too weak to assert their authority, and thus
the Empire was divided in 364. After Theodosius, the first emperor to emerge into
prominence was Justinian (A.D. 527-65), who codified the Roman laws, was a great
patron of architecture, and was responsible not only for the rebuilding of S. Sophia,
but also for many other churches in the city and in Syria and Palestine. During the
Macedonian dynasty (867-1057) and the Comnenian dynasty (1081-1185) there
was a remarkable outburst of building activity. In spite of its culture, commercial
prosperity and industrial activity, the Byzantine Empire’s increasingly isolated
situation as a bulwark of Christian civilisation, and its exposure to attacks by
barbarians from the north and Muslims from the east, led in the end to its destruc-
tion. Decay from within facilitated defeat from without. The final crash came when
the capital was captured by the Ottoman Turks in 1453.
HISTORICAL. Byzantium was founded as a Greek colony c. 660 B.C., and in A.D.
330 became the capital of the Roman Empire. On the death of the Emperor Theo-
dosius I (395) the Empire was finally divided, and Byzantium continued to be the
capital of the Eastern Empire, and throughout the Middle Ages was the bulwark of
Christianity against the attacks of Slav barbarians on the west, and of Muslims on
the east. Honorius (395-423), the first Western Emperor of the newly divided
Empire, removed his residence from Rome to Ravenna on the east coast of Italy
(404), and consequently there was great building activity in that city, which, from
its position, was peculiarly susceptible to Byzantine influence. A further impetus
was given to building when Ravenna became an archiepiscopal see in 438. During
the reign of Justinian (527-565) Sicily and Italy were recovered to the Eastern
Empire, and this new connection promoted a revival of building in Italy; here
again Byzantine influence came into play, and from before 584 to 752 Ravenna was
the seat of the exarch or representative of the Byzantine Emperors, and its buildings
of this period became of a still more pronounced Byzantine type. The history of
the Byzantine Empire from the fifth to the eleventh century is one of fluctuating
and gradually declining fortunes. It first lost its western provinces in the fifth cen-
tury, some of which, including Italy and Sicily, were regained in the sixth century
under Justinian; while again in the following century its strength was greatly
reduced by conflict with the Persians, but yet once more in the eighth century the
276 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

Empire somewhat recovered itself, till in the ninth century it was again strong
enough to carry on fierce contests against the Muslims, who were long kept at bay
on the eastern side. In the eleventh century the decline was accelerated because,
besides having enemies on the east and north, the Empire was now attacked by Nor-
mans and Venetians, till the ‘Latin occupation’ of Constantinople was accomplished
in 1204 and lasted to 1261. The old Empire still staggered on for nearly two hundred
years, but its vitality had been sapped by internal dissensions and continuous war-
fare against the Persians and Turks, and it was finally captured by Ottoman Turks
in 1453. Nevertheless, the spirit of the Byzantine Empire persisted even after the
Empire had fallen, especially in Russia and in the Balkans. Constantinople has
continued up to the present day as the seat of a Patriarch of the Orthodox Church.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The character of Byzantine architecture, which dates from the fifth century to the
present day, is determined by the novel development of the dome to cover poly-
gonal and square plans for churches, tombs, and baptisteries. The practice of using
a domical system of roof construction is in strong contrast to the Early Christian
timber trusses and the Romanesque system of stone vaults. It may be broadly stated
that the basilican type of plan belongs to Early Christian architecture (Chapter V)
and the domed, centralized type of plan to the Byzantine. At the same time, during
the first few centuries of the Byzantine Empire one may find domical constructions
in Italy and basilican plans in the Eastern Empire. The system of construction in
hand-laid concrete, introduced by the Romans, progressively had become more like
regular brickwork, and in this form was adopted by the Byzantines. The carcase
of brickwork was first completed and allowed to settle before the interior surface
sheathing of unyielding marble slabs was added, and this independence of the
component parts is characteristic of Byzantine construction (p. 277G, M). Brick-
work, moreover, lent itself externally to decorative caprices in patterns and band-
ing, and internally it was suitable for covering with marble, mosaic, and fresco
decoration. The Byzantines therefore took great pains in the manufacture of bricks,
which were employed alike in military, ecclesiastical, and domestic architecture.
The ordinary bricks were like the Roman, about an inch and a half in depth, and
were laid on thick beds of mortar. This general use of brickwork necessitated
special care in making mortar, which was composed of lime and sand with crushed
pottery, tiles, or bricks, and much of it remains as hard as that in the best buildings
of Rome. The decorative character of external facades depended largely on the
arrangement of the facing bricks, which were not always laid horizontally, but
sometimes obliquely, sometimes in the form of the meander fret, sometimes in the
chevron or herring-bone pattern, and in many other similar designs, giving great
variety to the facades. An attempt was also made to ornament the rough brick
exteriors by the use of stone bands and decorative arches. Walls were sheeted in-
ternally with marble (p. 277L), and vaults and domes with coloured glass mosaics
on a golden background. The churches of Constantinople, Nicaea, and Salonica
show the perfection to which this scheme of decoration was carried.
The dome, which had always been a traditional feature in the East, became the
prevailing motif of Byzantine architecture, which was a fusion of the domical con-
struction with the Classical columnar style. Domes of various types (p. 277) were
now placed over square compartments by means of ‘pendentives’ (pp. 274, 277,
281, 288), whereas in Roman architecture domes were only used over circular or
polygonal structures. These domes were usually constructed of bricks or of some
light porous stone, such as pumice, or even of pottery, as at S. Vitale, Ravenna
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

OME CONSTRUCTION ae
ATHOUT CENTREING
DOME ON PENDENTIVE:
TOMB
GALLA PLACIDIA: RAVENNA

—-
a
OME WITH DRU N PENDENTIVES
MONASTERY :M™ ATHOS

INTERIOR SHEWING DOME SYSTEM 4

SOPHIA: CO OPLE 3
< oes
DOME OMITTED te
Qs PENDEN
ae)

tay i4
|

\
Ze y))|A »4

eu Aa

NTERNAL
COLUMNS
 278 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

OD.SERGIUS & BACCHUS . ee ie

aSPRINGING

-+ a! ey - pil
Maas TS iste Senn) Sra
JE RN (eccrine |
FROM NW. (LONG: ‘SECTION
SCALE FOR ALL PLAN ’ SCALE FOR one ELEVNS: & SECT
ng _'0 ria 30—e Ey60 7) 80 90 10 FT..90
MTES5 20 25 { ne 10ME
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE 279

P. 285D). Byzantine domes and vaults were, it is believed, constructed without

temporary support or ‘centering’ by the simple use of large flat bricks, and this is
4 quite distinct system probably derived from Eastern methods. Windows were
formed in the lower portion of the dome which, in the later period, was hoisted
upon a high ‘drum’—a feature which was still further developed in western Renais-
sance architecture by the addition of an external peristyle. At S. Sophia the
haunches were strengthened by a ring of small buttresses to compensate for the
weakening effect of the window openings (pp. 273, 281A). The grouping of small
domes or semi-domes round the large central dome was effective (pp. 273, 277M),
and one of the characteristic features of Byzantine churches was that the forms of
the vaults and domes were visible externally, undisguised by any timberea roof (p.
281A, D); thus in the Byzantine style the exterior closely corresponds with the
interior. In S. Sophia is seen the perfect expression of the Byzantine style: for the
columns are not merely ornamental, but really support the galleries, and semicircular
arches rest directly on columns with capitals suitable for supporting the springers of
arches of which the voussoirs were rectangular blocks, not set in receding moulded
planes as in Mediaeval architecture (p. 330A, B). The Byzantine capital was shaped to
form a simple transition from the square abacus to the circular shaft. The numer-
ous columns in S. Sophia exhibit the remarkable and beautiful structural expedient
of surrounding the shafts, both under the capital and above the base, by bronze
annulets (pp. 277N, 282A, B). Monolithic shafts which, owing to the height required,
had to be set up contrary to the stratification of the quarry, were therefore liable to
split, and these bronze annulets not only overcame this danger, but also prevented
the lead ‘seating’ from being forced out by the superincumbent weight. Although
marble columns from old buildings were utilized, the importation of newly-
quarried columns and rare marbles for decorative purposes continued, and the
Theodosian code encouraged and regulated this industry, so that coloured marbles
were employed to a greater extent than in preceding styles. The interiors were
beautified by pavements in ‘opus sectile’ or ‘opus Alexandrinum’ (p. 332K), and in
domes and apses by coloured mosaics, which were of glass rendered opaque by
oxide of tin, an invention which had also been employed in the Early Christian
architecture. This use of rich marbles and mosaics resulted in the rounding of
angles and in an absence of mouldings and cornices, so that the mosaic designs and
pictures might continue uninterrupted over wall surfaces, piers, arches, domes,
and apses. Marble and mosaic were used broadly to make a complete lining for a
rough carcase, and mouldings were replaced by decorative bands formed in the
mosaic. One surface melts into another as the mosaic is continued from arch and
pendentive upwards to the dome, while the gold of the background was even intro-
duced into the figures, and thus unity of treatment was always maintained. In late
examples fresco painting was often used instead of mosaic. Invariably the pictures
were arranged in a special order: the head and shoulders of Christ usually occupied
the dome and the four Evangelists were set in the pendentives; the Virgin and
Child were customarily located in the apse, and all round the walls were repre-
sentations of the saints and pictures of incidents in the life of Christ.
The character of Byzantine architecture shows development in its three main
periods: (1) 330-850, including the reign of Justinian; (2) 850-1200, including the
Macedonian and Comnenian dynasties; (3) 1200 to recent times. The character
was also affected by local influences, as seen in examples found in Turkey, Italy,
Greece, Macedonia, Armenia, Syria, Russia, Serbia, and France.
The Greek church in Moscow Road, London, designed by Oldrid Scott, and
the Roman Catholic Cathedral, Westminster, by John F. Bentley, are modern
examples of Byzantine treatment in England.
280 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

EXAMPLES

CHURCHES
Byzantine churches are distinguished by the centralized type of plan, having a
dome over the nave which, in early examples, is sometimes supported by semi-
domes. In later examples the churches are much smaller and the dome is raised
upon a high drum with, occasionally, additional smaller domes rising at a lower
level. There is usually a narthex, or entrance porch, at the west end, and the east
end is cut off from the nave by an ‘iconostas’, or screen of pictures.
SS. Sergius and Bacchus, Constantinople (527) (pp. 278, 286c), erected by
Justinian, is nearly square on plan, rog ft by 92 ft, and the arrangement of the
interior is similar to that of S. Vitale (p. 285c), but it has only four colonnaded
exedrae to the central octagon. The church would resemble S. Sophia in plan if it
were cut in two, and a dome on pendentives placed over an intervening square and
the whole doubled in size. The dome over the central space, 52 ft in diameter and
69 ft6 ins high, is visible externally, for there is no outer timber roof, and has a peculiar,
melon-like form with ridges and furrows from base to summit (p. 277H, J, K).
S. Vitale, Ravenna (526-47) (pp. 285, 299B), was founded by Justinian to com-
memorate his recovery of Ravenna and was designed on the model of the ‘Minerva
Medica,’ Rome (pp. 206, 285A, B); but Byzantine influence is everywhere evident.
An inner octagon of 54 ft 9 ins is enclosed by an outer octagon of 115 ft. The
apsidal chancel is successfully designed to open direct from one side of the inner
octagon, while the other seven arches enclose columns placed on a half-circle
carrying the gallery usual in Eastern churches. The dome is curious, as it rests on
pendentives formed of small arches (p. 285D) and is constructed of earthen pots
fitted into each other, those in the upper part being laid horizontally, thus produc-
ing a lightness of structure which did not require the arches and buttresses found
necessary in SS. Sergius and Bacchus and S. Sophia, Constantinople. This remark-
able construction in pottery is protected by a timber roof, thus differing from
Roman usage and approximating to the practice which prevailed among Mediaeval
architects (p. 285D). It is also worthy of notice that the walls, being carried up to
support the timber roof, act as haunches and assist in directing the thrust of the
dome downwards. The interior is remarkable for the beauty of its carved capitals
with dosseret blocks (pp. 299B, 300C), while the mosaics which line the vaults of the
sanctuary are unique in this form of Christian art inasmuch as they are a most
valuable record of the costumes of the period. Here are life-size figures of Justinian
and the Empress Theodora at the consecration of the church in all the glittering
array of state panoply and surrounded by the ladies of the Court. Prominent in the
centre of the apse is the commanding figure of Christ seated on an azure globe
and holding the Crown of Life and the seven-sealed book. The exterior in large
thin bricks with thick mortar joints is characteristic of the simple external treatment
of so many Byzantine buildings. The fine cathedral of Aix-la-~Chapelle (Aachen) (p.
285E, F, G), which was built by Charlemagne as a mausoleum, much resembles S.
Vitale, and in all probability was derived from it (p. 357), while SS. Sergius and
Bacchus is also similar in plan, but consists of an octagon enclosed in a square
p. 278B).
S. Sophia, Constantinople (Hagia Sophia =divine wisdom) (532-7) (pp. 273,
274, 281, 282A, B), was built for Justinian by the architects Anthemius of Tralles
and Isodorus of Miletus, on the site of two successive basilican churches of the same
name, erected respectively by Constantine (c. 335) and Theodosius II (415). It
was the most important church in Constantinople. The noble atrium forming the
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE 281

fi
Bey

SECTION a-b~
Paci \RAMP: TO
GALLERIES

, Ks 3 5 ISOFEET
JOD OF DOME FORMATION ‘ibs Sa ares
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

A. North aisle, looking east B. Interior from an exedra

S. Sophia, Constantinople (532-7). See pp. 280 ff.

c. Exterior from S.E. D. Interior looking E.

S. Irene, Constantinople. Rebuilt by Justinian 527-65, and again rebuilt 740.
See p. 284
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE 283
approach to the church led through the great triple portal to the outer narthex 5; be-
yond is the imposing main narthex, 200 ft by 30 ft, which is in two storeys, the
lower of which was used by catechumens and penitents, while the upper forms part
of the gallery to the church. The plan consists of a central space 107 ft square, with
four massive stone piers 25 ft by 60 ft, pierced by arches for aisles and gallery, sup-
porting four semicircular arches upon which rests the dome, 107 ft in diameter and
180 ft above the ground. East and west of this central area are great hemicycles,
crowned with semi-domes, the space thus enclosed forming a great oval nave, 225 ft
by 107 ft, being about 28 ft wider than the huge vaulted tepidarium of the Thermae
of Caracalla. The great hemicycles are flanked by exedrae with semi-domes, and at
the extreme east is the apse. North and south of the nave are two-storeyed aisles
over 50 ft wide, the upper storey being the ‘gynaeceum’ or women’s gallery, reached
from the outside by ramps at each corner and by stone steps in the exterior. These
aisles bring the main building approximately to a square which, excluding the
eastern apse and the narthex, measures 250 ft by 220 ft. North and south, forming
continuations of the four great piers already mentioned, are massive buttresses 25 ft
wide by 60 ft long, which take the thrust of the main arches and central dome on
the two sides where there are no semi-domes (p. 277M). The two principal semi-
domes, east and west, abut against the great supporting arches and thus act as
buttresses to the central dome.
The monumental interior (p. 274) gives the impression of one vast domed
space, but the detailed effect, with the great hemicycles and smaller exedrae, is one
of extreme intricacy, in spite of the simplicity of the general scheme. Scale is
obtained by the gradation of the various parts, from the two-storeyed arcades of
the aisles to the lofty dome which rests, with little apparent support, like a canopy
Over the centre, or, as Procopius described it, ‘as if suspended by a chain from
heaven.’ Gigantic pendentives to the central dome overhang about 25 ft and are
themselves over 60 ft high (p. 281C), above which the dome itself rises only So ft.
The dome is constructed of bricks about 27 ins square in the lower part and 24 ins
Square at the crown, and 2 ins thick, with mortar joints of nearly the same thick-
ness. The joints do not radiate from the centre of the dome, but have a flatter in-
clination, in order to diminish the thrust. Walls and piers are sheeted with marbles
of Phrygian white, Laconian green, Libyan blue, Celtic black, besides Thessalian
and Bosphorus marbles, all fixed by metal clips (p. 277L). Floors are laid with
coloured mosaics in various patterns, and vaults and domes are enriched with glass
mosaics representing apostles, angels, and saints on a glittering golden ground
When the church was used as a mosque most of these were covered with plaster,
which is now being removed. The Muslims did, however, leave the representations
in the four pendentives of the six-winged seraphim, whom they acknowledged
under the names of the Archangels Gabriel, Michael, Raphael and Israfil.
107 columns of marbles are used constructively to support the groined vaults
inder the galleries, and moulded bronze rings encircle the column shafts at their
unction with capitals and bases, while the outward pressure of the arches is counter-
acted by tie-rods (pp. 277N, 282A, B). The lower storeys of the aisles north and south
of the central space are supported by four columns of dark-green marble from the
Temple of Artemis, Ephesus (pp. 129, 282B), while the upper storeys have six
columns of the same marble. Each of the four exedrae (p. 282B) has two large
-olumns of dark-red porphyry from the Temple of Jupiter, Baalbek (p. 194), and six
maller columns in the gallery (p. 281D). The capitals are mostly of the cubiform
ype, with small Ionic angle volutes and delicately incised carving, in which is
ometimes woven the monogram of Justinian, while a variation of the dosseret
Jlock on the lines of the Classical abacus is generally used above the capital. The
284 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

lighting is partly effected by forty small windows in the lower part of the dome
(pp. 273, 274) and by twelve windows grouped in the spandrel walls north and south
under the great arches (p. 274) which support the dome, while there are windows in
the lower part of the domes of the exedrae and of the apse. Many of the windows are
small and spanned by semicircular arches; others are more elaborate, as in the
‘gynaeceum’ in which large semicircular-headed openings are divided into six by
columns in two heights, between which marble lattice screens admit light through
glazed openings about 7 ins square (p. 300K). The building is now a museum.
The exterior (p. 273) is less impressive than the interior, for the brick walls
are plastered over and distempered conveying a drab effect at close quarters. The
actual shape of the domes and semi-domes is visible, as there is only a covering of
lead, + inch thick, resting on wooden battens placed immediately on the outer
surface of the brick domes. The immense buttresses and the deeply recessed
spandrel wall between them are imposing features in an exterior which depends for
effect entirely on the massiveness and general symmetry of its proportions. The
lofty minarets were not part of the original design, but were added by the Turks
after the capture of Constantinople (1453), and they frame in the subsidiary
buildings of the Turkish period. S. Sophia is the supreme monument of Byzantine
architecture, and provided the model for many of the great mosques which were
built after the Turkish capture. It is the masterpiece of Byzantine architecture,
as the Parthenon is the masterpiece of Greek architecture and the Pantheon of
Roman.
S. Irene, Constantinople (740) (p. 282C, D) was originally erected by Constan-
tine, but was several times destroyed and finally rebuilt. It is one of the twenty-one
Christian churches which still remain in Constantinople, though diverted to other
uses. It preserves the basilican plan of nave and aisles with eastern apse and western
atrium, and the dome is believed to be the earliest example raised on a high drum
pierced with windows. This was found to give dignity to the church, and so
became the usual treatment.
S. Theodore, Constantinople (c. 1100) (p. 278D, E, F, G), is a perfect specimen
of a typical small Byzantine church, although now a mosque. It has a double
narthex crowned with domes leading into a nave 29 ft 6 ins square, with central
dome formed with curved flutings and set on a drum 13 ft in diameter (p. 277F)
and with an apse semicircular internally and polygonal externally. The plan is
what is commonly known as the ‘cross-in-square’ and is characteristic of the later
development of the style. The basis of the design is a dome and drum raised upon
pendentives over a square space which is usually defined by four columns. From
this square project four arms, which are usually barrel-vaulted. At each internal
angle is a smaller area, roofed at a lower level, so that the building has a square
ground plan but is cruciform above. Sometimes, as at S. Theodore, there is an
additional bay at the east end, and usually a narthex at the west end. The exterior
is one of the most elaborate of all Byzantine churches in Constantinople, built of
brick and stone in bands, with columns supporting semicircular arches surmounted
by windows within a second tier of similar arches recessed in rings, while over the
outer narthex are the three octagonal tile-covered domes on high drums.
S. Saviour in the Chora, Constantinople (c. 1050) (p. 299A), was founded in
the fourth century. The central area has a dome on a high drum, 17 ft 6 ins in
diameter, pierced by windows, and the nave has semicircular windows on three
sides and an apse at the sanctuary end. The inner and outer narthex, with their
domes, are richly ornamented with fine early mosaics, and hence it is known as
the ‘Mosaic Mosque.’
The Church of the Apostles, Constantinople, founded by Constantine
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE 285

MINERVA MEDICA: PENDENTIVE

{
—5)

MM
Wye \
ys
CHT Ry

S-

sft Hi
1 ae : aes
.

"CEI
are
o ii"

) “2(Pewter FROM sw TK
=) eee SCALE FOR ALL SECTIONS Ul
LF al HALF fmm Per
ER PLAN" LOWER PLAN °scal? roftau. Beans” G
286 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

B. Monastery of S, Luke of Stiris: c. SS. Sergius and Bacchus,

interior of small church looking E. Constantinople (527).
(11th century). See p. 290 See p. 280
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

‘y
rh
“ieee

ccd

‘Wieniiad

B. Church of the Apostles, Athens. See p. 290

 S. MARK: VENICE & 5S. FRONT: PERIGUEUX

& _||_

; (NN
f\_[ JX _\
1

UN ol
Z B\ NG

ye N {2
UN
0 (I
CAD

INTERIORC
LOOKING

SCALE FOR PLANS

FEET 50
METRES |

ANTERIOR OFS-FRONT
LOOKINGE.
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE 289

the Great, was rebuilt by Justinian and destroyed in 1463 to make way for the mosque
of Sultan Mohammad II, and had a special interest, as with its cruciform plan and
five domes it is said to have been the prototype of S. Mark, Venice and S. Front,
Périgueux (p. 290).
S. Mark, Venice (1042-85) (pp. 288, 291, 292), reflects the art of Byzantium which
so largely influenced the architecture of Venice, situated midway between East
and West, The glittering, resplendent facade of the narthex faces the great Piazza
of San Marco, which was, like the Forum in ancient Rome, the centre of city life,
with the soaring campanile and the Palace of the Doge, all surrounded by stately
arcades. This vast open space, paved in marble, forms, in fact, a great public
atrium to the church dedicated to the sea-city’s patron saint. The history of this
city planning, which swept away the waters of an intruding canal and pushed back
the buildings to give space to the church, reveals the pride of the prosperous
Republic in her glorious religious monument, which was, in its architectural style,
an assertion of the independent spirit of a freedom-loving people who were always
intolerant of the domination of the Popes of Rome. This world-famous edifice stands
on the site of the original basilican church, which was founded in 864 to receive
the body of S. Mark, and partially burnt down in 976. Between 1042 and 1085 the
plan was completely transformed to resemble that of the Church of the Apostles,
Constantinople (p. 284): transepts were added, the sanctuary was extended, the
narthex was continued round the sides, and the interior altered from the basilican
to the Byzantine plan of a Greek cross surmounted by domes. The plan (p. 288C)
has a central dome, 42 ft in diameter, and a dome over each arm of the cross. The
great square piers, 28 ft by 21 ft, which carry the dome are pierced on both the
ground and gallery levels, and arcades support passages connecting the central
piers to the extremities of the nave and transepts. The addition of the narthex and
bapistery (p. 292A) makes the church approximately square on plan.
The interior (p. 291B) is gorgeous in coloured marbles and brilliant glass
mosaics which, extending in one continuous surface over vault and dome, picture
the story of the Creation, the fall of man and the Redemption, the miracles of
Christ and the legends of the saints, all enshrined in a glowing golden background.
Mosaic is here, as also in the vaulted narthex (p. 292B), the real and essential de-
coration, to which all architectural detail is subordinated, and it is used like the
stained glass of Mediaeval churches to produce a popular representation of
incidents from the Old and New Testaments.
The exterior, dating partly from the twelfth century, with its five entrance portals
(p. 291A), was much enriched by mosaic and marble decoration during the Renais-
sance. The exterior has indeed a character peculiarly its own; for it is a marvellous
blending into one homogeneous whole of a variety of features from many foreign
lands. Bronze horses from the triumphal arch of Nero, columns of porphyry, ala-
baster, and verde-antico from Constantinople and Alexandria, coloured marble
facing from Eastern cities, all form part of the world-wide contribution which, in the
twelfth century, commanders of warships and captains of trading vessels were alike
bidden to levy and bring in as votive offerings for success in commerce and victory
in war. In the thirteenth century a crown of gold was given to the building by the
unique timber domes (p. 2888), and finally, in the fifteenth century, the facade was
further embellished by Gothic canopied niches, ogee arches, and crocketed pinnacles,
all of which form a delicate stone framework to the glittering mosaics below. S.
Mark depends for beauty externally not only on delicate sculpture, but also on subtle,
variable, and indescribable colour, produced by transparent alabaster, polished
marble, and lustrous gold mosaic, all set against the azure blue of the Venetian sky
and bathed in the sunshine reflected from the shimmering waters of the Adriatic.
K HORA.
290 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

S. Front, Périgueux (1120) (p. 288D-G), is an interesting product of Byzantine

influence carried west along trade routes by Venetian merchants, and is an almost
identical copy in plan of S. Mark, Venice. The entire absence of mosaic, however,
shows by contrast how much Byzantine interiors owe to that art, for this French
version, appears bare and plain in comparison with the pure Byzantine original.
S. Fosca, Torcello (1108), forming, with the old cathedral (p. 270) and cam-
panile, a picturesque group rising from this island in the lagoons of Venice, is based
on the Byzantine plan, with central dome supported by eight columns, while ex-
ternally an arcade on five sides forms a semi-octagon. The details indicate that this
simple building was constructed by Byzantine Greeks who also worked on the
rebuilding of S. Mark, Venice.
S. Mary Pammakaristos (Church of the Theotokos) (eighth century) (p.
287A), S. Theodosia (ninth century), and the triple church of S. Saviour Panto-
krator (founded by the Empress Irene early in the twelfth century), are some of the
Byzantine churches erected in Constantinople which have been well preserved
considering their conversion into mosques, and are excellent examples of the
smaller structures on the typical Byzantine plan of a Greek cross with a central
dome, the influence of which spread to Italy, e.g. S. Antonio, Padua (p. 604).
The Little Metropole Cathedral, Athens (c. 1250) (p. 278H-L), is the smallest
building in the world dignified by the name of cathedral, for it measures only
38 ft by about 25 ft, and the dome, supported on a high octagonal drum, is only
9 ft in diameter, pierced by tiny windows, and its facades are largely made up of
miscellaneous marbles from old Greek buildings.
The Kapnikarea Church, Athens (875), and S. Theodore, Athens (1049)
(p. 286A), are similar churches with small central domes raised on octagonal drums,
while the Churches of the Monastery of S. Luke of Stiris in Phocis (eleventh
century) (pp. 286B, 294A), have domes with remarkable mosaics and screens to
bema (pp. 286B, 300L, 302). The diminutive proportions of these churches are due to
the simple ritual of the Greek Orthodox Church and to the absence of instrumental
music and of chairs for the worshippers—an influence which did not apply to
churches in the Byzantine style erected, like S. Mark, Venice, for Catholic ritual.
S. Sophia, Salonica (495), one of the earliest Byzantine domed churches,
altered by the Turks, has some fine ninth-century mosaics, while the Church of
the Holy Apostles, Salonica (14th century), has a central and four smaller domes,
typical of later Byzantine architecture. Also in Salonica there is a very early domed
church, S. George (400), which it is believed may have been built on a Roman
temple of the pattern of the Pantheon, Rome.
The Church of the Apostles, Athens (p. 287B) is an eleventh-century cross-in-
square church which has recently been restored. It is situated in a corner of the
classical Agora in Athens, and has characteristic Byzantine brick and stone wall
construction.
The Churches at Bozra and Ezra in Syria follow a favourite plan of a circle or
octagon within a square with niches in the angles. They are considered to be pro-
totypes of Byzantine churches like SS. Sergius and Bacchus, Constantinople (p.
278B), and S. Vitale, Ravenna (p. 285C).
The Church at Graéanica (1321), in Serbia, with its characteristic exterior of
brick and stone and its domes on high drums grouped around the dominating
central dome, is probably the most remarkable of all the churches in that country,
where the architecture was midway between two influences, arising respectively
from Constantinople on the east and Rome on the west, the former prevailing. The
churches at Sopocani (1190), Hilandar (1196), De¢ani (1330), Ravanica (1387),
and the Lazarica church at KruSevac are other Serbian examples of note.
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE 291

aan

A. S. Mark, Venice: west facade

(12th century, 13th century gilded domes and 15th century additions).
See p. 289

B. S. Mark, Venice: interior looking E.

(1042-85; cancelli erected 1393). See p. 289
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

B. S. Mark, Venice: detail of mosaic in narthex. See p. 289

 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE 293

The churches in Russia are a development of Byzantine architecture. S. Sophia

at Kiev (1036) is distinguished by having twelve supplementary domes. At S.
Sophia, Novgorod (1052), the top surface of the dome is steepened, partly to
throw off snow and partly for aesthetic reasons (p. 2948); later, considerable em-
phasis seems to have been laid on the skyline, for the domes have a curious bulbous
_ shape and are raised on tall, cylindrical drums. The most striking example of the
style is S. Basil in the Red Square at Moscow (1554), where there are eight bulb-
like domes, each different and all painted in the most brilliant colours.

BAPTISTERIES
Separate buildings used only for the sacrament of baptism were a feature of Early
Christianity. For this rite, Roman circular temples and tombs were occasionally
used. As the rite was administered only on three great Christian festivals—Easter;
Pentecost, and Epiphany—these buildings had to be of considerable size, and
until the end of the sixth century of our era they sometimes adjoined the atrium or
forecourt of the church; but after this period, and especially with the introduction
of infant baptism, the baptistery was replaced by a font in the church, close to the
entrance. When circular Roman temples or tombs were modified to meet the new
requirements, these sometimes had to be enlarged. It was difficult to cover the
enclosed area with one roof supported only by outside walls, and therefore, whereas
the Romans had used internal columns attached to the walls in a decorative way,
the Byzantines used columns constructively to support the central roof, and sur-
rounded the whole with a one-storeyed aisle enclosed by an outer wall, which
supported a lower roof (p. 295E-J).
The Baptistery, Nocera (350) (p. 295H, J), 80 ft in diameter, with a ring of
thirty antique columns in pairs, appears to be the first instance of the combination
of an internal dome covered by a wooden roof externally; for Roman architects had
previously allowed the vault to show externally, as in the Pantheon. This treatment
is similar to the practice of Gothic architects, who covered the thin stone vaults of
their churches with protecting timber roofs (p. 369C, F).
The Baptistery of Constantine, Rome (430-40) (pp. 295E, F, G), built
near the Lateran church by Sixtus III, and not by Constantine to whom it is
generally attributed, is among the oldest of Italian baptisteries, of which it was
probably the model. It is octagonal and the roof is supported by a two-storeyed
ring of eight porphyry and marble columns taken from old pagan buildings, while
in the centre is an old Roman bath of green basalt converted into a font.
The Baptistery, Ravenna, erected 449-52 for the Orthodox community, is
octagonal with two internal wall arcades one above the other, similarly placed to
the superimposed columns in the Mausoleum of Diocletian, now the Cathedral, at
Spalato (Split) (p. 218). The upper arcade is subdivided into triple arches under
each main arch, the earliest example of a treatment which became so usual in the
Romanesque period (p. 330D). The dome, constructed of hollow tiles, has fine
fifth-century mosaics representing the baptism of Christ.

TOMBS
Up to the fourth century, burial within city boundaries was usually prohibited by
law, but the Christian objection to cremation and insistence on burial in con-
secrated ground, together with the desire to provide monumental tombs which
were at once an expression of the Christian faith in immortality and a memorial
to the dead, led to the erection of imposing structures, which were usually domed
and often enriched with lavish mosaic decorations.
S. Costanza, Rome (330) (p. 296A; B; C, D, E), erected by Constantine for his
204 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

A. Monastery of S. Luke of Stiris: the two churches from E.

(11th century). See p. 290

B. S. Sophia, Novgorod (1052). See p. 293

 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE 295

Mi"|
al

UGGESTED RESTORATION

10 |[0]
ZZ IIS.

wo
iarr
—————

F ELEVATION
 296 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

|S. COSTANZA: ROME 20 MTs

SECTIONAL VIEW D PLAN (restoreb)

. TOMB OF GALLE, PLACIDIA - RAVENNA

TORIB OF THEOD URIC- RAVENNA

Bi { 2
afUE Thug
( iy

TT
Wm
dei att
4 1

i, |
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE 297
daughter Constantia, was converted into a church in 1256. The entrance leads to
the central space, 4o ft in diameter, encircled by twelve pairs of coupled granite
columns which support the dome, and it has a surrounding aisle covered with a
barrel vault, ornamented with mosaics of the fourth century representing the
vintage.
The Tomb of Galla Placidia, Ravenna (420) (pp. 277B, 296F, G, H, J;), appears
to be the earliest building which is cruciform in plan, and is extremely interesting
as the sarcophagi still remain in their original positions in the arms of the cross.
It is 39 ft by 33 ft internally, and the crossing is covered by an unusual dome in
which both dome and pendentives are portions of the same hemisphere (p. 2778, C)-
The walls are lined with marble slabs, and the dome and vaults still retain the
ancient coloured mosaics.
The Tomb of Theodoric, Ravenna (530) (pp. 296K, L, M, 299C), is in two
storeys, of which the lower, a decagon externally 45 ft in diameter, encloses a
cruciform crypt, while the upper storey is circular internally and has traces of an
external arcade. The extraordinary roof is formed of one huge slab of stone
weighing 470 tons and hollowed into a flattish dome, 35 ft in diameter, on which
stone handles are formed for hoisting it into position. The ashes of the founder were
deposited in an urn above the dome.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. The domical method of construction governs the plan of Byzantine
churches, which are all distinguished by a central square, covered with a dome on
pendentives (pp. 277, 281). Short arms on each side form a Greek cross, and the
filling in of the angles brings the plan nearly to a square (p. 278B). Opposite the
entrance was the apse for the altar in the sanctuary, which was screened off by
the characteristic ‘iconostas’ with its three doors, and there were also lateral ritual
chapels. The narthex formed an entrance vestibule and was frequently crowned
with domes. The essential difference in plan between a Byzantine and an Early
Christian church may be summed up as follows: Byzantine churches, unlike Early
Christian churches with their campanili, had no bell-towers. The Byzantine church,
because of the grouping of subsidiary domes round a central dome, gives a vertical
impression; for the eye is gradually drawn upwards towards the central culminat-
ing dome (p. 273). The Early Christian church, because of the vista of columns,
entablatures, and simple timber roof, gives a horizontal impression; for the eye is
led along these horizontal lines to the apsidal sanctuary which is the important
feature (p. 256B).
WALLS. The walls were usually constructed of brick and internally encrusted
with rich coloured marbles and shining glass mosaics, which swept from wall to
arch and arch to vault almost to the exclusion of mouldings and sculptured orna-
ment. In this lavish application of colour to a flat surface all the oriental love of
magnificence found full expression. In later examples, fresco painting is more
common, and the technique of the Byzantines preceded and equalled the achieve-
ments of the early Italian Renaissance artists, Giotto and Duccio. Externally the
walls were comparatively plain and depended largely for effect on the brilliant
oriental sunshine which clothed them with a garment of glowing colour. The
facades were often thrown into prominence by alternate layers or bands of brick
and stone, reminiscent of the strata of a quarry (pp. 278D, E, 294A). This simple
device further accentuated the connection of the building with the ground in which
it had its foundations. :
OPENINGS. Arcades or semicircular arches were employed in churches to
298 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

support the galleries (p. 282B). Doors were usually spanned by semicircular arches (p.
291A), but flat and stilted arches were also used. Pointed arches had been employed
in Mesopotamia since the eighth century B.c.; the earliest Byzantine instances,
561-4, built in the reign of Justinian, appear in Syria at Qasr ibn Wardan. In some
examples, windows were arranged in tiers (p. 282B). The encircling ring of windows
at the base of the dome, or in the drum upon which the dome was raised, was often
the chief source of light in the church (p. 274). Windows were also occasionally
formed of a thin frame, 3 ins thick, of translucent marble, filled in with glass (p-
300K) and creamy, golden-hued alabaster which the brilliant sunshine wrought into
colour like stained glass. The Gothic architects of Northern Europe, where large
windows were necessary owing to dullness of the climate, adopted a translucent
scheme of decoration by means of painted glass pictures in the large traceried
windows instead of sheathing their walls with mosaics.
Roors. The method of roofing was by domes of brick, stone, or concrete, often
with no further covering (pp. 273, 277, 278). In S. Sophia the vaults are covered
with sheets of lead, a quarter of an inch thick, fastened to timber laths resting on
the vaults. Hollow earthenware jars were used in order to reduce the thrust on the
supporting walls at S. Vitale, Ravenna (p. 285D). The Byzantines practised the
system of placing the dome over a square or octagon by means of pendentives (p.
277M), which had only been employed tentatively by the Romans, as in the Minerva
Medica, Rome (pp. 177N; 209, 285A, B). Examples of an even earlier date have been
discovered in Asia Minor and elsewhere in the East, but wherever the pendentive
may have originated, it was the Byzantines who were the first to develop its use on
a grand scale.
Domes are of three types: (i) simple, (ii) compound, (iii) melon-shaped (p. 277).
In the simple type of dome, pendentives and dome were part of the same sphere.
A good idea of this type is obtained by halving an orange, cutting off four slices,
each at right angles to the last, to represent the four arches and then scooping out
the interior; the portion above the crown of these semicircles is the dome and the
intervening triangles are the pendentives. Such a form of dome is, however, rare,
and perhaps the only example in Europe before the Renaissance is that over the
Tomb of Galla Placidia (p. 277B, c). The compound type of dome gives greater
height and was of two varieties, in the first of which the dome ceased to be part of
the same sphere as the pendentives, but rose independently above them (p. 277D),
and in the second the dome was raised on a high drum pierced with windows (p.
277E). In Russia a further development took place. The dome, instead of having a
simple hemispherical outline, was transformed, partly to throw off snow and partly
to provide a more attractive silhouette, into a bulbous onion shape (p. 294B). The
melon-shaped type of dome was an alternative which involved the treatment of the
inner surface, and consisted of curved flutings, as at S. Theodore, Constantinople,
and SS. Sergius and Bacchus (p. 277 F, H-K).
COLUMNS. Columns were used constructively, but were always subordinate
features and generally introduced to support galleries, as massive piers and walls
supported the superstructure (p. 277). In the first instance, columns were taken
from ancient buildings, but these were not so numerous in the East as in the neigh-
bourhood of Rome, and therefore the supply was sooner exhausted. This provided
an opportunity for designing monolithic shafts. For capitals, the Roman Ionic (p.
300) and Corinthian and Composite types (p. 300B, D) were sometimes used, but
from these was derived a new cubiform type with convex sides (p. 300C), suited
to carry a rising arch, which took the place of the horizontal entablature, and this
resulted in the gradual disuse of the Roman ‘Orders’ of architecture. Over each
type was frequently placed a deep abacus or ‘dosseret block,’ reminiscent of the
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE 299

ee
eee
Fee
es
DS

A. S. Saviour in the Chora, Constantinople, with Turkish minaret

(founded 4th century, but rebuilt c. 1050). See p. 284

B. S. Vitale, Ravenna (526-47). c, Mausoleum of Theodoric, Rayenna

See p. 280 (530), See p. 297
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

OG INT ASN?)

\\\3) PRS ARC yy

\) qf >) y)

BIRD ano BASKET CAPE: Ccustion ape

SOPHIA: CONSTANTINOPLE
1 (ol
5. VITALE : RAVENNA
1,

Ve A\ TT
{\"

f
int
i i:
ONC CAPL: D
S, EME

LOS

oe :

{ 0
A) 5Ae

AL CASKET )

OOOwS
OG eee
oyae

tt ‘o
ADT at
Oo 1 ot L
il \ | i
|
ff
\
|
| ‘
:
LINE
CENTRE.
o | !
a o =!
oooo0 o 2 { i

|
eae —> © 1

Om) oo Oom@o be ‘
mo} joo [ira mf eS '
O65) pea og) | ; me
SS el ' eye

[7 | ct SECTION | HALF ELEVATION

il 1 | if
|
| i \\) |
HALF ELEVATION
ay
SECTION
il
= | e—t
WINDOW in GALLERY: S‘SOPHIA: CONSTANTINOPLE SOoREEN to BEMA: S.LUKE or STIRI:
 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE 301

Classic entablature, or a new invention which performed the function of enlarging

the surface of the capital to support the wide voussoirs of the arch or a thick wall
(p. 300C, D, E). These capitals were carved with incised foliage of sharp outline with
drilled eyes between the leaves, all contained within the general outline of the
capital (p. 300C). An effective type is the bird-and-basket capital (p. 300A) from S.
Sophia, Constantinople.
MOULDINGS. Mouldings were little used because the marble and mosaic wall
linings ran continuously over the surface of walls and arches. Internally, decorative
panels of marble and mosaic were sometimes framed in billet mouldings, probably
derived from the Classic dentil course, and flat splayed mouldings, with incised
ornament, were also used (p. 277L). Externally the simple treatment of walls in
flat expanses of brickwork, with occasional stone banded courses, did not leave the
same scope for mouldings as in other styles. Flat stone bandings flush with the
wall surface were used instead of string courses and cornices (p. 278D, E).
ORNAMENT. The scheme of ornamentation was elaborate in the extreme, for
internal walls were lined with costly marbles with veining carefully arranged to
form patterns, while vaults and upper walls were sheathed with glass mosaic
pictures of symbolic figures, groups of saints, the peacock as the emblem of im-
mortal life, the endless knot as the emblem of eternity, and the sacred monogram
of Christ. Byzantine pavements of many-coloured marbles and mosaics were
carried out in great variety of patterns, such as ‘opus sectile’ and ‘opus Alexan-
drinum,’ and thus the general colour-scheme was carried throughout the church
over floor, walls, arches, and vaults. Mosaic in small cubes was used broadly as a
complete lining to brick structures, and mouldings were replaced by decorative
bands in the mosaic. One surface melts into another as the mosaics creep from
wall, arch, and pendentive to the dome, while one universal golden background
gives unity of effect to the whole surface. Greek rather than Roman technique was
followed in the carving, on account of the Greek origin of Byzantine craftsmen. A
special character of the carving was due to the use of the drill instead of the chisel.
The acanthus leaf, deeply channelled and of V-shaped section, was adopted from
the Greek variety, but became more conventional in treatment with acute-pointed
leaves drilled with deep holes at the springings (p. 300D, E). The great characteristic
of Byzantine ornament as compared with Classical is that the pattern is incised
instead of raised and was cut into the surface without breaking the general outline.
The bridal casket of Projecta (p. 300F), the marble sarcophagus (p. 300]), the well-
head from Venice (p. 300G), and the parapet panel (p. 300H) are all typical examples
of Byzantine art and show the close alliance between architecture and subsidiary
arts. The screen to the bema of S. Luke of Stiris (p. 300L), with its cubiform
capitals and unending knot ornamentation, is an example of church fittings. Figure
sculpture was not allowed by the Greek Church, as it was held to savour of idolatry,
and so this was an additional reason for the Byzantine type of decoration which
expressed itself in flat-coloured pictures and not in raised sculptured figures.
Where mosaic was not used, fresco painting was substituted. In their own special
way these Byzantine artists, with their miracles of colour effects, rivalled even the
artists of Old Greece, whose sculpture stands unchallenged through all ages.
It was as well for the fame of Byzantine art that it had no chance of entering into
rivalry with the art of Greece. It was compelled to seek another form of expression,
and this necessity gave rise to the wonderful pictures which clothe Byzantine
churches in the glowing beauty of surface decoration.
302 BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE

Mosaic in S. Luke of Stiris. See pp. 290, 301

REFERENCE BOOKS
BEYLIE,L. DE. L’ Habitation byzantine. Grenoble and Paris, 1902-3.
CHOISY, A. L’ Art de bdtir chez les Byzantins. Paris, 1883.
COLASANTI,A. L’arte bisantina in Italia. Milan [1912].
DALTON, O.M. Byzantine Art and Archaeology. Oxford, 1911.
DIDRON,A.N. Christian Iconography. 2 vols., London, 1886.
DIEHL, Cc. Manuel d’art byzantin. Paris, 1910.
EBERSOLT, J. Monuments d’ architecture byzantine. Paris, 1934.
ERRARD,C. et GAYET. L’art byzantin. 4 vols., Paris [1901-11].
FOORD,E. The Byzantine Empire. London, 1911.
FOSSATI,G. Aya Sofia, Constantinople. London, 1852.
GEORGE, WALTER S. The Church of S. Eirene at Constantinople. London, 1912.
GURLITT, C. Die Baukunst Konstantinopels. 2 vols., Berlin, 1907-12.
HAMILTON,J.ARNOTT. Byzantine Architecture and Decoration. London, 1933.
HARVEY, W. Church of the Nativity, Bethlehem. London, 1910.
JACKSON, SIRT. G. Byzantine and Romanesque Architecture. Cambridge, 1920.
KNIGHT,H..G. Ecclesiastical Architecture of Italy. 2 vols., London, 1842-4.
LETHABY, W.R. Church of Sancta Sophia, Constantinople. London and New York, 1894.
MICHEL, A. Histoire del’art. Vol. i, pt. i. Paris, 1905.
MILLINGEN,A. VAN. Byzantine Constantinople. London, 1899.
—. Byzantine Churches in Constantinople. London, 1912.
ONGANIA, F. Saint Mark’s, Venice. A large and beautiful monograph in several vols.
Venice, 1881.
PORTER, A.K. Mediaeval Architecture. 2 vols., New York and London, 1909.
RICE,D. TALBOT. Byzantine Art. Pelican Books, London, 1954.
SALZENBURG, W. Alt-christliche Baudenkmdler von Constantinopel. 2 vols., Berlin, 1854-55.
SCHULTZ, R. W. and BARNSLEY, S. H. The Monastery of St. Luke of Stiris in Phocis.
Folio. London, 1901.
SOTIRION,G.A. The Byzantine Monuments of Cyprus. Vol. i. Athens, 1935. (In Greek).
SPIERS,R. Architecture East and West. London, 1905.
STEWART, CECIL. Early Christian, Byzantine and Romanesque Architecture. (Vol. ii of
Simpson, F. M., History of Architectural Development). London, 1954.
STRZYGOWSKI, J. Kleinasien. 4to., 1903; Byzantinische Denkmdler. 2 vols., Vienna, 1891—
1903.
TEXIER,C.and PULLAN,R. P. Byzantine Architecture. London, 1864.
 A

‘Land over 3,000 Feet

«\Durhanv A "7 ita ses

e Fountains Abbey ——$— aed

e
o ve

Gloucester

Europe about 1100

VII. ROMANESQUE ARCHITECTURE

EUROPE
(ninth-twelfth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. On the decline of the Roman Empire, the Romanesque style
grew up in those countries of Western Europe which had been under the rule of
Rome, and geographical position determined many of the peculiarities of the style
in each country. Apart from its Roman origin, from which it took its name, the
Romanesque style owed something to Byzantine art, which was carried westwards
along the great trade routes, by way of such centres as Venice, Ravenna, and Mar-
seilles, and thus exercised a formative influence, especially in certain districts, as
will be seen in later chapters.
GEOLOGICAL. The use of local materials, whether stone or brick, marble or
terra-cotta, as well as of ready-made columns and other features from old Roman
304 ROMANESQUE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

buildings, accounts for many of the varying characteristics in each country over
this wide area, with its different geological formations.
CLIMATIC. Climatic conditions also contributed to differences of treatment
north and south of the Alps and Pyrenees. In the duller climates of the north,
window openings were enlarged to admit sufficient light, while in the south they
were kept small to exclude the dazzling sunshine. The slope of roofs was also
largely determined by climate; and it will be seen that the flat roofs of the south
gave way to the high-pitched roofs in the north to throw off rain and snow.
RELIGIOUS. Christianity, the chief source of education and culture, was gradu-
ally spreading throughout northern Europe, and the erection of a church often
resulted in the foundation of a city; for the Papacy had been rising to great power
and influence, and rivalled, or even controlled, such civil government as existed.
Justinian’s Pragmatic Sanction of 554 had already conferred authority on bishops
over provincial and municipal governments, and this had increased the power of the
Church, which now often nominated public officials. Bishops and abbots were also,
by reason of their feudal rank, military chiefs who sometimes took the field in
person, and thus the Church was everywhere predominant. Religious enthusiasm
and zeal found their material expression in the magnificent cathedral churches
and monastic buildings, which were an even more characteristic outcome of this
period than were the castles of feudal chiefs. This same religious fervour led to the
Crusades against the ‘Saracens’ who had overrun Palestine and taken the Holy
Places, and this long-continued warfare (1095-1270) between Christians of the
West and Muslims of the East was not without its effect on Western art. Monastic
communities had come into existence as early as the sixth century, and were
fostered by Charlemagne, but the eleventh century was remarkable for that great
development of the monastic system which gave an impulse to civilization, pro-
moted new methods in agriculture, and exercised its influence on architecture;
indeed, until the middle of the twelfth century, science, letters, art, and culture
were the monopoly of the religious Orders. The schools attached to monasteries
trained youths for the service of religion; monks and their pupils were often the
designers of cathedrals, and up to the thirteenth century architecture was almost
regarded as a sacred science. (For a description ofa typical monastery plan see p. 308).
The chief religious Orders were as follows:
(1) The Benedictine Order was founded during the sixth century in South Italy
by S. Benedict, who decreed that architecture, painting, and all branches of art were
to be taught. All the pre-conquest monasteries in England, including those of
Canterbury (p. 405) and Westminster (p. 423), belonged to this Order.
(2) The Cluniac Order was founded in 910 with the celebrated Abbey of Cluny
in central France as its headquarters. Cluniac houses were introduced into England
by William the Conqueror at Barnstaple and Lewes.
(3) The Cistercian Order was founded in 1098 at Citeaux, Burgundy, in protest
against the extravagance of the Benedictine system of life and architecture. The
Cistercian influence extended to England, and the Abbeys of Furness, Fountains
(p. 429) and Kirkstall were built by this Order.
(4) The Order of Augustinian Canons differed little from the Benedictine and
was introduced into England in 1108. Carlisle cathedral (p. 406), the abbey
churches at Bristol (p. 405) and Oxford (p. 421) which became cathedrals at the
Reformation, and S. Bartholomew the Great, London (p. 390), were founded by
this Order.
(5) The Order of Premonstratensian Canons was instituted at Prémontré,
Picardy (1120). Easby Abbey, Yorks (1152), and Bayham Abbey are examples of its
monastic buildings in England.
 ROMANESQUE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE 305

(6) The Carthusian Order was founded by S. Bruno in 1084. The Grande
Chartreuse, near Grenoble, is the French headquarters, and other monasteries of
this Order were at Vauvert, Clermont (Auvergne), the Certosa near Florence, the
Certosa near Pavia (p. 604), and the Charterhouse, London (p. 885). By the
rules of the Order the Carthusians had to work, eat, and drink in solitude. Such a
regime explains the original severity of their architecture.
(7) The Military Orders included the Knights Hospitallers or Knights of S.
John (1113) and the Knights Templars (1118). The Temple Church, London
(p. 390), and the round churches at Cambridge, Little Maplestead, and Northamp-
ton were founded by these Orders.
(8) The Friars (Fratres, Fréres, hence Friars), of which there were several Orders,
were of later origin, and their churches, such as S. Andrew’s Hall, Norwich, were
designed for preaching. (a) The Dominicans (preaching or Black Friars) were
founded by S. Dominic in 1216, and came to England in 1221. Fra Angelico was
one of the best-known members of this Order, which held a high place in Christian
art. (b) The Franciscans (mendicant or Grey Friars) were founded by S. Francis of
Assisi in 1209, and came to England in 1224. Roger Bacon was one of the most dis-
tinguished members of this Order, which came to be noted for intellectual attain-
ments. (c) The Carmelites (White Friars) received papal recognition in 1226
and came to England in 1240-1. (d) The Austin Friars (or Hermits). (e) The
Friars or more properly Canons of the Holy Trinity, instituted in 1198. (f) The
Friars of the Holy Cross (Crutched or Crouched Friars), instituted in Bologna in
I169.
(9) The Jesuits belonged to a much later epoch; the Society of Jesus was estab-
lished in 1540 by S. Ignatius Loyola as a counterforce to the Reformation, and did
not reach England until 1580.
SOCIAL. The introduction of the system of feudal tenure, or the holding of land
on condition of military service, caused important changes in the social and poli-
tical organization of states; for through its operation the class of actual slaves died
out, but at the same time the poorer freemen degenerated into serfs, bound to the
land and passing with it on a change of ownership. As civilization advanced the
towns grew in importance, but constant warfare rendered the condition of the
people unsettled and craftsmanship was consequently at a low ebb. Each country,
as will be seen later, had its special social conditions which affected architecture,
while in the days of its greatest prosperity the monastic system played an important
part in the life of the people of all countries, especially in rural districts before the
establishment of hospitals, and when all learning, even medical, was mono-
polized by the Church. Guilds of masons, by reason of privileges gradually ac-
quired, did much to facilitate the building of churches.
HISTORICAL. The break-up of the Roman Empire in the West led to the rise
of the independent states and nations of Europe. The coronation by the Pope of
the Frankish king Charlemagne (800) as Holy Roman Emperor marks the begin-
ning of a new era. From the fall of the Roman Empire till the time of Charlemagne
few buildings had been erected, but he gathered artists and craftsmen around him,
and before his death (814) he had, in a great measure, restored the arts and civiliza-
tion to Western Europe. For the next two hundred years little progress was made.
After this period buildings sprang up which, with their local peculiarities, will be
noticed under each country; but change was slow, as traditional forms were first
modified in design and detail, and new features were only added later. Nearly all
the nations of Europe had by this time struggled into existence. France, Germany,
and Spain were becoming powerful enough to begin to set aside the rule of the
Holy Roman Empire, which was afterwards little more than a title. Denmark,
306 ROMANESQUE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

Sweden, and Norway were distinct kingdoms, and at the end of the eleventh cen-
tury England had been welded into one by William the Norman.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The term Romanesque includes those phases of European architecture which were
based on Roman art from the beginning of the ninth to the end of the twelfth cen-
tury, when the Gothic style, combining the pointed arch, flying buttress, traceried
window and ribbed vault, was generally adopted. This survey of the Romanesque
style is given before treating of the development in each country, viz. in Italy (p. 311)»
France (p. 335), Germany (p. 353), and England (p. 379). After the Imperial rule of
Rome had passed away, her genius still asserted itself in the architecture of the new
states and gave it all a certain similarity, until each country developed its own style.
Certain districts of Europe fell specially under the influence of Byzantine art, which
was itself partly derived from Rome, but which, as East and West drifted apart,
had assumed a special character. Western European architecture exhibiting Eastern
influence in a paramount degree is classified as Byzantine. To appreciate the char-
acter of Romanesque architecture, we must form a mental picture of the conditions
of Europe during the period known as the Dark Ages. We must imagine the re-
mains of an ancient civilization, vast in extent and uniform in character, no longer
regulated by Roman law and no longer protected by Roman power. Its former
glory was now recognizable only by the multitude of its monuments; some were
still intact, others were injured or partially destroyed, most were unused, and all
were alike unguarded and neglected. This is the Rip Van Winkle period of Euro-
pean architecture. We next see Europe rising like a strong man from the lethargy
of a long sleep. He yawns, rubs his eyes, stretches his giant limbs, shakes off his
slumber, and stumbles to his feet to look out again upon the work-a-day world and
the treasures scattered around. He finds himself surrounded by the achievements
of a proud past, and as he becomes conscious of his own needs he realizes the pos-
sibilities of the present. Then with dazed eyes and groping hands he collects these
treasures of art and applies them to his daily needs. From the ruins of mighty
edifices, he gathers fragments of hewn stone, carved capital and sculptured frieze,
and places them together, with monoliths of porphyry and marble, upon old founda-
tions to construct some building of service to himself. Thus, by a gradual discovery
and understanding of the uses of these old fragments, did he succeed in adapting
them to new needs, and thus was a new art founded on the old. Here we have
indeed ‘new lamps for old.’ In this way the birth of Romanesque architecture may
be explained, for the ruins of ancient buildings served as the quarry for the new,
and necessarily determined the character, both of construction and decoration, in
proportion to the extent to which old features were employed.
The later Romanesque style of the tenth to the twelfth centuries was remarkable
for the tentative use of a new constructive principle. This was the deliberate
articulation of structure, in which each constructive part played a designed réle
in establishing equilibrium. This was in contrast to Roman construction, which
had depended upon opposing unco-ordinated masses. This new system, which was
accompanied by the use of dressed stones of comparatively small size connected by
thick beds of mortar, led in the thirteenth century, after many experiments, to the
full development of the Gothic system of architecture, in which elasticity and equi-
librium were jointly employed in the erection of the magnificent series of Gothic
cathedrals. The general architectural character of the Romanesque style is sober
and dignified, while picturesqueness depends on the grouping of towers and the
projection of transepts and choir. It will be seen that in Italy, France, England,
 ROMANESQUE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE 307

and Germany exceptional tendencies were brought about by local conditions; but
in all these countries the character depends on the employment of vaulting, based
on Roman methods.
Roman cross-vaults (pp. 370, 373) were used throughout Europe till the begin-
ning of the twelfth century, but they were heavy and difficult to construct and
were gradually superseded by ‘rib and panel’ vaulting, in which a framework of
ribs supported thin stone panels. The new method consisted in designing the pro-
file of the ribs to which the form of the panels was adapted; whereas in Roman
architecture the shape of the vault itself determined the groin, which was formed
by the intersection of the vaults. Romanesque architects therefore first decided the
profile of the transverse, longitudinal, and diagonal ribs, which last, as groins, had
previously been settled naturally by the intersection of the vault surfaces; this
arrangement produced the quadripartite (four-part) vault. If the cross-vaults were
semi-cylindrical the diagonal groin would be a semi-ellipse (p. 370D), but Roman-
esque architects did not resort to the use of ordinates as was afterwards done in the
Renaissance period; instead, they surmounted the difficulty arising from the dif-
ferent spans of diagonal and transverse ribs in various ways. In France and Ger-
many the vaulting ribs of a square vaulting compartment were usually semicircular
curves starting from the same level; therefore the diagonal rib, having the longest
span, rose to a greater height than the transverse and longitudinal ribs, and when
the panelling was filled in on the top of these ribs each vault was domical (p. 370G).
In England vaults were generally constructed with continuous level ridges, instead
of in this domical form, and the difference in height between diagonal and trans-
verse ribs in a square vaulting compartment was equalized by ‘stilting’ the latter
or by making the diagonal rib a segment of a larger circle than that of the longi-
tudinal and transverse ribs, which were semicircular, as shown on p. 370G. In
vaulting an oblong compartment the difference between the heights of diagonal
and transverse ribs was still greater than in a square compartment and produced
an awkward waving line of the ribs on plan (p. 373B), but little attempt was made
to vault any but square compartments. At Worms (p. 356J), Mainz, and Speyer
the difficulty of vaulting oblong nave compartments was partially surmounted by
including two of them to make one square bay of vaulting, each corresponding
with two square compartments of the side aisles. In some instances, as in the
Abbaye-aux-Hommes (p. 342F) and Abbaye-aux-Dames at Caen (p. 3388), Notre
Dame, Paris (pp. 53IF, G, 532B), and Canterbury (p. 4118), the intermediate pier
was carried up as a vaulting shaft to support a rib which altered the quadripartite
vaulting compartment into six parts, known as ‘sexpartite’ vaulting (p. 370E). The
main piers were usually more massive than the intermediate because they supported
the chief weight of the vaulting. The difficulty of equalizing the height of ribs of dif-
ferent spans, especially in oblong compartments, was finally surmounted by the
introduction of the pointed arch in the Gothic period (p. 370G), when the system
of ‘rib and panel’ vaulting was further elaborated by the addition of various
supplementary ribs (p. 371).

EXAMPLES
Examples of various buildings, such as cathedrals, churches, and castles, are given
under their respective countries. Churches were places of congregation for the
people in contrast to pagan temples which sheltered the statue of a deity. The
monastic system was necessitated by the requirements of monkish communities
which sprang up during the period in different European countries. R. L. Palmer,
in English Monasteries in the Middle Ages, gives a vivid description of the life and
308 ROMANESQUE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

varied pursuits of the monks, which not only helps us to realize the disposition,
uses, and extent of the various buildings in a conventual establishment, but also
shows the important réle played by monasteries in the social system of the Middle
Ages. They formed indeed the connecting link between the ecclesiastical hierarchy
on the one hand and the secular life of the people on the other. These monastic
settlements were factors in the development of Mediaeval architecture.
The monks followed different pursuits according to the Order to which they
belonged (p. 304). The Benedictine was the chronicler and most learned of all
monks; the Augustinian was the preacher and given to disputations; the Cistercian
was the recluse and interested in agricultural pursuits; the Cluniac was the student
and artist; and the Carthusian was the ascetic. The Friars were the missionary
preachers of a later period (p. 305).
A plan has been preserved of the Benedictine monastery of S. Gall, Switzerland
(p. 358), which shows that a complete monastic establishment, like Westminster
Abbey (p. 425H) or Fountains Abbey (p. 432), consisted of a group of buildings
designed for all occupations, both spiritual and temporal, of the monks, and re-
sembled a village with the monastic church as the centre. The monastic group
was planned to include the following essential departments: (a) The Monastic
Church, situated in a court or Close open to the public. (6) A Cloister Court off
which were the chapter house, sacristy, and dormitory with its staircase into the
church, while the cellarage for beer, wine, and oil was often under the dormitory.
The refectory and kitchens, with their noise and smell, were on the side of the
cloister away from the church. The lavatory was usually in the south cloister walk,
as at Westminster, Wells, Chester, Peterborough, and Gloucester. (c) An Inner
Court with infirmary, guest house, kitchen, servants’ hall, library, and the scrip-
torium for writing and illuminating. (d) A Common Court, approached through a
gateway for carts, and surrounded by granaries, bakehouses, stables, store-rooms,
servants’ rooms, tribunal, prison, abbot’s lodging, and barn. (e) Mills, workshops,
gardens, orchards, and fish ponds, which completed the monastic settlement.
Monasteries served the purpose of inns in little-frequented places, as is the case to
this day in some districts on the continent. The plans of some monastic establish-
ments differed in certain details from this description of a Benedictine monastery.
The plans of the churches of the Cluniac Order had double transepts, a feature
which was adopted at Castle Acre Priory and in some English cathedrals, as
Lincoln (p. 410F) and Salisbury (p. 410E).
The churches of the Cistercian Order were divided transversely into three parts
by screens, walls or steps, and there were often no aisles, while the transepts and
eastern arm of the cross were short, so that the choir extended westward of the
transepts. There was an absence of towers and painted glass.
The Carthusians usually provided two churches, one for the monks and another
for the people. A typical feature was the great rectangular cloister, surrounded by
an arcade on to which opened the monks’ cells, which were self-contained and had
their own gardens.
Another variation is found in the churches of the Military Orders, and especially
of the Knights Templars. Their churches were circular, in imitation of the Rotunda
of the Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem (p. 262)

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. The Roman basilica had been the model for Early Christian churches, the
plan of which was subject to new developments during the Romanesque period.
The addition of transepts and the prolongation of the sanctuary or chancel made
 ROMANESQUE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE 309

the church a well-defined cross on plan, as at S. Michele, Pavia (p. 322E). Transepts
were generally the same breadth as the nave, which was usually twice the width of
the aisles. The choir was often raised on piers above the level of the nave and over
a vaulted crypt, in which saint or martyr had been buried, as at S. Miniato,
Florence (p. 321B) and S. Michele, Pavia (p. 322A). In later churches aisles were
sometimes carried round the chancel to form an ambulatory. Cloisters in connec-
tion with monastic churches are often very elaborately treated with twisted columns,
carved capitals, and sculptured arches. Towers, square, octagonal, or circular, are
prominent features of most Romanesque churches. They may occur over the cross-
ing, at the west end centrally with the nave, or at the east end. Sometimes they are
arranged in pairs at the west end and at the ends of the transepts or at the eastern
ends of the aisles, and they often rise to a great height in well-marked stages pierced
with windows.
WALLS. Roman methods of craftsmanship still influenced constructive art in
Europe, but technical skill in general was at a low ebb. Walls were roughly built,
and were relieved externally by shallow buttresses or pilaster strips, connected at
the top by bands of horizontal mouldings or by a series of semicircular arches on
corbels (pp. 350C, 355C). Attached columns, with rough capitals supporting semi-
circular arches, formed wall arcading, which was a frequent decorative feature (p.
350G).
OPENINGS. Arcades consisted of massive circular columns or piers which sup-
ported semicircular arches, as in the naves of Norman cathedrals (p. 392B). Door
and window openings are very characteristic, with jambs or sides formed in a
series of receding moulded planes known as ‘orders,’ in which are set circular
shafts surmounted by a continuous abacus. The semicircular arch above was also
constructed in receding concentric rings (p. 330B), which followed the lines of the
recesses below. A rose or wheel window was often placed over the principal west
door, as at S. Zeno Maggiore, Verona (p. 325A), and in South Italian churches, as
at Palermo. Glass does not appear to have come into general use till the ninth
century.
Rooks. The general employment of vaulting in the eleventh century, especially
over side aisles, may have been due to the desire to fire-proof the building, although
the central nave often had only a simple wooden roof. The form of arch employed
in vaulting as elsewhere was semicircular, often raised or ‘stilted’ (p. 370Cc). Un-
moulded ribs were first used about 1100, and later on they were moulded quite
simply. Intersecting barrel or cross-vaults (p. 399A) were usual over a square plan,
but the difficulty in constructing these over oblong bays finally led to the use of
pointed arches in the Gothic period (p. 370G). When the crossing of nave and
transepts was crowned by an octagonal dome, four of its sides were carried on
‘squinch’ arches (p. 322A, D). Romanesque architects began to use flying buttresses
under the aisle roofs to counteract the thrust of a vaulted nave roof (p. 342C); but
it was left for Gothic architects to place these flying buttresses outside the aisle roof
and to weight them with pinnacles.
COLUMNS. In Italy, the traditional monolithic column, often of Roman origin,
was usual, but in the West, and especially in France and England, the columns
were generally cylindrical and of massive proportions, built up with ashlar masonry
and having a rubble core. These were treated with flutings or with spiral, trellis or
chevron patterns (p. 392B). Variations of Corinthian or Ionic capitals were used,
as in S. John’s Chapel, Tower of London (p. 504A), and elsewhere (pp. 332E; F,
351C, G), and in later times the capital was often of a cushion (cubiform) shape, as
also in S. John’s Chapel, Tower of London (p. 436c), and Winchester (p. 503C),
and was sometimes richly carved and scalloped (pp. 503B, D, E, 504 A-C).
310 ROMANESQUE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE >

MOULDINGS. These were often elaborately carved, as will be seen in English

Romanesque (Norman) architecture (p. 508). The base of the column was generally
an adaptation of the old Attic form, but the circular moulding often projected over
the square plinth below, at the angles of which flowers or animals were occasionally
carved to fill up the triangular part (p. 503H). The abacus above the capital (p. 503E)
was distinctive in form; it was higher, but projected less than in the Classical
column and was moulded with alternate fillets and hollows.
ORNAMENT. Ornament, into which entered vegetable and animal forms, was
treated conventionally, and carving and sculpture were often rough (pp. 332, 351;
362, 508). For interiors, frescoes were more usual than mosaics, which had been
such a feature of Early Christian churches, while stained glass was as yet little used.
Ornament, like all other features, was affected by various influences which are
referred to in the chapters special to each country.

REFERENCE BOOKS
CLAPHAM, A.W. Romanesque Architecture in Western Europe. Oxford, 1936.
JACKSON, T.G. Byzantine and Romanesque Architecture. 2 vols., Cambridge, 1920.
LETHABY, W. R. Mediaeval Art. 1904. Revised and edited by D. Talbot Rice. London,
1949.
PALMER, R. L. English Monasteries in the Middle Ages. London, 1930.
STEWART, CECIL. Early Christian, Byzantine and Romanesque Architecture. (Vol. ii of
Simpson, F. M., History of Architectural Development). London, 1954.
See also list under each country: Italy (p. 331), France (p. 352), Germany (p. 364), and
England (p. 513).

A. S. Denis, Paris: vaulting in narthex. B. Autun Cathedral: interior looking

See p. 344 towards sanctuary (1090-1132).
See p. 343
 erona

Payia?a~08Cre mo
"Asti garb

Toscanetta *
(Tuscan)

#2 Land over 1,500 ft.

° Miles 100
| pe $s
EW.

Italy in the Tenth Century

VIII. ITALIAN ROMANESQUE

(ninth-twelfth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. The long, narrow peninsula of Italy stretches from the snowy
Alps on the north, right down through the waters of the Mediterranean, almost to
sultry Africa on the south. These geographical variations were accompanied by
other differences which influenced the architecture in such varying degrees that it
may be most conveniently considered under (a) Central Italy, within the inner zone
of Roman influence; (6) Northern Italy, in contact with Western Europe; (c) South
Italy and Sicily, open to influ~aces from the East.
(a) Central Italy.—The central region lies between Florence, commanding the
passage of the Arno, on the north; Pisa, the maritime power on the west; and Naples,
312 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE

the naval port on the south; Rome, the Imperial City, rich in ancient pagan monu-
ments and Early Christian churches, here exercised a paramount influence on
architecture. (b) North Italy.—Milan, the capital of Lombardy, enjoyed great pros-
perity on account of its proximity to several Alpine passes and its situation in the
fertile plains of Lombardy, where the cultivation of the vine and mulberry was then,
as now, a staple industry. Venice and Ravenna, which were connecting trade links
between East and West, fell geographically under the influences of Byzantine art.
(c) South Italy and Sicily.—South Italy, including Calabria, was by position
specially susceptible to influence from the East, and, after passing under Greek
and Roman rule, it formed part of the Byzantine Empire under Justinian. Sicily,
an island which is triangular in form, is situated in the Mediterranean sea, and,
facing Greece on one side, Italy on another, and North Africa on the third, was
exposed to influences from all three countries.
GEOLOGICAL. (a) Central Italy.—Tuscany possessed great mineral wealth and
an abundance of stone. Various building materials were used in Rome, including
bricks, volcanic tufa or peperino, travertine stone from Tivoli, and marble from
Carrara and from Paros and other Greek islands. Much material was also obtained
from the ruins of Classic buildings. (6) North Italy.—The low-lying plains of Lom-
bardy supplied clay for making bricks, which, used with marble from the hills, gave
a special character to the architecture. Venice on the Adriatic imported marbles in
her merchant vessels. (c) South Italy and Sicily—The mountains of South Italy
and Sicily supplied calcareous and shelly limestone as well as many kinds of
marble, while the sulphur mines, especially of Sicily, largely contributed to that
prosperity which was conducive to building enterprise.
CLIMATIC. (a) Central Italy.—The brilliant sunshine demanded, as in the
Roman period, small windows and thick walls, both in cities of the plain and in
cities built on the hill-tops. The climate varies not only from north to south, but
also from east to west according to the proximity to the Apennines, which are often
snow-clad, or to the sea-board. (b) North Italy.—The climate resembles that of
Central Europe, and varies between extremes of heat and cold. The towns from
Milan on the west to Venice on the east lie below the Alps, and thus in the winter
they are swept by the ice-winds from the mountains; while in the summer these
same mountains protect them from the north winds, when the heat in the plains is
often excessive. (c) South Italy and Sicily.—The climate is almost sub-tropical;
palms grow in the open air and the orange and lemon groves of Palermo are famous.
On the southern coasts of Italy buildings have the flat roofs and other character-
istics of Oriental cities.
RELIGIOUS. (a) Central Italy—During this period the Popes, although they
had only small temporal dominions, began to be a power in civil government, and
thus started opposing policies and rival factions. Pepin, king of the Franks, sided
with Pope Stephen II against the Lombards and restored to him Ravenna, the chief
city of the Exarchate. In 755 Central Italy became independent under the Pope,
and so inaugurated the temporal power of the papacy. Then Charlemagne, invited
by Pope Adrian I (772-95), advanced into Italy in 773, defeated the Lombards and
entered Rome for the first time, in 774. He bestowed the dukedom of Spoleto on
Pope Adrian, and thus added to his temporal power, while the wealth of the Church
rapidly increased, and from this period the papal connection with Byzantium was
broken off. The decisions of Gregory VII (1073-85) that the clergy should not
marry, and that no temporal prince should bestow any ecclesiastical benefice,
resulted in the long struggles between Guelphs and Ghibellines (pp. 315, 603).
(b) North Italy—The Emperor Theodosius had, in Early Christian times, been
forced to do penance for the massacre in Thessalonica, and S. Ambrose, bishop of
 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE 313

pAPISA CATHEDRAL

c setenntl Iae
MA 3. CAMPANILE
- ‘bi
aL ab
sae :aecr
e e i si
gco

BAPTISTERY 7se SSS

aaa eS

THE PISAN GROUP FIROM SW.

BIRDS-EYE VIEW
Sar FOR PLAN
iy, FROM CAMPANILE
i
SETI 50 50 \ I
=TRES a 0 #

STR ERSE SECTION xx LONGITUDINAL SECTION

 314 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE

> rae

WS WA f, /-
ga
Yf |
ag
why AS
Bias & ci
eee or
dc

core | = : ;
Ol te\ z : |
iE

i | eS : (Lo.
Le fEL iiIp
say i| Ica

Ee 2 ELEV™ existing) (3ELEV™ (originat) (ey SECT onanat) 3 SEC

 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE 315

Milan (374-98), closed the church doors against him. This is significant of the
great power the Church had acquired. The influence of S. Ambrose had been suffi-
cient to establish the Ambrosian ritual, which introduced more metrical chanting
into the service, and, owing to his fame, it was long maintained in Milan instead of
the Roman liturgy. The power, both spiritual and temporal, of the archbishops of
Milan, especially under Aribert (1018-45), was firmly established by their espousal
of the people’s cause and their stand for popular rights against the Lombard kings.
(c) South Italy and Sicily —Under Muslim rule (827-1061), which reached Sicily
from North Africa, even church facades were ornamented with geometrical pat-
terns, because the Muslim religion forbade representations of the human figure
(Ch. XXXIID. The Muslim and the earlier Byzantine influence persisted even
after the Norman conquest of the region in 1061.
SOCIAL. (a) Central Italy.—The artistic activity of Tuscany in the eleventh
century showed itself chiefly in architecture, which provided a suitable setting for
the daughter arts of painting and sculpture. The growth of an industrial popula-
tion, the increase of commerce, and the rise of ruling families promoted the founda-
tion of independent and fortified cities, such as Pisa, Lucca, and Pistoia, which
were all competitors in architectural achievements. (b) North Italy.—The devastat-
ing inroads by the Goths into the North Italian plains led to the gradual rise of the
powerful Venetian state; for the hardy northern traders planted their new colony
on the islands of the lagoons. There, safe from serious attacks, they settled on a
republican form of government, which afterwards became an oligarchy under a
Doge, who was invested with supreme authority. Commerce and art were the
special care of the Venetians. They raised glorious buildings in the sea and brought
precious freights from the East, even including relics from the Holy Land. Thus
did the East triumph in the West through its influence on the buildings of the
Queen of the Adriatic. All the free cities, or independent commonwealths of Italy,
such as Milan, Pavia, Verona, and Genoa, vied with one another in the beauty of
their public buildings, and this spirit of rivalry encouraged the most remarkable
structural advances in all Italy. (c) South Italy and Sicily.—The Muslims stimu-
lated commercial enterprise in Sicily. Civilization there had been, however, con-
siderably aided by earlier Byzantine influences. The traditional use of mosaic in
decoration was fostered by the Norman kings who established a school of mosaic
at Palermo. Southern Italy, which always maintained a close connection with
Sicily, has yet to be fully explored for traces of its architectural development.
HISTORICAL. (a) Central Italy.—Pisa, like Genoa in the north and Amalfi in
the south, sent merchant fleets to the Holy Land for the Eastern Fair at Jerusalem,
and thus were the Pisans brought into contact with Eastern art. At the commence-
ment of the eleventh century Pisa was the rival of Venice and Genoa as a great
commercial and naval power, and took the lead in the wars against the infidels,
defeating the Muslims in 1025, 1030, and 1089. The Pisans also captured Palermo
in 1062, and this contact with the Muslims probably accounts for the characteristic
Pisan use of striped marbles. The Pisans were defeated by the Genoese in 1284,
and this was the beginning of their decline. The rise of Florence dates from 1125,
when the inhabitants of Fiesole moved there, owing to the destruction of their city,
and in the following century Florence rivalled Pisa in commerce. Lucca, another
important city during this period, was rent by the feuds of the Guelphs, supporters
of the Popes, and the Ghibellines, who sided with the Emperors. This dual influ-
ence is traceable in architectural features of the city, such as battlements of castles
and fortifications. (b) North Italy.—The close alliance which Venice kept up with
Constantinople increased the commercial and naval importance of the sea-state so
that, by the end of the eleventh century, her trade extended beyond Dalmatia,
316 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE
Croatia, and Istria to the Black Sea and the Mediterranean coasts. In spite of the
intervening Alps, the invaders who had occupied the valley of the Po kept up com-
mercial communications with those on the Rhine, by means of the Alpine passes;
so that Milan in the plains of Lombardy was subject, then as afterwards, to German
influence in art, but the old Roman influence reasserted itself in the eleventh and
twelfth centuries which witnessed great building activities in Lombardy. (c) South
Italy and Sicily.—In 827 the Muslims landed in Sicily and gradually overran the
island, which had formed part of the Byzantine Empire. The latter part of the
tenth century was the most prosperous period of their sway, but sanguinary religi-
ous struggles ended in the downfall of the Muslim dynasty. From 1061 to 1ogo the
Normans, under Robert and Roger Guiscard, were engaged in the conquest of the
island, and in 1130 a descendant of the latter was crowned at Palermo. During the
succeeding years Sicily was again prosperous, as may be judged by the number and
beauty of the buildings of this period, and her fleet was powerful enough to defeat
the Arabs and Greeks.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The Romanesque Period in Italy may be taken to date approximately from the
ninth to the twelfth century.
(a) Central Italy —The basilican type of church was closely adhered to during
this period; for Italians were slow to adopt a new system of construction and pre-
ferred to concentrate on beauty and delicacy of ornamental detail, while the archi-
tectural character was much governed by Classic traditions. The most pronounced
features of facades were the ornamental arcades which rose one above the other,
sometimes even into the gables (pp. 313A, 314). This decorative use of arcaded
galleries is one instance of the employment of an architectural feature having a
constructive origin. When a wooden roof was placed over a vault there was no
need to continue the solid external walls above the springing of the vault, as wooden
rafters exerted little thrust (p. 295J); hence this upper portion of the wall could be
pierced or arcaded (p. 330E, G), and this arcading came to be employed, especially
by the Pisans, as a decorative feature, and sometimes even entirely covered the
western facade (p. 313A). In a similar way the battlemented parapet, primarily
designed for defence, was used as a purely decorative feature. It must also be
understood that by carrying the external walls above the springing of the vault,
an additional load was provided which usefully deflected the vault thrust. The use
of marble for facing walls distinguishes Romanesque architecture in Italy from
that of the rest of Europe (p. 321A). The churches had, for the most part, simple
open timber roofs ornamented with bright colouring. Byzantine influence was
strong in Ravenna and Pisa, which developed their own individual styles. Cam-
panili or bell-towers, which seem to have originated in the sixth century, for carry-
ing the bells which summoned Christians to prayer, now became an integral part
of the church group, and henceforward gave special character to ecclesiastical
architecture (p. 325A).
(6) North Italy—Romanesque art in this district shows influence from north
of the Alps, where the principal innovation was the development of the ribbed
vault which brought about the adoption of many new constructive features. The
churches are basilican in type, but naves as well as side aisles are vaulted and have
externa) wooden roofs. Aisles are often two storeys in height, while thick walls
between the side chapels act as buttresses to resist the pressure of the vaults. The
flat, severe entrance fagades stretch across the whole church, thus masking exter-
nally the division of nave and aisles. There is often a central projecting porch, with
 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE 317

here

B. S. Antonino, Piacenza (1104). c. Torre Asinelli, Bologna (1109).

See p. 320 See p. 323
318 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE

4
i
:
2s
*

B. S. Ambrogio, Milan: nave looking E.

 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE 319
columns standing on the backs of crouching beasts and a wheel window above to
light the nave (p. 330J). The gable is characteristically outlined with raking arcades
and there are also arcades round the apse under the eaves. The general character
becomes less refined, owing to the increased use of stone and brick instead of
marble, and ornament shows a departure from Classic precedent, and portrays,
with an element of the grotesque, the rough outdoor life of the invaders from the
north. The Comacine masters, a privileged guild of architects and sculptors origi-
nating in Como, carried out church building and characteristic decoration during
the eleventh century, not only in the north, but also in other parts of Italy.
(c) South Italy and Sicily —The changing architectural character can be traced
through Byzantine, Muslim, and Norman rule, and each successive period carried
with it something from the past. Byzantine influence is evident in the mosaic
decoration of interiors and predominates in the plans of such buildings as the
church of the Martorana at Palermo, where the dome, supported on four columns,
covers the square central space. Muslim influence is especially seen in the applica-
tion of stripes of coloured marbles and in the use of stilted pointed arches. The
Norman character is displayed in the planning and construction of the cathedral of
Monreale, which has a cruciform plan, is decorated with mosaics and has a nave
arcade of stilted pointed arches.

EXAMPLES
CENTRAL ITALY
Pisa Cathedral (1063-92) (pp. 313, 314B) with Baptistery, Campanile, and Campo
Santo, together form one of the most famous building groups of the world (p.
313A). The cathedral is one of the finest of the Romanesque period and has a
strongly marked individuality. It resembles other early basilican churches in plan,
with long rows of columns connected by arches, double aisles, and a nave which
has the usual timber roof (p. 313c). The exterior has bands of red and white
marble, and the ground storey is faced with wall arcading, while the entrance
facade is thrown into relief by tiers of open arcades which rise one above another
right into the gable end. The transepts, with a segmental apse at each end, were
an advance on the simple basilican plan. The elliptical dome over the crossing, or
intersection of nave and transepts, is of later date (p. 313D). The building depends
for its interest on its general proportions and on the beauty and delicacy of its
ornamental features, rather than on any new structural development, such as may
be seen in Northern Italy.
The Campanile, Pisa (1174) (pp. 313, 314), is a circular tower, 52 ft in dia-
meter, rising in eight storeys of encircling arcades. This world-famous leaning
tower, which is the most arresting feature of this marvellous group, has been the
subject of much discussion, but there is little doubt that its inclination, which
recent measurements proved to be on the increase, is due to subsidence in the
foundations. The upper part of the tower now overhangs its base as much as
13 ft 10 ins, and it thus has a very unstable appearance. The belfry was not added
till 1350.
The Baptistery, Pisa (1153-1278) (pp. 313A, D, 314, 377F), was designed by
Dioti Salvi, on a circular plan, with a central space or nave, 60 ft in diameter,
separated by four piers and eight columns from the surrounding two-storeyed
aisle, which makes the building 129 ft in diameter. Externally it is surrounded on
the lower storey by half-columns, connected by semicircular arches, under one of
which is the door (p. 330K), with, above, an open arcade of small detached shafts.
320 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE

This arcade is surmounted by Gothic additions of the fourteenth century, which

disguise the original design. The structure is crowned by an outer hemispherical
roof, through which penetrates a truncated cone capped by a small dome, covering
the central space (p. 314F, G). This Baptistery resembles the church of S. Donato
(ninth century) at Zadar, Dalmatia, in which, however, the central space is only
30 ft in diameter.
S. Martino, Lucca (1060, facade 1204) and S. Michele, Lucca (1188), with a
facade (1288) of which the gables are mere screens, are very similar in style to the
buildings of the Pisan group, because at the time of their erection Lucca had fallen
under the power of Pisa.
Pistoia Cathedral (c. 1150) was also built under the influence of the Pisan
school, and with its porch and arcaded facade in black and white marble formed
the model for other churches in the city (p. 317A).
The Cloisters of S. Giovanni in Laterano, Rome (1234) and of S. Paolo
fuori le Mura, Rome (1241) (p. 330H) are of special interest, since they are
virtually the only instances of Romanesque art in Rome which show any progres-
sive character, owing to the survival of the Classical tradition; besides which, the
use of Roman architectural fragments still gave the churches a basilican character.
The delicate twisted twin columns, inlaid with patterned glass mosaics, are the
special features of these cloisters, and are a triumph of craftsmanship which has
given to these coils of stone the subtlety of living forms. The coupled columns
carry semicircular arches in groups of five or more openings between the recurrent
piers, and form an arcade round the four sides of the cloister.
S. Miniato, Florence (1013-) (p. 321A, B) is important as showing some innova-
tions; for the length of the church is divided by piers and transverse diaphragm
arches into three main compartments, of which the raised eastern portion has a
crypt open to the nave and containing the tomb of the saint. This division seems
a prelude to the idea of vaulting in compartments, and is a departure from the
basilican type of long, unbroken ranges of columns and arches. The novel panel-
ling and banding in black and white marble, both of exterior and interior, were
carried further in the Gothic period in Italy. The sanctuary has translucent marble,
instead of glass, in the window openings. The open timber roof, with its bright
colour decoration recently restored, gives an excellent idea of the effect produced
by the use of simple colour on these basilican roofs.

NORTH ITALY
S. Antonino, Piacenza (1104) (p. 317B), rebuilt on the site of an earlier cathedral,
is noted for its later Gothic porch, II] Paradiso (1350).
S. Ambrogio, Milan (1088-1128) (p. 318), founded by the great S. Ambrose
in the fourth century, raised on its present plan (c. 850) and partly rebuilt with
vault and dome in the twelfth century, has a proud history, and set a type for
Lombard churches, as did its founder for Lombard ritual, which included the
metrical chanting of the Mass. Here S. Augustine was baptized, the Emperor
Theodosius was excommunicated, and Lombard kings and Germanic emperors
were crowned. The plan includes the only existing atrium among Lombard
churches, a narthex flanked by towers, vaulted nave and aisles with an octagon
over the crossing, triforium gallery, raised choir over the crypt, and an apse. The
interior (p. 318B) is severely plain and impressive. The pulpit (p. 332B), which is
built over a sixth-century sarcophagus, consists of an arcade with characteristic
Lombard ornamentation of carved birds and animals.
S. Michele, Pavia (c. 1117) (p. 322), is a notable instance of a treatment which
 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE 321

B. S. Miniato, Florence c. The Baptistery, Cremona (1167).

(1013-) See p. 323
H.O.A.
 322 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE

S. MICHELE : PAVIA

PEELE

SCALE FOR SECTIONS

FEET: 2
METRES |

SCALE FOR PLAN

FEET 4
METRES!
 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE 323
is an advance on the divisions, marked only by piers, in S. Miniato; for here not
only is the nave divided into square bays by transverse arches but the dividing piers
are of a clustered character, shaped to receive the vaulting ribs. This church is
cruciform in plan with well-defined transepts and a raised choir, under which is a
vaulted crypt. The side aisles, which are two storeys in height, are also vaulted in
Square compartments, two of which correspond to one vaulting bay of the nave.
The flat fagade shows little play of light and shade, with its three simple, recessed
portals and four vertical pilaster strips from ground to gable, almost akin to but-
tresses. The wide-spreading gable stretches across nave and aisles and is empha-
sized by a characteristic raking arcaded gallery which is the only prominent feature
of this simple design (p. 322F).
S. Zeno Maggiore, Verona (1138-) (p. 325), has a facade which is stern in its
simplicity. The fine projecting porch has two free-standing columns, which rest
on the backs of crouching beasts and support a semicircular vault, over which is a
gabled roof (p. 326c). Above is the great wheel window which lights the nave, one
of the earliest in Italy, and the whole facade is relieved by pilaster strips connected
by corbel tables under the slopes of the centre gable and side roofs. The interior
(p. 325B) has a nave arcade of compound piers with uncarved capitals, and the nave
shaft is carried up as if to support a vault. Intermediate columns with carved
capitals support semicircular arches, surmounted by a wall banded in red brick and
stone. There is no triforium, but a clear-story, and above this is a wooden ceiling
of trefoil form. The choir, 7 ft above the nave floor, has a high pointed fourteenth-
century vault and an apse, and beneath is the crypt, in seven aisles, with the shrine
of S. Zeno. The campanile (p. 325A) is detached, as usual in Italy, has no but-
tresses, and is of alternate courses of marble and brick, terminating in open arcades
to the bell-chamber, angle pinnacles, and a high-pitched roof. The sturdy tower
formerly belonged to a residence of the Mediaeval German emperors and is finished
with Ghibelline battlements.
Baptisteries are a special feature of Italian architecture and represent a period
of Christianity when the baptismal rite was carried out only three times a year—
Easter, Pentecost, and the Epiphany—and therefore required a large and separate
building. The Baptistery, Cremona (1167) (p. 321C), is octagonal, and has a
projecting porch and the usual pilaster strips, corbel tables, and arcading. The
Baptistery, Asti (1050), and the Baptistery, Parma (1196-1270) (p. 327A, B), are
octagonal, modelled on that of Constantine, Rome.
The Campanili or bell-towers are a product of the period, and, unlike the
church towers of England, France, and Germany, generally stand alone, though
they were sometimes connected by cloisters with the church. Campanili of North
Italian towns are often civic monuments rather than integral parts of churches,
and, like the civic towers of Belgium (p. 577), were symbols of power, and served
also as watch-towers. They are square in plan, without the projecting buttresses
which are usual north of the Alps, and their design is generally simple, broken
only by windows which light the internal staircase or sloping way. The window
Openings increase in number with the height of the tower and often form an open
loggia at the top, through which may be seen the swinging of the bells, and the
whole is often surmounted by a pyramidal roof, as in the rebuilt campanile of S.
Mark, Venice (pp. 608, 611A), originally built 888, and also in that of S. Zeno
Maggiore, Verona (p. 325A), which dates originally from 1172.
The Torre Asinelli, Bologna (1109) (p. 317C), 225 ft high, and the Torre
Garisenda, Bologna (1100), 130 ft high, date from the time when the town was
prominent in the struggles of the period, and are the leaning towers referred to by
Dante, while San Gimignano (p. 625C), with its thirteen towers, built for defence
324 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE

and ostentation, has the appearance of a Romanesque city so often pictured by

Raphael in later times.
The Fondaco dei Turchi, Venice (p. 326A), a twelfth-century mercantile
palace (since rebuilt) on the Grand Canal, is an example of the high level which
domestic architecture reached in Venice as the outcome of her prosperous trade
with the East. The Palazzo Farsetti and the Palazzo Loredan (twelfth century)
are in the same style, with cubiform capitals carrying semicircular arches which
are sometimes stilted.

SOUTH ITALY AND sigivy

Monreale Cathedral (1176-82) (pp. 326, 328) stands on the heights south-west of
Palermo, and is the most splendid of all the monuments erected under Norman rule
in Sicily. The plan is basilican in its western part and quasi-Byzantine in its eastern
part, with a choir raised above the nave and with eastern apses. The nave columns
have capitals of Byzantine form with ‘dosseret—blocks’ encrusted with mosaic, to
support pointed arches, which are not in recessed planes as in northern Romanesque
buildings, and in the aisles there are pointed windows without tracery. The walls
are covered with mosaics in gold and colour, representing scenes from Biblical
history with a figure of Christ in the apse, framed in arabesques; while a high dado
of white marble slabs is bordered by inlaid patterns in coloured porphyries. The
open timber roofs, intricate in design, are brightly painted in the Muslim style.
The interior is solemn and grand, an effect produced by the severity of the design,
enhanced by the coloured decoration. The low, oblong central lantern and the
antique bronze doors add to the beauty and distinction of this famous church. The
cloisters (p. 328B), the only remaining portion of the Benedictine monastery, are
the finest of the style. They consist of coupled columns, in some cases inlaid with
glass mosaics, supporting pointed arches, and have beautiful Corinthianesque
capitals (p. 332E, F), one of which represents William I of Sicily offering the Church
to the Virgin.
The Capella Palatina, Palermo (1132-40) (p. 327C), the chapel in the Royal
Palace, has gilt and coloured mosaics in the interior, and a dome, 18 ft in diameter,
indicative of Byzantine influence, while the carved stalactite ceiling, pulpit, candel-
abrum, and organ gallery show Muslim craftsmanship.
S. Giovanni degli Eremiti, Palermo (1132—), La Martorana, Palermo (1129-
1143),and S. Cataldo, Palermo (1161-)are other churches which,in the arrangement
of their domes and ornamentation, show the blending of Muslim and Byzantine art.
S. Nicola, Bari (1087-1139) and the Cathedral Bitonto (p. 333), of about the
same date, like other churches of Southern Italy, are small in comparison with those
of the same period in the north. The feature in the main facade of these southern
churches is the projecting porch with columns standing on lions’ backs, supporting
a roof, and above this is usually the characteristic wheel window. The decorative
detail is refined and graceful, largely due to the Greek descent of the craftsmen of
this part of Italy.
Crypts are a special feature in the south and there is a crypt at Otranto Cathedral
(eleventh century) which is remarkable for the unusual number of columns which
support the choir.
La Zisa, Palermo (Arabic, E] Aziza =Palace of Delights) (1154-66) (p. 327D),
is a three-storeyed Norman castle with battlemented parapet, and shows the influ-
ence of Muslim art. The vestibule is rich in marble columns and coloured tiles,
while the stalactite vaults over the alcoves recall the glories of the Alhambra,
Granada.
ITALIAN ROMANESQUE 325

B. S. Zeno Maggiore, Verona

326 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE

B. Monreale Cathedral (1176-82): c. S. Zeno Maggiore, Verona (1138-):

apses at east end. See p. 324 porch. See p. 323
 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE 327

A. Exterior B. Interior
The Baptistery, Parma (1196-1270). See p. 323

c. The Capella Palatina, Palermo: p. La Zisa, Palermo (1154-66).

interior (1132-40). See p. 324 See p. 324
 A < 4 we Z r O = < Z wQ 7p) oO S i

So
epee
Siar

A. Monreale Cathedral interior looking E. (1176-82) . See p. 324

aaa
HRA
nnnall?
REA TE

B. Monreale Cathedral : the cloiisters

 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE 329

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. In Central Italy church plans adhered substantially to those of basilicas,
and naves were divided from aisles by antique columns (p. 3138). The choir was
occasionally raised above a crypt reached by steps from the nave. In the North,
_ the most important architectural developments took place. Churches were mostly
vaulted and occasionally had transepts, as at S. Michele, Pavia (p. 322). There
were many baptisteries, usually octagonal or circular, such as the one at Novara,
which is connected to the Cathedral by an atrium similar to the famous atrium at
S. Ambrogio, Milan. Open arcades round the apses, with the arcaded octagonal
lantern at the crossing, give great charm to the buildings externally (p. 330E, G).
Projecting porches, which were preferred to recessed doorways, are bold arched
structures often of two storeys, flanked by isolated columns on huge semi-grotesque
beasts, as at Verona (p. 330J). Towers are straight shafts, often detached, as at
Verona (p. 325A), without buttresses or spires (pp. 317B, 318A, 330F). In the South the
low lanterns at the crossing of nave and transepts are marked features, as at Monreale
Cathedral.
WALLS. In Central Italy the Pisan school elaborated wall arcades into many
storeys of galleries, which decorated alike facades, apses, and towers (p. 313A). In
North Italy the facades have less play of light and shade, and they usually rely
upon simple pilaster strip decoration, running from the ground and ending in
small arches under the eaves, as at S. Abbondio, Como (p. 330F). Sometimes there is
a large circular window over the entrance, and usually this front extends the whole
width of nave and aisles and terminates in one wide-spreading gable filled in with
open arcaded galleries which spring either from horizontal or from stepped bases, as
at Pavia (p. 322F). In South Italy the lateral walls are occasionally decorated with
flat pilaster strips connected horizontally by small arches springing from corbels.
OPENINGS. In consequence of the brilliant climate, while arcades are universal,
doors and windows, whether in Central, North, or South Italy, are small and un-
important, with ‘jambs’ in rectangular recesses or ‘orders’ filled in with small
shafts, crowned with semicircular arches (p. 330B, C, K) in contrast with the classic
architrave. Window tracery, which was a later invention of the Gothic period, was
at no time employed to any great extent in Italy, and even wheel windows are only
rudimentary in pattern (p. 325A); but in South Italy, as in the churches of Palermo,
these windows are often made of sheets of pierced marble and highly elaborate.
RoOoFs. In Central Italy timber roofs over naves are of the simple, open basilican
type with rafters and tie-beams often effectively decorated in colour; while aisles
occasionally have groined vaults of small span, divided into compartments by
transverse arches (p. 321B). In North Italy not only aisles but also naves began to
be vaulted (p. 322B). In South Italy domes rather than vaults were adopted, but
timber roofs were the rule in Sicily under Muslim influence and had stalactite
ceilings, rich in design and colour.
COLUMNS. In Central Italy during this period a vast number of columns from
ancient Roman temples were utilized in the new churches, and this retarded the
development of the novel types which were introduced in districts more remote
from Rome (pp. 313C, 321B). In some places, as at Tuscania, rudely carved
Corinthianesque columns carry round-arched arcades instead of entablatures. The
finely carved and slender twisted columns in the cloisters of S. Giovanni in
Laterano and S. Paolo fuori le Mura, Rome, are delicate variations of the Classic
type (p. 330H). In North Italy sturdy piers faced with attached half-columns took
the place of the Classic column, as supports to the heavy stone vaulting (p. 3228,
D). The half-columns on the side towards the nave were carried up as vaulting
 330 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE

mate!
éy

y\
(Bee ® DOORWAY : (Cpnooriny S.CRISTOFORO: (Doncuiera:
S. CRISTOFORO : LUCCA LUCCA 4 BROLETTO:MONZA
oy ss
se ~~

2 panty 1b te

MA
En}

Ea a rE =| py ‘
APSE: S. MARIA = ae ice AP Sie
MAGGIORE : BERGAMO E. END:S. ABBONDIO: COMO 5. PEDELE “COME
R Oo : IST ee (ey 2 Ae === a
>

mig PORCH: S ZEN Se

LO: ROME DOORWAY: BAPTISTERY :PISA
 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE 331

shafts, and this was the beginning of a system which was destined in the Gothic
period to transform the shape of piers. In South Italy, and especially in Sicily,
greater variety in columns and capitals was brought about by changes which re-
sulted from the successive introduction of Byzantine, Muslim, and Norman art, of
which the nave arcade columns (p. 328A) and the coupled columns in the cloisters
at Monreale (pp. 328B, 332E, F) are good examples.
MOULDINGS. In Central Italy there are rough imitations of old Classic mould-
ings, but elaborate variations of a more pronounced Romanesque type in recessed
planes were used in doorways and windows (p. 330B, C, D, E, K). In North Italy
flat moulded bands or strings on the exterior are varied by a series of small arches
connecting the pilaster strips (pp. 330F, G, 332H). In South Italy mouldings are
specially characterized by grace of contour and intricacy of carving (p. 332E, F).
ORNAMENT (p. 332). In Central Italy Classic models were followed so as to
suit the old fragments incorporated in the new buildings, and rough variations of
the old Roman acanthus scroll are frequent (p. 332D, J). The rows of Apostles on
doorway lintels, as at Pistoia, are similar in style to Byzantine ivories. In all parts of
Italy Christian symbolism now entered into decorative carving and mosaics. The
monogram of Christ, the emblems of evangelists and saints, and the whole system
of symbolism, represented by trees, birds, fishes, and animals, are all worked into
the decorative scheme. The High Altar (p. 332C) and the mosaic paving (p. 332K)
are characteristic examples of the period. In North Italy roughly carved grotesques
of men and beasts occur, along with vigorous hunting scenes and incidents of daily
life. Crouching beasts support columns of projecting porches and of bishops’
thrones (p. 332A). The font (p. 332L), similarly supported, and the corbel tables
(p. 332H) are typical. In South Italy elaborately modelled bronze doors are charac-
teristic externally, while coloured mosaics add to the beauty of the interiors of
Palermo churches. Colour, in spreading masses of geometric design, was the pre-
dominant note of internal decoration of South Italian and more especially of
Sicilian churches, while the bronze pilasters (p. 332D, G) clearly indicate the influ-
ence of the Classic tradition.

REFERENCE BOOKS
ARATA,G.U. L’architettura arabo-normanna in Sicilia. Milan, 1914.
AVENA, A. Monumente dell’ Italia meridionale. Rome, 1911.
CATTANEO, R. Architecture in Italy from the VIth to the XIth Centuries. Translated from
the Italian. London, 1896.
CLAPHAM, A.W. Romanesque Architecture in Western Europe. Oxford, 1936.
CRESY,£E.and TAYLOR,G.L. Pisa. London, 1829.
CUMMINGS, Cc. A. A History of Architecture in Italy. 2 vols., 2nd ed., New York and
London, 1928.
DARTEIN, FE. DE. Etude sur l’ architecture lombarde. 2 vols., Paris, 1865-82.
DELHI, A. J. and CHAMBERLIN, G. H. Norman Antiquities of Palermo and Environs.
Boston, 1892.
GRAVINA,D.D.B. J] Duomo di Monreale. 2 vols., Palermo, 1859.
GRUNER,L. Terra-Cotta Architecture of North Italy. London, 1867.
GURLITT, C. Denkmdler der Kunst in Dalmatien. 2 vols., Berlin, 1910.
HITTORFE,J.1. et ZANTH,C.L. W. Architecture antique de la Sictle. Paris, 1827.
JACKSON, SIR T. G. Byzantine and Romanesque Architecture. 2 vols., Cambridge, 1920.
KNIGHT, H. G. Normans in Sicily. London, 1838.
—. Saracenic and Norman Remains to illustrate the Normans in Sicily. London, 1830.
LETHABY, W.R. Mediaeval Art. London, 1912.
MARTIN, C. L’art roman en Italie. Paris, [1912].
OSTEN, F. Die Bauwerke in der Lombardei vom 7 bis 14 Fahrhunderts. Folio. Darmstadt,
1846-54.
 332 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE

i
S. MICHELE : MONTE S. ANGELO S. MARIA MAGGIORE:

MS dem |
TOSCANELLA
vA
eS
Wr) Li

a
. ee

|:Ly); ! oy 5 oO lat sag

Say Rey + eae) Oh

% 3 ) / NAS SONG s

i| - Xs 2 =

| it
| |

K a
[BRONZE PILASTER
DOOR OF TRANI CATHEDRAL
CLOISTERS ° BRONZE PILASTER
DOOR OF RAVELLO CATHE:

ete
i

VA WP \\AVON
rs " ii
NSCS HD I a
DC ISK WS7/ SOKO
TUNA NWI AN INS INN
(16g ae a

“ut
D) 0p LINTEL : ? FONT .
S. GIUSTO : LUCCA S. PIETRO : TOSCANELLA BAPTISTERY : PARMA
 ITALIAN ROMANESQUE 333
PORTER,A.K. Mediaeval Architecture. 2 vols., New York and London, 1909.
—. The Construction of Lombard and Gothic Vaults. New Haven and London, Ig9It.
RICCI, C. Romanesque Architecture in Italy. London, 1925.
RIVOIRA, G. T. Le origini della architettura lombarda. Milan, 1908. English translation by
Rushforth. 2 vols., London, 1910.
ROHAULT DE FLEURY. Monuments de Pise au moyen age. 2 vols., Paris, 1866.
SALAZARO, D. Studi sui monumenti dell’ Italia Meridionale dal IV® al XIII® Secolo. 2 vols.,
Naples, 1871-7.
SCHULZ, H. W. Denkmaeler der Kunst des Mittelalters in Unteritalien. 3 vols., Dresden,
1860.
STREET,G.E. Brick and Marble Architecture of North Italy. London, 1874.
VENTURI,A. Storia dell’ arte italiana. Vols. ii and iii. Milan, 1902-4.

Bitonto Cathedral (11th and 12th centuries). See p. 324

 334 FRENCH ROMANESQUE
aS

ANGOULEME CATHEDRAL

(i

(A)SECTION b-b SECTION a.a

——
SCALE FOR SECTIONS
FEET
METRES |

2
INTERIOR LOOKING E.
 ® Land over 1500 feet
°

Mont St. Michel

Bir) cal ANION)
C hateaudun

CrAtS CLO SNe

Biarritz Toulo

*Carcassonne

France about the year 1000

IX. FRENCH ROMANESQUE

(ninth-twelfth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. France holds a central position between north and south on the
western confines of Europe, and has great natural highways along the valleys of
the Rhéne, Sadne, Seine, and Garonne which connect the Mediterranean with the
Atlantic Ocean and the English Channel. The different territories into which the
country was divided at this period had strongly marked characteristics in architec-
ture, as in all else, partly due to the difference in geographical position. Roman
civilization had spread through France along the historic highway of the fertile
Rhone valley, where the influence of Roman architecture is everywhere evident.
Somewhat later, the trade route from the Mediterranean along the Garonne valley
carried Venetian and Eastern influence across the south-west of France to the
district around Périgueux, where we find a version in stone of Byzantine architec-
ture. North of the River Loire is seen the influence of the Northmen who came by
sea, and of the Franks who stretched across the country from the Rhine to Brittany.
336 FRENCH ROMANESQUE
GEOLOGICAL. France has an abundance of good stone, easily quarried and
freely used for all types of buildings. In the north the fine-grained Caen stone was
not only available throughout Normandy, but was so plentiful that it was shipped
to England, both for ecclesiastical and secular buildings. In the volcanic district
of Auvergne a special character was given to architecture by the coloured pumice
and tufa, which were not only used for walls and inlaid decoration, but were so
light in weight that they were also employed in large blocks for the solid stone
vaulted roofs peculiar to the district.
CLIMATIC. The climate of the north resembles that of the south of England;
in the west on the Atlantic coast it is warmer, owing to the Gulf Stream; while in
the south, on the Mediterranean, it is sub-tropical. These climatic variations
regulate door and window openings, which decrease in size towards the south. The
climate also determines the pitch of roofs which, from being steep in the north to
throw off snow, become almost flat in the south, and these features largely control
the general architectural style.
RELIGIOUS. Christianity, like Roman civilization, was carried along the natural
highways of France, and was first established in the Rhone valley, where Lyons
contributed martyrs to the cause. There is a tradition that in A.D. 55 there arrived in
Gaul the Apostle-bishops who founded churches at Arles, Narbonne, Limoges,
Clermont, Tours, and Toulouse, while later S. Denis (c. 250) became bishop and
martyr of Paris. In 910 the Cluniac Order was founded at Cluny, Burgundy, and
was followed in 1098 by the Cistercian Order at Citeaux, Burgundy, the severity
of whose rules as to simplicity in church buildings caused a reaction from the
decorative treatment found at S. Gilles and S. Trophime, Arles (p. 343). Attention
was then concentrated upon producing grand and severe rather than ornate build-
ings. The eleventh century was marked by a desire to follow the monastic life
apart from the world; this resulted in the foundation of monasteries, which gave
an impulse to architecture and also fostered art and learning. Religious zeal was,
however, not confined within monastic walls, but was also evident in that more
active spirit which found vent in the Crusades, which began in 1096 under Geof-
frey de Bouillon and were continued under Louis VII (1147). This intercourse
with the East reacted in its turn on the art of the West. This crusading king,
through his minister, the Abbé Suger, also extended his religious zeal to the build-
ing of churches.
SOCIAL. Caesar’s conquest of Gaul (58-49 B.c.) was followed by the systematic
Romanization of the country, which had begun with the making of roads, with
Lyons as the centre, and the development of thriving commercial colonies which
adopted the Roman social system in their independent municipalities. The ‘Pax
Romana’ was established, and by the early third century, when Caracalla extended
Roman citizenship to the whole Empire, social conditions had become stable; but
thereafter Roman administration and industrial and commercial development were
progressively undermined by barbarian incursions and the growth of the power of
great individual landowners. In 496 Clovis united all the Franks, expelled the
Romans from Northern Gaul, and by embracing Christianity secured the allegiance
of the powerful leaders of the Church, and so established himself in the place of the
Roman Emperor. After two and a half centuries of civil war and conflicts between
kings and nobles, King Pepin (752-68) united the four kingdoms of the ‘Ile de
France.’ His successor, Charlemagne (768-814), brought Western Europe under
his sway, promoted education and learning, but only succeeded in establishing the
unity of France and the power of the feudal system for his lifetime, so that within a
century of his death France again became a series of small states. In 911, owing to
the inroads of the Northmen (Normans) the duchy of Normandy was established.
 FRENCH ROMANESQUE 337

Sag
sore
Joop

&
id
bea
Se

A. The facade B. The inter 10r

S. Madeleine, Vézelay (1089-1206). See p. 343

c. Notre Dame la Gr ande, Poitiers (eleventh century). See p 343

338 FRENCH ROMANESQUE

A. Notre Dame la Grande, Poitiers B. The Abbaye-aux-Dames, Caen

(eleventh century). See p. 343 (vault 1100-10)

all

c. The Abbaye-aux-Dames, Caen (1062-1140). See p. 344

 FRENCH ROMANESQUE 339
- Hugh Capet (987-96) ascended the Frankish throne, and Paris became the capital of
his kingdom, but his authority extended little beyond Paris and Orleans, as the
greater part of France was held by the independent lords of Aquitaine, Auvergne,
Provence, Anjou, Burgundy, Normandy, and Brittany. In 1066 Duke William con-
quered England, and numerous churches and castles in Normandy are a material
expression of the prosperity of his duchy. Throughout the period the feudal system
was developing, the basis of which was land and protection, the lord promising pro-
tection and land to the tenants in return for service. To check the power of the feudal
lords, Louis VI (1108-37) encouraged the growth of independent communes and
towns which, through the guild system, improved standards of craftsmanship and
fostered artistic development.
HISTORICAL. Gaul is introduced by Caesar with the statement: ‘Gallia in tres
partes divisa est,’ and it was occupied by different races, whose quarrels enabled
Caesar (49 B.C.) to complete the Roman conquest of Gaul; for five centuries she re-
mained a Roman province and absorbed Roman ideas. InA.D.250 Frankish barbarians
began their attacks, and strife continued till Goths, Franks, and Romans united to
defeat Attila, king of the Huns (451). Then Clovis, king of the Salian Franks,
defeated the Romans (486) at Soissons, absorbed the kingdom of Burgundy, drove
Alaric II, king of the Visigoths, out of Aquitaine (507), united the Frankish tribes
and established the Merovingian dynasty, and thus achieved the Frankish con-
quest of Gaul. The Muslims overran southern France (719-732). Charles Martel,
by his conquest of them at Poitiers (732), changed the future of Western Europe. The
Carolingian dynasty followed, and Pepin was crowned as the first Carolingian king
by Pope Stephen II (754), to whom he presented the exarchate of Ravenna, and thus
first established the temporal power of the papacy. The old Roman monarchical
idea was now supplanted by the feudal system in France. Charlemagne, Pepin’s
son, king of a united France (768-814), also arrogated to himself all Western
Europe as the Holy Roman Empire, and then learning, culture, and architecture
all took a step forward. On his death France was ravaged by the Northmen from
overseas, and also again divided into many small states; for Louis the Pious (814-
840) left it to his three sons, and the Treaty of Verdun (843) divided the Eastern
and Western Franks into Germany and France, with Charles the Bald as king of
France (843-77). The Northmen insistently penetrated up the rivers, the monarchy
grew weaker, and feudal lords grew strong enough to elect the king. Charles III
ceded Normandy to Duke Rollo (911), and this foreign influence reacted on the
architecture of Northern France. Hugh Capet brought in the Capetian dynasty
(987), which, with its centre in the Ile de France, was hemmed in by powerful
enemies, but under Philip I (1060-1105) the king’s power was increased, because
the conquest of England by the Normans withdrew their attacks from his king-
dom. Louis VI (1108-37) began an unsuccessful struggle against Henry I, king of
England and duke of Normandy, championed the towns, and kindled national
sentiment. But Louis VII (1137-80) weakened his kingdom by divorcing Eleanor
of Aquitaine (1152), who married Henry of Anjou, king of England, and so the
English king now owned more than half of France. The country again rallied
under Philip Augustus (1180-1223), who was strong enough to subdue the feudal
lords and attack Henry II of England. Such were the forces at this period, external
and internal, which went to the making of the French people; while the influence
of Roman civilization is specially noticeable during the period when monasticism
produced that grand series of Romanesque buildings in France.
340 FRENCH ROMANESQUE

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
Romanesque architecture in France dates from the ninth to the twelfth century,
The character differs in the north and south, which are approximately divided by
the Loire valley. Further modifications crept in according to the various territories
into which France was divided at this period.
The south is remarkable for richly decorated church facades and graceful
cloisters, and for the use of old Roman architectural features which seem to have
acquired a fresh significance. Roman buildings at Arles, Nimes, Orange, and other
places in the Rhéne valley naturally exerted considerable influence throughout
Provence. In Aquitaine and Anjou the aisleless naves, covered with domes on
pendentives (p. 334), or vaulting supported only by the massive walls of the
recessed chapels, recall the great halls of Roman thermae. The development of
vaulting (p. 307) progressed, and naves were often covered with barrel vaults
(p. 338A), whose thrust was resisted by half-barrel vaults over two-storeyed
aisles, thus suppressing the clear-story, as at Notre Dame du Port, Clermont-
Ferrand. The pointed arch, early used in the south of France, has been held to
be due to contact with the Muslims who overran this part of the country from 719
to 732.
In the north, where Roman remains were less abundant, there was greater free-
dom in developing a new style, and western facades of churches, especially in
Normandy, are distinguished by the introduction of two flanking towers, while
plain, massive side walls with flat buttresses emphasize the richness of the facades.
The interiors, close set with pier and pillar and roofed with ponderous arching,
form a link with the light and graceful structures of the Gothic period. Naves are
covered by ribbed vaults which are often sexpartite and in square compartments or
‘severies,’ the ribs being constructed independently and supporting the panels (pp.
338B, 342D, F). The gradual change to the Gothic system was promoted by repeated
attempts to cover oblong compartments with ‘rib and panel’ vaults, a problem
which was eventually solved by the introduction of the pointed arch, first used in
the south of France and introduced into the north in the twelfth century. The
solution to the many problems which had faced the Romanesque designers was
found in the building of the choir of the Abbey of S. Denis (1137-44), near Paris,
where the ribbed vault, pointed arch and flying buttress are successfully combined.

EXAMPLES
ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE
Southern France includes Aquitaine, Auvergne, Provence, Anjou, and Burgundy,
each with its special architectural peculiarities, the extent of which can be traced in
the examples which follow.
S. Sernin, Toulouse (1080-96) (p. 341A, B), in Aquitaine, is cruciform with
nave, double aisles, and transepts. The nave has a round-arched barrel vault, with
plain square ribs, supporting the roofing slabs direct, and the high triforium
chamber has external windows which light the nave, for there is no clear-story.
The central octagonal tower (1250) with a spire (1478), 215 ft high, belongs to
the Gothic period (p. 549). Santiago de Compostela, Spain (p. 640) a pilgrimage
centre of importance, is similar in many respects to the church of S. Sernin,
Toulouse.
Angouléme Cathedral (1105-30) (p. 334), in Aquitaine, has a long aisleless
nave, 50 ft wide, transepts with lateral chapels, and an apsidal choir with four
chapels, forming a Latin cross on plan. The nave is covered with three stone domes
 FRENCH ROMANESQUE 341

B. S. Sernin, Toulouse: nave c. S. Denis, near Paris: nave looking E,

looking E. (1137-44). See p. 344
 342 FRENCH ROMANESQUE

ABBAYE-AUX-HOMMES (Ss. EF
FSSOOOOOO OOH | t
cai : : -_ ;

hae

EE

[ 1) An A
e-——-LATER DATE—~~-

PLAN ? PIER # x

EXTERIOR FROM N.W.

 FRENCH ROMANESQUE 343

on pendentives and a double dome over the crossing raised on a drum with sixteen
windows and crowned by a finial. Both transepts originally had towers, but the
southern one was destroyed in 1568. The western facade (p. 334D) is exceptionally
rich with tiers of arcades divided into five bays by lofty shafts. Over the entrance
is a high window framed in sculpture, and there are two flanking western towers.
Cahors Cathedral (1119), also in Aquitaine, is an aisleless church crowned by
two domes on pendentives, and somewhat resembles S. Irene, Constantinople (p.
284).
Notre Dame du Port, Clermont-Ferrand, S. Austremoine, Issoire, and
Le Puy Cathedral, all in Auvergne and of the twelfth century, have local character
imparted to them by the light stone vaults, and inlaid decoration of different-
coloured lavas of the Puy de Déme district.
Notre Dame, Avignon, in Provence, is one of the numerous churches of the
eleventh and twelfth centuries in which pointed barrel vaults were used, and which
show Classical influence.
S. Trophime, Arles (1150), has beautiful cloisters with coupled carved capitals
(p. 350F) and a fine porch (p. 350K), based on a Roman triumphal arch, but with
modifications, such as deeply recessed jambs and columns resting on lions, behind
which are sculptured saints; the entablature carries a row of figures and the sculp-
tured tympanum represents Christ as Judge of the World.
The Church of S. Gilles (c. 1150), near Arles, has probably the most elaborate
sculptured facade in Provence (pp. 349A, 35IL), with three porches connected by
colonnades which may have suggested the facade of S. Mark, Venice (p. 289).
Notre Dame la Grande, Poitiers (eleventh century) (pp. 337C, 338A), in Anjou,
has a fine sculptured west front and imposing conical dome over the crossing,
while the interior (p. 338A) has neither triforium nor clear-story, but is covered by
a barrel vault with prominent unmoulded transverse ribs.
Fontevrault Abbey (1101-19) (p. 346A) also in Anjou, resembles Angouléme
Cathedral in its nave and general arrangement, and is interesting to Englishmen as
the burial-place of the English kings, Henry II and Richard I.
The Abbey Church, Cluny (1089-1131), formed part of the most famous
monastic establishment in Burgundy, which influenced the design of the churches,
many of which, like Cluny itself, have been destroyed. It was the longest in France
(443 ft), with nave and choir, each with double aisles, double transepts, and a chevet
of five apsidal chapels. The pointed arch, possibly the earliest in Europe, was
employed in the nave arcades, and the nave was covered with a great barrel vault,
while the aisles probably had groined vaulting, but little now remains.
Autun Cathedral (1090-1132) (p. 3I0B), another Burgundian church, has a nave
covered with a pointed barrel vault on transverse arches which spring so low down
as almost to squeeze out the clear-story windows. At the east end there are three
apses, and the portals of the west front are rich in the Burgundian style of sculpture.
S. Madeleine, Vézelay (1089-1206) (pp. 337A; 349B), in Burgundy, has a most
remarkable narthex (1130) with nave and aisles crowned, it is believed, by the
earliest pointed cross-vault in France; this leads into the church, which also has
nave and aisles, the transepts, choir, and chevet being completed in 1206. The nave
has no triforium, but a clear-story with small windows between the immense trans-
verse arches of the highly domical, groined intersecting vault (p. 337B). The central
portal (p. 337A), with two square-headed doorways, separated by a Corinthianesque
column, is spanned by a large semicircular arch containing a relief of the Last
Judgment. Left and right are side portals, and in the upper part of the facade is a
large five-light window richly sculptured and flanked by towers, that on the left
rising only to the height of the nave.
344 FRENCH ROMANESQUE

S. Philibert, Tournus (c. 1009), in Burgundy, once the Abbey Church of the
Benedictine monastery, has arches which span the nave from pier to pier, and
support barrel vaults under which windows were formed.

Northern France includes Normandy, the Ile de France and Brittany.

The Abbey of Bernay (1050) was probably the first important Norman church.
It had a nave of seven bays, of which five are still intact, divided into arcade,
triforium and clear-story. The choir and side aisles terminated in apses and there
were transepts, and over the crossing a tower.
The Abbaye-aux-Hommes, Caen (1066-86) (pp. 342; 345), known as S. Etienne,
is one of the many fine churches in Normandy of this period, which were the product
of the prosperity and power of the Norman dukes. It was commenced by William the
Conqueror, and is of the vaulted, basilican type which was developed into the com-
plete Gothic in the thirteenth century, and may have been modelled on the Roman-
esque cathedral of Speyer (p.358). Its original eastern apse was superseded in 1166 by
the characteristic chevet (pp. 342D, 345). The western facade, flanked by two square
towers, crowned by octagonal spires which with angle pinnacles were added in the
thirteenth century, was the prototype of later Gothic facades. The nave provides
an interesting example of ‘sexpartite’ vaulting (pp. 307, 342F). Here, over the large
square bays, intermediate transverse ribs are introduced which cut the diagonal
ribs at their intersections and thus support them. This method was superseded on
the introduction of the pointed arch, when each compartment, whatever its shape,
could be vaulted without reference to the neighbouring one, because the difference
between the width of the nave and the distance longitudinally between the piers
could easily be surmounted by pointed arches of different radii manipulated so as
to equalize the height of the ribs. The thrust of this nave vault, one of the earliest,
was counteracted by a semi-barrel vault over the triforium gallery, protected exter-
nally by a timber roof, and forming, as it were, a concealed flying buttress, which
later in the thirteenth century was emphasized externally as a feature of the design.
The Abbaye-aux-Hommes is a remarkable instance of the use of spires as archi-
tectural features; for there are no less than nine spires, giving the vertical expres-
sion which became characteristic of Gothic architecture (p. 368).
The Abbaye-aux-Dames (‘La Trinité’), Caen (1062-1140) (p. 338B, C),
founded by Matilda, wife of William the Conqueror, has a fine western facade with
two square towers in arcaded stages, strengthened at the angles by flat buttresses
and formerly crowned by spires. The massive walls of nave and aisles with slightly
projecting buttresses and the square tower over the crossing complete this homo-
geneous design. The interior (p. 338B) has a remarkable intersecting sexpartite
ribbed vault, as in the Abbaye-aux-Hommes, in which two bays are included in
each vaulting compartment, with semicircular diagonal and transverse ribs and
intermediate ribs which support a vertical piece of walling.
In addition to the abbeys mentioned above there are a number of smaller
‘churches, of which the most important are Berniéres, Ouistreham and S.
Georges, Boscherville, all of which are vaulted, and have interesting towers
built in stages and culminating in pyramidal stone roofs.
The Abbey of S. Denis (1137-44) (p. 310A), near Paris, erected by the builder
Abbé Suger, is one of the few buildings in this style in the royal domain of the Ile
de France, which during this period comprised only a small territory, and it was not
until the Gothic period that the great outburst of building activity occurred in this
district. The Abbey Church is of great interest as the burial-place of the French
kings. The original choir and two internal bays still remain, and a Gothic nave and
transept (c. A.D. 1231) have been wedged between them (p. 341). The west front,
 FRENCH ROMANESQUE 345

A
se
emieam

The Abbaye-aux-Hommes, Caen, from E. (1066-77). See opposite page

346 FRENCH ROMANESQUE

4
a
a
|
%.

Pa
BR

B. Church of Jumiéges (1050). View of nave, showing alternation

of clustered piers and columns. See p. 348
 FRENCH ROMANESQUE 347
with its mingling of round and pointed arches, is an early instance of the use of the
pointed arch, while the eastern end, though still retaining many Romanesque
features, is probably the earliest truly Gothic structure.

SECULAR ARCHITECTURE
Buildings other than ecclesiastical have not been well preserved, because they were
not sacred against attack, because they were generally built for military purposes
and so were liable to destruction, and because of the risk of injury by fire and adapta-
tion to changed requirements. Fortified towns, like Carcassonne (p. 549), which
dates from Roman times; Bridges, like the Pont d’Avignon (1177-85) (p. 549),
built by the fréres-pontifes or sacred guild of bridge builders; Castles, such as the
Chateau de Chateaudun (p. 555) and the fortified Abbey of Mont S. Michel (p.
549), and the stone Houses of the twelfth century still found at Cluny and else-
where, are types of buildings which started in the Romanesque style, but were
much altered or extended in the Gothic period. The Monastic Kitchen, Fontev-
rault (1115) (p. 350D), with its fine roof, and the fireplace and chimney from S.
Gilles (p. 350B), are remnants which show the character of the secular work of this
period.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. In the south, churches were cruciform in plan and frequently had naves
covered with barrel vaults whose thrust was taken by half-barrel vaults over aisles
in two storeys (pp. 334E, 342D). Buttresses are internal and form the divisions
between the chapels which flank the nave, as at Vienne Cathedral. Towers are
sometimes detached, like Italian campanili. Cloisters are treated with the utmost
elaboration, as at S. Trophime, Arles (p. 350F), and form a special feature in the
plan of many churches of the period. Circular churches are rarely found, but the
development of the semicircular east end as an ambulatory, with radiating chapels,
is common in southern France. In the north, plans were of the basilican type with
nave and aisles. The use of high nave vaults changed the setting-out of the bays,
which were brought to a square by making one nave vaulting compartment equal
to the length of two bays of the aisles (p. 342D), until the introduction of the
pointed arch overcame the difficulty of vaulting oblong compartments with ribbed
vaults.
WALLS. The massive walls characteristic of this period were, in both south and
north, of rubble faced with squared stone. Sculptured and moulded ornament was
concentrated on wall arcades, especially on western facades, which thus stand out
in contrast to the general simplicity of the external wall treatment (p. 337C).
Facgades were often divided by string courses or horizontal mouldings into
storeys relieved by single, coupled, or grouped windows, and frequently had
arcading as at Echillais (p. 350c). Buttresses were wide strips of slight projection
(p. 338C) or half-round shafts (p. 350G); while flying buttresses, admitting of high
clear-story windows to light the nave, were introduced in the latter half of the
twelfth century (p. 345). Towers were generally square with pyramidal or conical
roofs (p. 350A), and by their grouping and number gave a vertical character to the
style, as at the Abbaye-aux-Hommes, Caen (p. 345).
OPENINGS. In the south, nave wall arcades of aisleless churches are semi-
circular, with mouldings in recesses or ‘orders’ (p. 337B), while arcades of cloisters
are elaborated with coupled columns in the depth of the walls, and with carved
capitals which support the semicircular arches of the narrow bays, which were left
unglazed as in Italy (p. 350F). The western portals of such churches as S. Trophime,
348 FRENCH ROMANESQUE

Arles (p. 350K), and S. Gilles (p. 349A) recall the columns and horizontal entabla-
tures of the Romans, but in other cases doorways have recessed jambs as usual in
this period (p. 350], L). Narrow windows with semicircular heads and wide splays
inwards suffice to admit light, especially in the south (p. 350G). In the north, nave
arcades are spanned by semicircular arches which are repeated in the deep tri-
foriums, as at the Abbaye-aux-Hommes. Imposing western doorways (pp. 337A; C;
338) with sculptured tympana were the forerunners of the magnificent sculptured
entrances of the Gothic period. Windows with semicircular heads are sometimes
grouped together and enclosed in a larger arch, as in the nave wall or clear-story
immediately beneath the vault (p. 338B).
Rooks. In the south, naves were first covered by barrel vaults (p. 338A) but-
tressed by half-barrel vaults over aisles, which were sometimes two storeys high
and thus left no space for a clear-story. The vault was sometimes pointed (p. 310B),
and this had the advantage of lessening the superincumbent thrust of the stone
roofing slabs which, especially in Auvergne, were frequently laid direct upon the
vaults and were given the low pitch suitable to the south. The narthex or ante-
chapel of S. Madeleine, Vézelay (1130) (p. 349B), is believed to have the earliest
pointed cross-vaults in France. As to the external treatment of roofs in southern
France, while climatic conditions decided that they need only be low in pitch,
other factors entered into the nature of their construction; for in the volcanic
district of Auvergne the light nature of the stone resulted in stone-covered vaults;
while in Aquitaine, the trade route from the East occasioned the use of domical
construction, as at Angouléme. In the north, the height of clear-storeys was in-
creased by means of intersecting ribbed vaults whose thrust was taken by buttress
arches under the aisle roofs (p. 342Cc)—a step towards the later external flying
buttresses. In the north, also, the most important developments in stone vaulting
technique took place, with the introduction of the rib and panel system. The vaults
were usually covered by wooden framed roofs, finished with slates and of steep
pitch, as the need to throw off snow and water was a determining factor in their
construction (p. 345).
COLUMNS. In the south, the piers were derived from the Roman square pier,
with attached columns to which were added nook shafts, and on the nave side the
half-round shafts were carried up to the springing of the vaults (p. 337B). These
piers, as at Lessay (p. 350H), were the prototypes of the richly clustered Gothic
piers. Capitals, as at Aix, clearly show the influence of Classic buildings (p. 351K).
In the north, similar piers were in use, while cylindrical piers, as at Notre Dame,
Paris (p. 532B), were also frequent, surmounted with carved capitals of Corinthian-
esque type and square abacus, from which the vaulting shafts start awkwardly (p.
350M, N, P, Q, R). In Normandy, the system of alternating clustered pier and
column along the nave was introduced, as at Jumiéges (p. 3468).
MOULDINGS. Mouldings executed in stone are coarser than those in the marble
of Italy. In the south, Classic tradition is reflected in the graceful moulding con-
tours. Capitals and bases are either rough imitations of the old Roman Corinthian
type (p. 35IC, H) or have considerable variations, due to the introduction of animal
figures. In the north, the jambs are formed in receding planes, with recesses filled
with nook shafts fluted or carved with zigzag ornament. Capitals are frequently
cubiform blocks, sometimes carved with animal subjects (p. 351). Corbel tables of
great richness, supported by grotesquely carved heads, often form the wall cornices
(p. 351).
ORNAMENT. In the south, painted glass was not favoured, and small clear-
glazed openings were employed to set off the opaque colour decoration of the walls.
Figure sculpture is at its best in Provence, as in the portals of S. Trophime, Arles
 FRENCH ROMANESQUE 349
ac

Rall
taeat
eee
(2

A S . G illes .. west facade (c. 1150). See p. 343

B. S. Madele ine, Vézelay the narthex (1130). See p. 343

 350 FRENCH ROMANESQUE

ga

ina PLACE e CHIMNEY:

MgB ABBEY or SENANQUE; ene
WEST FACADE: Se
MONASTIC KITCHEN:
(A) omA. S.ULLES ECHILLAIS FONTEVRAULT
5. ESTEPHE io — 2

| Er
ase
oSa oi
Te
fe, ee

C OSSTERS:S. TROPHIME: ARLES Garse: SPIERRE : AULNAY NAVE PIERS: LESSAY

}
! k
-9'10'=---=-4
e B i
Zh
i. bY! ke

& ite i
NAT!
Mil
Rivest Hn ‘yy
Doooia: SERQUICN
*
5
1
'
YL [
1

=!
y)
(My io)
$ =~
WY i :
!
1

EARLY NAVE PIER a

oAie)
+
ete Fk
ABBAYE AUX DAMES BERNIERES-SUR-MER
NAVE PIERS
oe AEN
 FRENCH ROMANESQUE 351

FesACE RANNNN ENN

au ea - o £

al Raed Gans!

llsFae (
wr

‘ imn 2 he

aan
Z
HAsf x SATA Vs%e%a%,
SERRE ‘ a
ty

l << Wi
MMSE
D
|
\(((WWaess ssspoem uml

ill La i
pall
(alpapaigalyal Alp 7. Iya Ted] | '
|\ |:
fixe ys ARLE : sc a CAPITAL: '
ye
tins
Ie
MPANUM:LA CHARITE-S?-LOIRE S.AIGNAN-S®-CHER

re W =

iW ) AK
WE\ S j y ry
By
7
ues a SS
CS VERY,
2

y TWIN CAPITALS:
5, SERNIN: TOULOUSE
= CARVING: VENCE

BSS ONES
aa aa al

ea, |
J

TT

se )

ay ORES
we & ma ",, ——~

y, (PS) SS Ney
.

Viusg
< bio fi

Lu
yy

Rm
| 4

Ht (C
vA)

(Hynste, i : Ga
pe
\ el i LA
‘ i z

BASES: AIX CATH: ES faa ee

2 NY AU es
SCULP®: FRIEZE:
ie anes | ANGOULEME. CATH
Z2AW SSS SS) Ll c]

x “a NlAE
; = O
oe n

yFODO
YiaN

.U
—= ; 7 y y come al -'

€
=f Ie A
=lFall= NE
WS LP |
HNN WN Ms

ODD
NNDB
ili
| |
NATTA
HA
SA

(dithiniltlh
HINN
iil
SS: (5 ay Ds }

jl
sir, hi Kfad ff
7a
ri TU
in a i
quilt Seu
A PIER ano COLUMNS: (lies eh) (M)ScuLp? SPANDREL.
—

CLOISTER:AIX CATH: ~=\LJpooRWaY:S. GILLES BAYEUX CATHEDRAL.

352 FRENCH ROMANESQUE
(p.350K) and S. Gilles (p. 351L), where we can see the early promise of the remarkable ,
sculpture of the French Gothic period; while in Aquitaine sculpture is confined to the
capitals, which are sometimes carved with figures, animals, and Bible subjects, and
are frequently derived from Roman Corinthian prototypes (p. 351A, C, D, G).
Facades of churches of the Charente district in Aquitaine have this elaborate
carved ornament representing foliage, or figures of men and animals (p. 351J),
and capitals of columns on the ground storey are often continued as a rich, broad
frieze across the building (p. 351L). In the north, stained glass, which was more
suitable to large openings, was only gradually developed. The diaper work in the
spandrels of arches is supposed to be an imitation in carving of the colour-pattern
work or stuff draperies that originally occupied the same position, while the period
is rich in carving of zigzags, rosettes, and billets (p. 351F, M). The carved tympana,
dealing with Biblical subjects, are frequently of great interest (pp. 349B, 35IB).
Owing, however, to the comparative absence of antique Roman models in the
north, figure sculpture is rare in this period and never approached the beauty of
the sculpture at Arles in the south.

REFERENCE BOOKS
BAUM, J]. Romanesque Architecture in France. London, 1928.
ENLART,C. L’architecture réligieuse en France. Paris, 1902.
EVANS, JOAN. The Romanesque Architecture of the Order of Cluny. Cambridge, 1938.
LAVEDAN,P. French Architecture. London, 1956.
MCGIBBON,D. The Architecture of Provence and the Riviera. Edinburgh, 1888.
MARTIN, C. L’art roman en France. Paris, [1912].
MICHEL, A. Histoire de l’art. Vol. i, pt. i (for article by C. Enlart on Romanesque). Paris,
1905.
PORTER,A.K. Mediaeval Architecture. 2 vols., New York and London, 1909.
PUGIN, A. and LEKEUX. Architectural Antiquities of Normandy. London, 1828. New ed.,
1874.
RAMEE, D. Histoire del’ Architecture. 2 vols., Paris, 1870.
REVOIL, H. Architecture Romane du Midi de la France. 3 vols., Paris, 1864-73.
RUPRICH-ROBERT, V. L’ Architecture Normande aux XI° et XII® siécles. 2 vols., Paris,
1885-7.
SHARPE, EDMUND. The Domed Churches of Charente. London, 1882.
SPIERS, R. PHENE. Saint Front of Périgueux and the Domed Churches of Perigord and
La Charente. RIBA Journal, 20 Feb. 1896.
THIOLLER, N. and F. L’architecture religieuse a l’époque romane dans l’ancien diocése du
Puy. Le Puy, 1900.
VERNEILH, F. DE. L’ Architecture Byzantin en France. Paris, 1851.
VIOLLET-LE-DUC. Dictionnaire de l’Architecture. 10 vols., Paris, 1859. [A translation of
the article ‘Construction’, by G. M. Huss, was published under the title of Rationale
Building. New York, 1895.]
WARD, C. Mediaeval Church Vaulting. Princeton, 1915.
 _ Hanover

* Hudesheun

*“Gerntoda

“Land over 1,500feet

Germany in the twelfth century

X. GERMAN ROMANESQUE
(ninth-thirteenth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. Germany was through many centuries a conglomeration, first
of various tribes fighting amongst themselves, and then of various independent
states, principalities, and powers occupying the great central district of Europe.
This country north of the Alps was not geographically so generally accessible to
Roman influence as was Gaul, with her sea-ports and great trade routes, but here
the Rhine played the same part in civilization as the Rhéne did in Gaul, and
Roman civilization spread north-west along the fertile Rhineland and into Saxony,
while the region to the east was untouched. The ‘Peutinger Tabula,’ a Mediaeval
Mi H.O.A.
354 GERMAN ROMANESQUE
copy of a Roman map, now at Vienna, shows the principal Roman towns on the
Rhine, with their thermae and other public buildings.
GEOLOGICAL. Stone from the mountains along the Rhine Valley was the
material used for buildings in this district, and the churches were rendered more
permanent and fireproof by the early introduction of vaulting. Along the Baltic
shores and in central and southern Germany there was an ample supply of timber.
As there was no stone or timber in the plains of the north, brick was there employed,
almost exclusively in the district east of the Elbe, and the style consequently differs
from that of other districts.
CLIMATIC. The average temperature of central Germany is much the same as
in southern England, but the heat in summer is ten degrees higher and in winter
correspondingly lower. Roman influence on architecture of this period was so in-
sistent that even the northern climate did not exert its full influence in building.
Nevertheless there was a distinct tendency to large windows, suitable for the north,
and to steep roofs to throw off snow.
RELIGIOUS. Christianity naturally followed along much the same lines as
Roman civilization, and under the influence of Rome it took root in southern
Germany and in the Rhineland, while the rest of the country remained pagan. As
early as the sixth century the bishops of Trier and Cologne were conspicuous in
promoting church building, of which evidences can still be traced. Charlemagne,
in furtherance of his desire to extend the Christian religion, forced the people of
Saxony to embrace Christianity, and this resulted in the erection of a number of
circular baptisteries, as the conversion of the tribes made a great demand for the
baptismal rite.
SocIAL. The social development of these central districts was much the same
as in Europe generally: a few strong kings emerged from among weak ones, while
feudal lords were constantly intolerant of kingly authority and oppressive towards
the people, who became freemen or fell back as serfs, according as kings and cities
prevailed against feudal tyranny, and at this period churches were only churches
of monks and not of the common people. Germany, united under Charlemagne,
afterwards split up into small principalities. This naturally fostered differences in
architectural style. The feudal system made great strides, as it appealed to the
desire of the feudal lords to become dukes of independent states, who could defy
the authority of the king and tyrannize over freemen. Cities, which first grew
strong in the Rhineland, found more consideration from kings than from feudal
lords, so that the country was distracted by constant strife, tillin 919 Henry the
Fowler made himself king of a united Germany and there was peace in his time,
during which many towns sprang up and freemen found it possible to carry on
their industries.
HISTORICAL. Charlemagne (768-814), the first Frankish king who became
Roman Emperor, was crowned in 800 at Rome by the Pope, and ruled over the
land of the Franks, which included central Germany and northern France, and he
also established the Frankish dominion over southern France and northern Italy
(p. 312). He restored civilization in a great measure to Western Europe, and was a
patron of architecture and the allied arts. Charlemagne died in 814, and before the
death of his son and successor Louis the Pious in 840 the empire had already begun
to crumble to pieces. The German princes demanded the right to elect their own
sovereign, and Conrad I (911-19) reigned as king of Germany. Henry the Fowler
(919-36) drove the Magyars out of Saxony, subjugated Bohemia and the tribes
between the Elbe and the Oder, thus again establishing a united Germany. Otto
the Great (936-73) was crowned king at Aix-la-Chapelle. His wars, including his
conquest of Lombardy (951), made him the greatest sovereign in Europe, and in
 GERMAN ROMANESQUE Ss)

qURCH OF THE APOSTLES:

rik COLOGNE
SS
© KE |

BEai Ta
int |
FD mt

# FF _
l sed ne

ig KIN
DXDX

il lif VJ is f :

ealETTETHTTT
: ote
Om LONGITUDINAL L |SECTION 1%!) RANSVERSE SECTION

CLOISTERS
 356 GERMAN ROMANESQUE

WORMS CATHIE DRAL

SCALE FOR SECTIONS &c. sli
25 159 75Fe
ly 5 10 15

a
iii
tee
TCT eet
tne ie
e2aaalttt

ee
Paneer
rk
eee
2

B)nave BAY (int)

EXTERNAL
ANGLE ? CHOIR

Pipaeeoe FROM NE
ELEVATION ee

(ave Pier R b=

SCALE FOR PLAN

eS AMB OF
ree emer jer erp joe A (SPLAN N. oODOORWAY
 GERMAN ROMANESQUE 357
961 he received the Imperial crown at Rome; but for two centuries after his death
the royal authority remained weak. His power is reflected not only in the extent of
his empire, but also in the number of important buildings erected in his dominions.
When Conrad II in 1024 became king of Germany, Denmark, under Canute the
Great, threatened his power on the north, and Poland and Hungary on the east,
but he inaugurated the great Imperial age, by restricting the power of both secular
and ecclesiastical princes. After wars between rival claimants, Conrad III in 1138
became the first of the Hohenstaufen dynasty and was followed by Frederick Bar-
barossa (1152-90), who was also crowned Emperor at Rome. He defeated Denmark
and Poland, secured the alliance of Hungary and negotiated with France and
England, but his interference in papal schisms brought disaster, till emperor and
pope were reconciled under Gregory VIII. The position of Germany was again
reasserted in Europe by the brilliant Frederick II (1218-50), who united in himself
the crowns of the Holy Roman Empire, Germany, Sicily, Lombardy, Burgundy,
and Jerusalem. The political connection of the Hohenstaufen (or Swabian) em-
perors (1138-1254) with Lombardy is evidenced in the similarity of the architecture
of the two countries during the Romanesque period.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
German Romanesque architecture dates from the ninth to the thirteenth century.
The style, owing to historical influences (as mentioned above), bears a striking
similarity to that of Lombardy, and in some instances lasted as late as the middle
of the thirteenth century, more especially in the Rhineland and Saxony, where it is
found in its most highly developed form.
Church plans are peculiar in having both western and eastern apses (p. 356J), and
thus there are no great western entrances as in France. The reason for these double
apses has never been thoroughly explained; some think that the eastern apse may
have been used for the abbot and monks and the western apse for the bishop and
laity, or that the western apse may be the survival of the detached baptistery which
had been usual in earlier churches. The general character is picturesque by reason
of numerous circular and octagonal turrets, polygonal cupolas, and arcaded gal-
leries under the eaves (p. 356F). Doorways were placed laterally in the aisles and
are the most richly ornamented features of the churches, with shafts and capitals
boldly and effectively carved. Vaulting appears not to have come into use in the
Rhenish churches until some fifty years after its general adoption in France.

EXAMPLES
Aix-la-Chapelle (Aachen) Cathedral (796-804) (pp. 280, 285E-G), built by the
Emperor Charlemagne as his royal tomb-house, resembles S. Vitale, Ravenna (p.
285C, D). The entrance, flanked by staircase turrets, leads into a polygon of sixteen
sides, 105 ft in diameter. Every two angles of this polygon converge on to one pier,
and thus form an internal octagon, the eight piers of which support a dome 47 ft
6 ins in diameter, rising above the two-storeyed surrounding aisles. The building
has been much altered since the time of Charlemagne, for the Gothic choir was
added (1353-1413), the gables date from the thirteenth century and the lofty outer
roof of the octagon from the seventeenth century. The surrounding chapels are of
the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and the western steeple has been added in
recent years (p. 285F). The building is of historic interest as the prototype of other
similar churches in Germany, but more especially as the place of coronation of the
Holy Roman Emperors.
358 GERMAN ROMANESQUE

Gernrode Abbey (958-1050) has a nave, covered by a wooden roof, aisles, and a
fine triforium, and is probably the earliest instance of a church with an apse at
both ends, a feature peculiar to Germany.
The Monastery of S. Gall (c. 820) (p. 308), in modern Switzerland, is a typical
German Benedictine monastery of the period. A complete plan found in the
seventeenth century appears to have been prepared by Eginhardt, Charlemagne’s
architect, and shows a double-apse church with cloisters, abbot’s lodging, school,
refectory, dormitory, guest-house, dispensary, infirmary, granaries, bakehouses,
orchard, and cemetery—thus showing the thoroughness with which every need
was provided for in the planning of a monastic colony.
S. Godehard, Hildesheim (1133-70), and S. Michael, Hildesheim (c. I1015-
1186), have nave arcades in which square piers and columns are used to support
semicircular arches.
The Church of the Apostles, Cologne (1035-1220) (p. 355), is one of the series
of triapsal churches in that city. The plan consists of a broad nave, aisles half its
width, western transepts, and a triapsal choir, while over the crossing a low octa-
gonal tower gives dignity to the effective external grouping (p. 355C). The entrance
is by a northern porch, and there is no great western portal as in France, the west
end being occupied by a tower flanked by stair turrets, crowned with a typical
Rhenish roof, consisting of a steep gable on each face from which ride the ridges of
a pyramidal roof. An Anglo-Saxon example can be seen at Sompting, Sussex (p.
387E). The triapsal end has wall arcading in two storeys crowned with the charac-
teristic eaves arcade, and on the south side are the cloisters. This church was
severely damaged during the 1939-45 war.
S. Maria im Capitol, Cologne (rebuilt 1047), S. Martin, Cologne (1150-70)
(p. 359A, B), and S. Cunibert, Cologne, are other triapsal churches which have
suffered from war damage.
Worms Cathedral (A.D. 1110-81) (p. 356) vies with the Cathedrals of Speyer
(1030) (p. 359C, D) and Mainz (1036) (p. 360B) as a typical church of this period.
The plan is apsidal at both ends, with eastern and western octagons, while one
vaulting bay of the nave corresponds with two of the aisles, and cross-vaults are
employed in both cases (p. 356c, J). Twin circular towers containing stairs flank
the eastern and western apses, and the crossing of the nave and transept is covered
with a low octagonal tower, crowned with a pointed roof. The entrances are in the
aisles, a position which found favour both in Germany and England. The lateral
facades have circular-headed windows, between the characteristic flat pilaster
strips.
Laach Abbey (1093-1156) (p. 361B) is a Benedictine church. The plan differs
from most others because on either side of the western apse, which is used as a
tomb-house, are entrances from the cloistered atrium which still exists, and there
are also three eastern apses. The vaulting bays of nave and aisles are of the same
width, which shows an advance towards the Gothic system. The church is built
chiefly of local lava and the exterior is a fine grouping of six towers, double tran-
septs, and east and west apses.
Liibeck Cathedral (1173) is an example of the brick architecture of north
Germany; but the Gothic choir and aisles were not added till 1335 (p. 588),
thus converting it into a ‘hall’ church (p. §87).
Trier Cathedral (1016-47) (pp. 361A, 364) is reminiscent of the importance
of this ancient city which, in the fourth century, was one of the residences
of Roman Emperors, and for nearly 1,500 years remained the seat of bishops,
archbishops, and electors. The cathedral succeeded a basilican church several
times destroyed by Franks and Normans, but rebuilt and enlarged in the eleventh
 GERMAN ROMANESQUE 359

A. Nave looking E. B. Exterior from N.W.

S. Martin, Cologne (1150-70). See opposite page

c. Towers and external gallery D. Detail of doorway

Speyer Cathedral (1030). See opposite page

360 GERMAN ROMANESQUE

ti
= Pe Pa

A. S. Gereon, Cologne, from E. (1160) B. Mainz Cathedral from S.W. (1036).

See pp. 265, 587 See p. 358

c. S. Gereon, Cologne, from S. (straight-sided choir 1075; towers and apse 1160;
oval nave 1219-27). See pp. 265, 587
 GERMAN ROMANESQUE 361

OEE
PARES
ROT
nas
eae

&”

(Added 18h century) (al155-69)

A, Trier Cathedral from N.E. (1016-47 and later). See p. 358

POM
Lt ce
Mee eke

B. Laach Abbey Church from N. (1093-1156). See p. 358

 362 GERMAN ROMANESQUE

CAPITALS 97>
ILSENBURG > CONRADSBUI

if
Mh
AMEN

ee
ANY

eine

head3
emer
Be
NDOW:
mq ,,
oaem!
ED
a
AS- =
mM==.

: LAACE
~

—S=S=>
Ga
:
=
=;
>= V\/ =A Rai WP y

jill Ne aii at Tit

Vee a
(N)eorts
ee Sy

oe
KernMig
a
NN i
yers\eal
(D peat

na
mini { int |

ill)
5.
 GERMAN ROMANESQUE 363
century. It has an eastern apse and also a western apse flanked by entrances, and forms
an important group with the Liebfrauenkirche, which is described in Chapter
XVI (pp. 587, 589A, B).
Germany is remarkable for two-storeyed churches, generally attached to castles,
as at Nuremberg, Landsberg, and Steinfurt in Westphalia. It is supposed that the
upper church was used by the prince and his retinue, and the lower by his retainers.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. Naves and aisles of churches are vaulted in square bays, one vaulting bay
of the nave being equal to two of the aisles, as in Worms Cathedral (p. 356), and
the Church of the Apostles, Cologne (p. 355D). The plans of churches are com-
plicated by the multiplication of towers, transepts, and apses at either end, while
the choir is always apsidal and often raised, as in Lombardy, to admit of a crypt
beneath. Apses also frequently terminate the western end of the nave, as at Worms
(p. 356J) and Laach, and churches are sometimes triapsal, as the Church of the
Apostles, Cologne (p. 355D), while in others there are also western transepts with
towers over the crossing. Towers, square, circular, or polygonal, numbering often
as many as six, two at the east end flanking the apse, and two similarly at the west
end, give a varied skyline to churches (p. 362k).
WALLS. The plain wall surface is relieved by pilaster strips, connected hori-
zontally at different stages by ranges of arches on corbels which, owing to the
smallness of scale, have the appearance of moulded string courses (pp. 355C, 356F,
362K). Arcaded galleries, the origin of which has already been considered, are fre-
quent under the eaves of roofs, especially round apses (p. 355c). All these features
are derived from Lombardy. Churches usually have a triforium and always a
clear-story (p. 355A).
OPENINGS. Nave arcades are frequently unmoulded and the semicircular
arches spring from piers (pp. 355, 356) or cylinders, while alternate piers are some-
times carried up to support the vault ribs (pp. 355A, 356B). Cloisters frequently
have small columns supporting arches in groups of three (p. 362P). The eaves
galleries (p. 355C), borrowed from Lombardy, are special features, sometimes
carried entirely round the church, as at Speyer (p. 359C). Doorways are frequently
in the side aisles instead of in the west front or transepts, and have recesses with
nook shafts (p. 362R, Ss, T). Windows are usually single, but occasionally grouped
(p. 362M), and sometimes have a mid-wall shaft (p. 362H, Q), the germ of Gothic
tracery windows.
Rooks. In the Rhine district the semicircular cross-vault of the nave is of a
domical nature, owing to the use of semicircular ribs, which rise to a greater height
over the diagonal of the compartment. The system of including two bays of the
aisle in one nave vaulting compartment was generally adopted (pp. 355A, B, 356B,
c). Timber roofs were also employed for naves with large spans, as at Gernrode.
Square towers, divided into storeys by moulded courses, frequently terminate in
four gables with hipped rafters rising from the apex of each, and the roofing planes
intersect at these rafters and thus form a pyramidal or ‘helm’ roof with four
diamond-shaped sides meeting at the apex (pp. 355C, 362K). Polygonal towers have
similar roofs, but with valleys between the gables (p. 355c), and all show the com-
mencement of the evolution of spires which became the feature of the Gothic
eriod.
4 COLUMNS. In nave arcades square piers with attached half-columns were usual,
though sometimes varied by the alternation of compound piers and cylinders
crowned by capitals bold in execution and well designed (p. 362A, B, C, D). The
364 GERMAN ROMANESQUE

shafts and capitals in doorways were frequently elaborately carved with figures of
men, birds, and animals (p. 362E, J, L, N).
MOULDINGS (p. 359D). There is a general absence of mouldings in nave
arcades, which gives a bold appearance to interiors. When they occur, mouldings
are as a rule of indifferent design, and those of capitals and bases take a distinctive
form intermediate between Roman and Gothic.
ORNAMENT. Internally the flat wall surfaces may have been painted originally,
but the general effect to-day is extremely bare. Characteristic carving in bands was
employed (p. 362G), and in the north, lines of coloured bricks were used externally.
The sculpture is often well executed (p. 362N), and the craftsmanship of this period
is seen in the bronze doors of Hildesheim Cathedral (A.D. 1015), which are wrought
in wonderful detail to represent the Creation, the Fall, and the Redemption, as seen
in a reproduction in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London.

REFERENCE BOOKS
BOISSEREE, S. Denkmaeler der Baukunst am Nieder-Rhein. Munich, 1844.
HAUPT, A. VON. Die Baukunst der Germanen von der voilkerwanderung bis zu Karl dem
grossen. Leipzig, 1909.
MOLLER, G. Denkmaeler der Deutschen Baukunst. Leipzig, 1852.
OTTE,H. Geschichte der romanischen Baukunst. Leipzig, 1874.

Trier Cathedral (1016-47) and the Liebfrauenkirche (1227-43) from W.

See pp. 358, 587
 ¢Boundary of Holy
Roman Empire
c. 1360

+ eo
= ° Miles 300

X) uh’ Land over 3,000Ft.

Ce
is)

Paris Trier
KINGDOM
OF

Europe in the fourteenth century

XI. GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

(twelfth-sixteenth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. The various peoples of Western Europe, who had once been
under the dominion and civilization of Rome, had by the end of the twelfth century
formed into separate nations, with a consequent new territorial distribution of the
map of Europe. The Latin races of France, Italy, and Spain developed into inde-
pendent kingdoms; Germany was the centre of the Holy Roman Empire; England,
under her Norman kings, possessed large domains in France and was thus linked
up with Western Europe. Poland, the north-eastern Baltic lands and Scandinavia—
apart from Norway, influenced by England—were less affected by this movement
and reflected German art. Russia played little part. The Gothic style originated in
France, and until the beginning of the thirteenth century French influence was
paramount.
GEOLOGICAL. Geological conditions vary so much in Europe that they con-
tribute a definite influence in differentiating the style according to countries; thus
the white and coloured marbles of Italy, the coarse-grained stone of France and
England, the brick of northern Germany and of Lombardy are all factors, as will be
seen, in determining the character of the architecture of these countries.
CLIMATIC. Climatic conditions, which, even in Europe, vary from north to
 366 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

south and east to west, have in all ages and countries had considerable influence in
deciding the style of the architecture in any given district. Thus in the slanting rays
of the northern sun the most effective shadows are cast by vertical features, such as
the buttresses and pinnacles which surround northern Gothic churches. The
southern sun moves higher in the firmament and thus the deepest shadows are cast
from horizontal cornices, and these are therefore frequently retained in Italian
Gothic. Although this did not wholly determine the difference in treatment, it is
interesting to observe that the highest development of Gothic architecture was
achieved in northern latitudes. Climate, as will be seen, more especially affected
the use of arcades and the size of door and window openings; while heavy snow-falls
necessitated steep Gothic roofs in the north.
RELIGIOUS. The conditions of the Christian Church and the rise of monastic
communities precedent to the Gothic period have been dealt with under Roman-
esque architecture (p. 304). The immense power of the popes in the thirteenth
century can be judged from the way they made and unmade emperors and kings
and disposed of their dominions. The clergy, by reason of their learning, were
prominent not only in spiritual but also in temporal affairs, and thus attracted
wealth and power to the church. In Germany many of the abbots and bishops were
princes of the Empire, and the archbishops of Cologne, Trier (Tréves), and Mainz
were among the Electors of the Holy Roman Empire. The periodical pilgrimages to
shrines of local saints and holy relics, and the various forms of an increasingly
ornate ritual, influenced the plans of cathedrals. In England homage paid to the
Virgin Mary led to the building of Lady chapels, either as a prolongation of the
eastern end, as at Salisbury (p. 410E), or as a lateral addition, as at Ely (p. 410A).
The extension of the sanctuary to provide for the increase in the numbers of the
clergy, chapels dedicated to special saints, processional ambulatories, chantry
chapels for masses for the dead, all in turn modified and extended the original plan
in the different countries.
SocIAL. The rapid growth of towns and the development of commercial
activity, with the consequent increase of wealth, inspired a rivalry between
neighbouring cities which was expressed in the erection of magnificent buildings
both municipal and ecclesiastical. The countries of Europe developed along
different lines according to the genius of the people, as set forth in the following
chapters—English (p. 382), French (p. 529), Belgian and Dutch (p. 569), German
(p.583), Italian (p.599), and Spanish (p.635) Gothic architecture. In Germany towns
formed associations for mutual defence, the Hanseatic League being a famous
example. France and England were much under the heel of the feudal system, which
retarded municipal activity but gave opportunity for domestic architecture. Italy was
divided into republics and dukedoms, in which smaller cities were subject to the more
powerful, and here city life developed with greater freedom owing to disputes
between the Papacy and the Holy Roman Empire and to the comparative freedom
of Italy from the feudal system.
HISTORICAL. The principal historical events which influenced the architecture
of the different countries are referred to in subsequent chapters; but, briefly, they
were the loss of the English possessions in France, the gradual subjugation of the
various provinces of France under one king, the disintegration of Germany into a
number of independent states, the contests between the Muslim Moors and the
Christians in Spain, and the Latin conquest of Constantinople (Istanbul) in 1204,
which transferred the commerce of the East to the cities of Italy. The historical
influences affecting English Gothic architecture were of a varying nature and are
referred to in detail on p. 385.
 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE 367

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The following diagram emphasizes the broad lines of the evolution of styles leading
up to the Gothic architecture of Western Europe:

Greek Etruscan
(trabeated) (arcuated)
an
Roman
(trabeated and arcuated)

Romanesque (round arch) = 8th—12th cent.

Gothic (pointed arch) = 12th-16th cent.

The term ‘Gothic’ was used by Vasari (1511-74) and also by Sir Christopher
Wren in the seventeenth century as a term of reproach for this style, which had
departed from those Classic lines which he was instrumental in establishing in this
country. This term is now, by common consent, given to the Mediaeval architecture
of the twelfth to the early sixteenth century in Europe. The Gothic of the thirteenth
century throughout Europe was slowly evolved from Romanesque architecture and
is mainly distinguished by the introduction and general use of the pointed arch,
whose original home was Mesopotamia; from Assyria (p. 86) it passed to
Sassanian Persia; when the Muslims conquered Persia (c. 641) it became part of
their stock-in-trade. The adventurous Normans found it well established when they
wrested Sicily from the Muslims (1061-90) and in Syria it was in frequent use at the
opening of the Crusades (1096). This feature, in conjunction with buttresses and
lofty pinnacles, gives to the style the aspiring tendency which has been regarded as
symbolic of the religious aspirations of the period. Romanesque architects (p. 306)
had begun to recognize the differing functions performed by the respective parts of
vaulted buildings and to provide for them more economically than the Romans had
done. Gothic architects further extended the application of the principles of counter-
poise, and by employing small stones laid in shallow courses with thick mortar
joints, endeavoured to secure the greatest amount of elasticity compatible with
stability. The Gothic masons, throwing the rein on the neck of experiment,
utilized stone to its utmost capacity. They heaped up stone in towers that, rising
above the lofty roofs of nave and transepts, tapered upwards in slender spires
embroidered with lace-like tracery. They suspended it overhead in ponderous
vaults, ornamented so as to seem mere gossamer webs pierced by cunning pendants,
which pleased the fancy of the fifteenth century, and which in reality sustain the
very vaults from which they appear to hang. Finally, emboldened by success, they
even ventured to cut granular stone as thin as fibrous wood. The stability of a
Gothic cathedral depends upon the proper adjustment of thrust and counter-thrust.
The collected pressures of the nave vaulting, which are downward owing to their
weight and oblique owing to the arched form of the vault, are counteracted partially
by the dead weight of the outer roof loaded upon the upward extension of the
clear-story walls, and for the rest by arches carried above the aisle roofs to press
against the nave wall, these arches being retained by an outer line of massive
buttresses weighted by pinnacles. Whereas in Roman buildings the buttressing
system is often an integral part of the enormously thick walls (pp. 199A, 369A),
which rise up to weight the haunches of barrel vaults or domes, in a Gothic
368 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

building (p. 369B) the wall system consists of pieces of wall, or buttresses, at right
angles to the building, to take the collected pressures of the ribbed vault. This
structural contrivance of transmitting the accumulated pressures to the ground is
known as a ‘flying buttress’. The entire structure consists of a skeleton of piers,
buttresses, arches, and ribbed vaulting, all held in equilibrium by the combination
of oblique and vertical forces neutralizing each other, as is clearly shown by the
illustrations which explain the constructive principles (p. 369). The walls were thus
merely required to enclose and not to support the structure, and indeed they
principally consisted of glazed windows with vertical mullions and traceried heads.
It is evident that the development of this complicated system of construction would
have been impossible apart from the use of such material as could be laid in the
small stones with thick mortar joints, which were necessary to give elasticity to the
structure. These principles led to much novelty in the treatment of capitals and
piers; for the vaulting ribs, collected at intervals, were supported on capitals shaped
to fit them, and shafts, when continued to the ground, modified the form of the
nave piers of which they formed a part. The difficulties in the quarrying and trans-
port of stone, which resulted from the social and industrial conditions of the age,
taught the Gothic architects economy in the use of materials, and there was con-
sequently less waste in the working of stone in Mediaeval than in Classic times.
Gothic architecture, in common with Greek, relies on the evident truthfulness of
its structural features, which in both styles are component parts of the artistic
scheme. The self-contained Greek temple, however, is reposeful in the repetition
of its columns and the severity of its horizontal entablatures, whereas the Gothic
cathedral is a complex, virile structure composed of many vertical features, to which
unity was given by a due observance of relative proportions. Thus in Gothic
architecture the features were not left to mere artistic caprice, but were in the main
determined by stern structural utility, as exemplified in the novel shape of a capital
specially designed to support a novel superstructure, and in the ribs of vaults which
accurately express their function as sinews to support the vaulting panels. Although
most of the forms were founded primarily on structural necessity, others were the
expression of artistic invention; thus the spire fulfilled no structural requirement,
but it served as a symbol and formed an outward and visible expression of the
religious aspirations of the time and directed the thoughts of men heavenwards.
Compared with Greek or Roman monumental construction in masonry, the Gothic
was an architecture of small stones, for easy transport; for fine material was not
usually so immediate to the sites as in Greece, nor was there such a well-developed
road system as the Roman. Indeed roads were very poor, and if practicable, water-
carriage by boat or barge on sea, river or stream was preferable, however circuitous,
and decidedly cheaper than overland haulage by pack-horse or waggon. There are
frequent instances of stone being brought from Caen, Normandy, to south-eastern
England, or being brought long distances around the coast rather than overland
from quarries much nearer to hand.
The evolution of stone vaulting from Roman to late Gothic times is an interesting
subject which can be clearly explained by diagrams (pp. 369, 370, 373, 399). The
Roman system of stone vaulting, comprising the waggon and the intersecting vault
(p. 370A; B), was continued in the Romanesque period (p. 370D), but an innovation
was that of placing a vault over an oblong compartment of a church nave (p. 370C),
when difficulties occurred owing to the differences in height between semicircular
arches over spans of varying width. The illustrations (p. 370G) give the several
means of overcoming the difficulty, which was only entirely surmounted when the
pointed arch was introduced (p. 370F, H). A careful study of the illustrations (pp.
370; 373) will clearly demonstrate the various problems encountered in the evolution
 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE 369

7
GOTHIC WALL
SyoleM

Consens VE SN Aan OF THE

SAWN

MEDIZ-VAL. CHURC !

YING BUTTRESS WooDEN|| ROOF

Ss Po a Zz ” ~
FLYING BUTTRESS
(RHEIMS)
we

QEQn
RSs
SS

[ARS
Ss

wos
=

TRANSVERSE SECTION oraTYPICAL GOTHIC CATHEDRAL. amens)

 370 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

EVOLUTION OF GOTHIC VAULTING

\ |
ROMAN ras
WAGGON VAULT IWAGGON VAULT onrey |} INTERSECTING
WITH INTERSEGING| WITH SEM CRRCULA a)
Vv ) SRT

RIBS, & ILLUSTRATE THE DIFFICULTIES OF REGULATING THE HEIGHT OF RIBS OF DIFFERENT SPAN OVER A SQUARE
OMPARTMENT, AS THE PROBLEM IS TO KEEP THE CROWNS OF THE INTERSECTING VAULTS LEVEL.
CROSS VAULT WITH ELLIPTICAL DIAGONAL GROINS. @R ESQUE RIBBED VAULT WITH SEGMENTAL DI
IBS. © ROMANESQUE RIBBED VAULT WITH SEMI- GOTHIC RIBBED VAULT WITH POINTED ARCHES
RANS E RIBS WHICH CAN BE MADE ANY HEIGHT, FOR ANY SPAN
THUS OVERCOMING ALL DIFFICULTIES AS 5@-

VAULT OVER OBLONG

wei
LE COMPARTMENT

N be TUS Pais 7m
1b Lae os a |
NOUS
KC
ORC Se
|
7 tl Bey
ee
or ~
She Stoo
= SN Bote
<---\-----@--=-4
Wwe XN
ecm) al = BN
ge a We es \

Fi
\ | |
La._=. Siar
Son Neer
METHOD OF SETTING
Niles Tess eee
OUT PROFILES OF ,
WALL, DIAGONAL, INTERMEDIATE, CROSS & RIDGE RIBS FROM THE PLAN.
DIFFERENCE OF SPAN ACCOMMODATED BY USING POINTED ARCHES OF
DIFFERENT RADII. \,
 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE 371

from the Roman stone vault to the ribbed Gothic vault over an oblong compart-
ment. The setting-out of one compartment of a Gothic vault is given, with plans at
different levels of the springers (p. 373C), and the method of obtaining the outline of
the various ribs is also shown (p. 370H). This flexibility allowed in vaulting by the
use of the pointed arch—always regarded as the chief visible characteristic of Gothic
architecture—is a virtue which might seem to explain the readiness with which it
was adopted from Muslim art, were it not for the fact that the pointed arch appears
to have been used over wall-openings (soon after 1100 at Cluny, France; p. 343)
before it was employed in vaults (over Durham Cathedral nave, 1128-33; p. 392B).
Gothic vaulting consists of a framework of stone ribs, which support thin stone
panels, known as ‘rib and panel’ vaulting, which was an extension of the Roman-
esque method which had been evolved from the Roman. The ribs were constructed
as permanent supports and on them the thin stone panels were laid, being supported
temporarily on a movable centre sometimes known as a ‘circe’ (p. 373E). The
difficulty of vaulting oblong compartments was overcome by the use of the pointed
arch over the shorter spans, while the semicircular arch was for some time retained
for the diagonal or longer spans. The licence which Gothic masons allowed them-
selves in the treatment and disposition of ribs, with which they spun an intricate
web of many strands, makes the evolution of Gothic vaulting a most fascinating
study. Vault thrusts are considered in the chapter on English Mediaeval architecture
(p. 394), and it is sufficient to say here that the vault pressures were both down-
wards by the weight of the stone, through the action of the law of gravitation, and
outwards by the pressure of the arch voussoirs; both pressures were collected by
the meeting of the ribs at the angles of vaulting compartments, and the resultant
oblique pressure was then counteracted and transmitted to the ground by buttresses
and flying buttresses weighted by pinnacles (pp. 369, 497, 532C, 539A, 564A). The
weight of the roof, transmitted by the nave arcade walls, also played its part in
driving thrusts to earth. The evolution of Gothic vaulting in England is referred to
later (p. 394).
As a result of the development of the Gothic system of buttresses, walls became
less necessary as supports; but were naturally retained to enclose the building and
protect it against the elements. Another step in the evolution of the style was made
possible by the invention of painted glass, which was forthwith used to form
brilliant transparent pictures in the ever-recurring windows which were enclosed
under the pointed vaults, which had, as already explained, been originally adopted
for constructive reasons. The stonework of traceried windows in churches was
merely a frame for pictures of incidents in Bible history. The brilliant translucent
windowed walls of a Gothic cathedral rival in beauty the painted wall-reliefs and
hieroglyphics of Egyptian temples, the sculptured slabs of Assyrian palaces, the
paintings and sculpture of Greek temples, the stuccoes and frescoes of Roman
thermae, and the mosaics of Byzantine and Romanesque churches. In the north of
Europe the windows stretched from buttress to buttress, and thus provided full
scope for the use of glowing painted glass as the chief internal decoration, and it
followed that walls were kept uniformly flat internally so that the coloured windows
might be seen by all; while structural features, such as buttresses and pinnacles,
were placed externally (p. 369).
The question as to the real designers or architects of Mediaeval buildings and the
methods of organization of building works has been undergoing investigation in
recent years. The conception, or design, of new projects was the province of the
master of the appropriate craft; thus usually a mason in works for the church, royal
house or a civic authority. Master-masons acquired varying degrees of renown, and
the greater the recognition of their prowess as architects and the more they concen-
372 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

trated on this function and the direction of subordinates, the less they worked at
their craft with their own hands. Some became very famous indeed; their services
were widely sought by great personages, so that they proceeded from one project to
another or even controlled several at the same time. In general, as time elapsed, the
masters of the respective crafts became progressively more firmly grouped into
guilds or lodges, these being associations concerned to uphold the status and well-
being of the crafts and to nourish craft secrets, as well as to assure the integrity of
the members and the quality of the work produced in return for a fair price. In
later times at least, representative masters of chapters or groups of lodges met at
intervals to concert regulations and to advance their art. Great distances sometimes
were covered. In these and other ways, fresh ideas were constantly disseminated.
From time to time great masters were called from widely afield into consultative
council on projects of particular importance or difficulty. Travels also were under-
taken by masters in search of suitable building materials. The names of some five
hundred. European—including British—leading architect-craftsmen are known.
Among these are such as Villard de Honnecourt of thirteenth-century France;
Arnolfo di Cambio (1232-1301) of Italy; Peter Parler (1333-99) of Germany;
Henry Yevele (c. 1320-1400) and Hugh Herland (fl. 1360-1405) of England, the
last being a master-carpenter. Ordinary craftsmen necessarily left a completed
project for another, which in church or domestic work might be quite far away.
For royal works, craftsmen as well as workmen could be impressed. Contrary to
popular belief, monks or clerics took no part in actual building operations, though
they might discharge duties of collecting or disbursing funds or controlling
accounts. Until the later Middle Ages, when trading in building materials had
made some progress, the organization of a large building project included the
drawing together of all the necessary materials from their respective sources,
shaping them when requisite and obtaining the necessary plant and gear. Building
processes much resembled those of to-day; but comprehensive ‘working drawings’
for an entire scheme were not made; only for the part as work proceeded, and much
was done by direct setting-out at full scale in temporary booths or lodges constructed
on the site. The core of the church mason’s knowledge was that of the geometrical
mysteries of bay structure, which the more progressive masters were constantly
concerned to refine and improve. Templates, patterns, diagrams and other devices
for setting-out were treasured possessions of building-craftsmen and their guilds.

EXAMPLES
CATHEDRALS
Cathedrals and churches in Mediaeval times occupied an important place in
national life, and their construction was continued from one generation to another.
The term ‘cathedral’ (Gk. seat or throne) was applied to the episcopal church of
the diocese. They were the history books of the period when few people could read,
and thus were a medium of popular education, taking the place of such modern
institutions as free schools, libraries, museums, picture galleries, and concert halls.
Sculpture and painted glass reflected incidents of Bible history from the Creation
to the Redemption of mankind, and this pictorial presentment was peculiarly
adapted for people to whom the written word was a sealed book. The virtues and
vices, surrounded by all the imagery of Mediaeval symbolism, were depicted in
sculptured figure and coloured glass before the gaze of the passing people, and the
moral was pointed for the encouragement or warning of all by representations,
often crude and realistic, of the rewards or punishments that might be expected to
result from the practice of the particular virtue or vice. Saints with devout mien
 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

JOMPARATIVE LA eee OF VAULTS

=e Sere 3ae4a ARE JOINT MOULDS «> Jif
SORES 3b er4b ARE PLANS LOOKING
ra as _, DOWN OF GROIN STONES 3c
Z, --ppsm--y #TOLARGER SCALE.
|8c e-4c ARE 15
|METRIC SKETGHES

:
cs
D Lf//}

LINE
CENTRE
eo wa eed

BOTTOM BED
OF SECOND
AN , SPRINGER
Y/, TOP OF SECOND
* are
oe VAULT: THE COMPARTMENT |S 7 SPRINGER &
QUARE: AND SEMI-CIRCULAR VAULTS OF EQUAL BOTTOM o THIRD
EIGHT MAKE. THE LINE OF GROIN STRAIGHT ON PLAN KN 10°oF THIRD
\ SpDINGER &
BOTTOMo FOURTH
TRUE SECTION “GY

SIH T, OF PLOUGH-
SS SHARE TWIST

OMPARTMENT & SEMI-CIRCULAR VAULTS an

OF
ae ee VAULTS STILTED MAKING LINE OF GROINS
ole CROSS VAULT Pptun
©
SOUTHWARK CATH®!
SET TING-OUT OF TRANSVERSE,
DIAGONAL & WALL RIBS

con]

CIRCE’ or MOVABLE CENTRE

fpf ee FRENCH ENGLISH

Se
= mara gleeNSa
a Lee an Lg
LED

SIS
BOS
SSN

aa oe
Sk

RSS
aes SRY
—— 4 el
) WE | eedena7
ENAISSANCE CROSS VAULT OBLONG,
08. COMPART-
NEQUA EQUA WW SUI ="
IGHT OBTAINED BY USE OF CO-ORDINATES -GROIN INES.STRAIGHT KLAN METHOD or INFILLING
374 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

A. Nétre Dame, Paris B. Rouen c. Amiens

see p. 534 see p. 541 see p. §41

D. Evreux E. Chartres F. Beauvais

see p. 541 see p. 538 see p. 542

G. Strasbourg
see p. 542

K. Cologne L. Milan
see p. 587 see p. 604
Comparative Models of Continental Cathedrals
 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE 375
and angels of joyful aspect carried the thoughts of men to a future and higher life;
while all the manifold energies of mankind, as expressed in the various handicrafts
of peace and war, were represented in cathedral wall and window to stimulate
energy and action in daily life. Thus we see that Mediaeval architecture is a grand
chronicler also of secular history in which kings, nobles, knights, and people were
represented as playing their part. The plans of cathedrals differ in every country in
Europe, and Continental cathedrals (p. 374) form an interesting comparison with
English cathedrals (pp. 407, 408, 409).
Church plans in England (pp. 410, 411, 412, 413), France (p. 561), Belgium
(p. 571F), Germany (p. 590H), and Italy (p. 602) are generally in the form of a
Latin cross of which the short arms form the north and south transepts. The
derivation of this cruciform plan is conjectural, and has been the subject of various
theories of origin. It may have been formed from the Early Christian basilican
churches (p. 258), such as old S. Peter, Rome (p. 259c), and S. Paolo fuori le Mura
(p. 259E), by the extension of the ‘bema’ into well-marked transepts; or it may
have been suggested by the cruciform tombs of the period of Constantine (p. 296G).
Its complicated development during the Mediaeval period was due to the require-
ments of an increasingly ornate and ceremonial ritual of which it forms a material
expression in stone. The main body of the church generally stretches westward and
the choir and sanctuary eastward from the ‘crossing’ of nave and transepts, which
is often marked externally, especially in England, by a tower, sometimes tapering
into a spire. These main divisions east and west, and the transepts north and south,
are often further divided into central nave with side aisles, separated by columns or
piers. The principal entrance is generally either at the west, as in France, where it
is flanked by towers (p. 543), or on the south or north side, as in England, where
it is protected by a porch (p. 412B). The columns or piers which separate nave and
aisles support the nave arcades and the walls which rise above the aisle roofs
(p. 369C, F). Above is the triforium or ‘blind-story’, which is the space beneath
the sloping roof over the aisle vault and enclosed on the nave side by a series of
arches. Above the triforium is a range of windows to light the nave, called the
‘clear-story’, probably from the French word ‘clair’. By means of cross vaults these
clear-story windows generally rise to the level of the ridge of the nave vault, which
is covered by a high-pitched wooden roof.
The eastern arm, or the choir, reached by steps from the nave level, is generally
the most ornate part of the church.
The general form of a church may also be explained in practical terms. Whereas
developing ritual prescribed the mason-architect’s objective, structure and materials
set limitations, as did the need for adequate natural light. Wooden roof-trusses and
stone vaults could not economically span naves much wider than about 40 ft (50 ft
in France), but the use of either one or two aisles on each side, with clear-story
lighting for the nave, doubled or trebled the accommodation. Transepts, organized
on the same principle, added further to the useful space but left a dark intersection
or ‘crossing’, which for this reason was usually elevated into a clear-story central
tower, often called a ‘lantern’ in the past, because of this function. In France, the
great height of the transepts allowed light to reach the crossing from the transept
end walls, and obviated the need for a central tower (p. 545E). Weighty towers,
turrets or massive buttresses were needed to counter the cumulative thrusts at the
outer ends of the nave and transept arcades (e.g. Durham Cathedral, pp. 392, 408c,
IIE).
: tes although the general preference was for a square end to the sanc-
tuary, many cathedrals when rebuilt in Norman times were given a circular end,
which was sometimes partially developed into a chevet (see Glossary). This may still
376 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

be distinguished in the plans of Peterborough, Norwich, Canterbury, Gloucester,

Lichfield, Ely, Winchester, Durham, S. Albans, and Chester (pp. 410, 411,412,413).
Many cathedrals were enlarged in later years and were then given a square ter-
mination, thus reverting to the Anglo-Saxon usage. Westminster Abbey, built
under French influence, is unique in England in having a chevet with complete ring
of chapels (pp. 424D, 426A), and French cathedrals are generally finished with a
distinctive semicircular chevet (pp. 531, 545, 561). The Lady chapel was added at the
extreme east end, as at Norwich (p. 411), Exeter (p. 412), York (p. 410), Salisbury
(p. 410), Gloucester (p. 411), and elsewhere; or on one side as at Ely (p. 410).
The cloisters attached to many English cathedrals formed a part of the original
monastic buildings and are generally in the most sheltered position, south of the
nave and west of the transept, and served as a means of communication between
different parts of the abbey and as a general meeting-place for members of the
monastic community (pp. 410, 411, 412, 413). This is the general distribution of the
various parts of a conventual cathedral church, from which there are many devi-
ations, such as the number of transepts and aisles, the position of entrances, chapels,
choir, and presbytery, cloisters and chapter house.
English cathedrals are conspicuous for great length in comparison to their
width, and for central towers over the crossing, as at Gloucester, Canterbury, and
elsewhere. Some English cathedrals, as Canterbury, York, and Ripon, also have
western towers, which are usual in France, as at Paris, Rheims, and Amiens. The
long, low, and clearly marked outlines of English cathedrals, accentuated by the
central tower, are in strong contrast with the short, lofty, and less strongly defined
outlines of Continental cathedrals, with their intricacy of flying buttresses and
profusion of encircling chapels (p. 532C). English cathedrals owe much of their
imposing appearance externally to their comparative detachment from surrounding
buildings, as they often stand in an open space or Close, as at Canterbury, Lincoln
(p. 416A), and Salisbury (p. 395A), or are picturesquely situated on a river, as at
Worcester and Durham (p. 392A), described by Scott as ‘Grand and vast that
stands above the Wear’; or as at Winchester, Chichester, and Lichfield, which, as
Milton so descriptively writes, are ‘bosom’d high ’mid tufted trees’.
French cathedrals, on the other hand, are often surrounded by houses and shops,
which, if not actually built against the church itself, are crowded so close to it as to
detract from the dignity of the building, as at Chartres, S. L6, and S. Omer. French
cathedrals were popular rather than monastic in origin, and this accounts for the
general absence of cloisters. Thus we see that there are some essential differences
between English and French cathedrals (p. 559).
MONASTERIES
A general description of monastic establishments has already been given under
Romanesque Architecture in Europe (p. 307).

PARISH CHURCHES
The parish churches both in town and country, erected throughout this period,
were of a much less ambitious character than the cathedrals and monastic churches,
but the origin and development of these smaller churches in England are of equal
significance (p. 430), and the single western tower of the parish church is often the
most striking landmark of the country-side.

SECULAR ARCHITECTURE
Castles and mansions of the nobles, manor houses of the gentry, dwellings of the
people, hospitals, and other civil and domestic buildings are referred to under each
 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE 377

' ’:
‘ ' '
‘ tps- ‘ ne +
' ' AG . ' 4 }
ee

; Bs
i i
HEXASTYLE:1%SQ. wrrtour peoment ~OCTASTYLE: 2 SQUARES. witout PEDIMENT

; ARCH OF
ees / TRAJAN

SePrMUS
|} SEVERUS_~~ |
ROME |

SS
SK
a _————,
\ ae
Al‘SS
eis
mes
1S TS / fs
tek
ye
“5
ny
,
a
=. wt3]
RA
lS
JEAN ins
+52,
x ———
i [pe
|I AK fy
SS}

7 j
mi

GAZ |
Vm,

‘v7
|
VY
il
G,
Z
Z
te
iy
i

%) YY
Li
is

SS eee EDs HENRY a pte

A\ YY

ho,
Dy
‘CHAPEL WESTMINSTER
WALLY
= ae
aaalee
mHx a}70>

as‘e
SS. 4S GEORGES
Phe
Nes
CHAPEL
AWINDSOR

Uy Oat aye Se

erriris
Loe ‘ Peasy
Zs Ss
7 aes
y ea He re
. 4) X
>. 4
eae ind ) ' : BA,
As ,. nly ‘
7
Bes .
.vs
Bin
!
x rN ,
Bl e \MGY c v

HAPTER HOUSE: WELLS

>
Ga a S 7 4 4
>

RGES CHAPEL: WINDSOR

a WZ

ms
378 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

country as follows: England (p. 437 ff.), France (p. 549 ff.), Belgium (p. 577),
Germany (p. 588 ff.), Spain (p. 644 ff.).

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
A comparative analysis of Gothic architecture in each country is given as follows:
England (p. 489 ff.), France (p. 559 ff.), Belgium (p. 577 ff.), Germany (p. 593 ff.),
Italy (p. 624 ff.), and Spain (p. 647 ff.).
A comparative table of the underlying differences between the Gothic and
Renaissance styles is given on p. 660 ff.

REFERENCE BOOKS
BUNT, C.G.E. Gothic Painting. London, 1947.
HARVEY,J.M. The Gothic World. London, 1950.
JACKSON, SIR T. G. Gothic Architecture in France, England and Italy. London, 1915.
KARLINGER, H. Die Kunst der Gotik. 2nd ed. Berlin, 1934.
LETHABY, W.R.,and TALBOT RICE,D. Medieval Art. 3rd ed. London, 1949.

Reference books relating to Gothic architecture in the different countries of Europe are
given as follows: England (p. 513), France (p. 568), Belgium (p. 582), Germany (p. 597),
Italy (p. 633), and Spain (p. 653).

Hampton Court: the west gatehouse. See p. 459

 BUILDING
MATERIALS
® Mnwick
2 Warkworth

Plaster P
Kentish Ragstone R
Tue Hanging T

Bahgor
Caernavon®s-:

E Stamford; yee
*hienfiela ¢aes aes,
2 Coventiy E ly
rkenitworek Bury St. Edmunds
Cambridge

St. David
fe
SSeS ae
* Cole! ter

= o Canterbury
eee»Penshurst:

and over 500 feet

oO Miles 100
a —— pe ——— a ————)

EW

Mediaeval England

XII. ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

ANGLO-SAXON, ROMANESQUE (NORMAN), AND GOTHIC
(fifth-sixteenth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. England, remote from Rome, on the outskirts of civilization and
an island in the North Sea, opposite the rich and populous continent of Europe,
owed her national development both to her insular position and to her maritime
intercourse with other countries. Her geographical position has thus given rise to a
dual influence in the formation of national characteristics, the operation of which
has varied at different periods. Thus, isolation by the sea continuously promoted
the development of definite national characteristics, while intercourse with the
Continent across the sea resulted from time to time in a marked importation of
380 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

foreign ideas in architecture. England’s former splendid isolation cannot be

described more trenchantly than in the verses of England’s greatest poet:
This royal throne of kings, this scepter’d isle,
This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,
This other Eden, demi-paradise;
This fortress built by nature for herself
Against infection and the hand of war ;
This happy breed of men, this little world;
This precious stone set in the silver sea,
Which serves it in the office of a wall,
Or as a moat defensive to a house,
Against the envy of less happier lands.
SHAKESPEARE, Richard IT, II, i, 40-9.

GEOLOGICAL. The varied geological formation of Great Britain was responsible

for the variety of materials employed in building (p. 379). A band of oolitic free-
stone, including the well-known Bath stone, stretches diagonally across the island
from Somersetshire to Lincolnshire, and supplies such excellent natural materials
for all types of buildings in its vicinity that this geological influence is seen in the
cathedrals along its course and in the fine manor houses of Wiltshire and Northamp-
tonshire. The granites of Cornwall and Devonshire, and the sandstone of Yorkshire
in the north were both so hard in texture as to admit of little sculptured ornament,
and this gives severity to the architecture of these districts. It is natural that in
early times the material at hand should have been employed, and this in itself gave
local character, but as methods of transport improved there has been a tendency for
local distinctions to disappear. In the Middle Ages transport by road was a difficult,
slow, and costly undertaking when, in the absence of good roads and of wheeled
vehicles, stone had to be carried on pack-horses, so water-carriage, by sea or river,
was often preferred for economy; thus our island stone was easily supplemented by
Caen stone from Normandy, as at Canterbury Cathedral and the Tower of London.
A limited supply of marble from the Isle of Purbeck and elsewhere was also used,
chiefly for clustered piers in churches, during the Early English period. The flint
work of Norfolk, Suffolk, and part of the south coast gives pronounced local
character to the churches of these districts, especially when, as in the Tudor period,
the flints were ‘knapped’ or split and shaped to form chequer work and traceried
panels in walls. The fine oak forests of old England, especially in Lancashire,
Cheshire, Shropshire, and Sussex, provided another building material. Timber
was specially serviceable for posts, beams, and braces of roofs, and for the fretted
barge boards of gables, and it gives an intimate and attractive character to the half-
timber houses which were such a marked development in the domestic architecture
of later English Gothic (p. 469). Brickwork, which was an inevitable product of the
clay in river valleys, had been made use of by the eminently practical Romans in
their settlements in Britain; but this material fell into disuse till it was again
requisitioned in the latter part of the thirteenth century, chiefly in low-lying
districts around London and in the eastern counties. Little Wenham Hall, Suffolk
(1270-80) (p. 448), is probably the earliest domestic brick building in England, and
Hampton Court is a world-famous pile of sixteenth-century brickwork. Terra-cotta,
introduced by Italian craftsmen in the reign of Henry VIII, was employed by
Giovanni da Majano for the medallion bas-reliefs at Hampton Court (p. 459) and
by Torrigiani for the celebrated tomb in the Rolls Chapel, London; it also was
largely used in such houses as Layer Marney Towers, Essex (c. 1500-25), and
Sutton Place, Guildford (1523-5) (pp. 457C, 462A, 463).
CLIMATIC. The temperate and humid English climate, with its searching winds
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 381
and driving rain, has had its effect upon the plan and certain features of buildings.
Thus, whereas great western portals, opening direct into nave and aisles, are
marked features of French cathedrals, porches in England are generally planned in
the side aisles and are deep and narrow, so as to act as screens against the direct
blast of the wind. The general dullness of the climate and the absence of strong
sunlight contributed to the increased size of traceried windows, which in late
Gothic often stretch, as in-S. George’s Chapel, Windsor, across the whole width of
the nave. The high-pitched roof to throw off snow and rain was another result of
climatic conditions, and gave full scope internally for these elaborate timber roofs
which are essentially English, while externally it accentuated the aspiring character
of Gothic design.
RELIGIOUS. Christianity had first made its way into Britain during the Roman
occupation, and henceforth religion ranks as a paramount influence in the develop-
ment of the architecture of this country. The following events indicate the status
and development of Christianity in Britain which influenced architecture along
ecclesiastical lines.
305. The martyrdom of S. Alban, the first British martyr.
314. The bishops of York, London, and Lincoln are recorded as attending the
Council of Arles.
449-607. Christianity was blotted out and churches destroyed during these
years of the Anglo-Saxon settlements.
597. S. Augustine landed in England, converted the Kentish King Ethelbert
and other kings of the Heptarchy and their people, and introduced the Benedictine
Order of monks into England.
601. Thesee of London was revived and the see of Rochester founded.
655. The Benedictine monastery of Peterborough was founded.
668-90. ‘Theodore, Archbishop of Canterbury, divided England into bishoprics. -
669-91. Wilfred, Bishop of York, repaired the Minster there, rebuilt that at
Ripon on a fresh site (670) and built a fine church at Hexham (674).
674, 682. Benedict Biscop founded monasteries at Wearmouth and Jarrow, of
which remains still exist.
673-709. Aldhelm of Sherborne built churches in the south, as at Bradford-on-
Avon (re-modelled in the tenth century).
735. Thesee of York acquired metropolitan rank.
793. The Benedictine monastery of S. Albans was founded by Offa.
871-99. -King Alfred rebuilt monasteries destroyed during the Danish
incursions.
960-88. Dunstan, archbishop of Canterbury, after directing the secular affairs
of the kingdom, devoted himself to church government and the monastic revival.
1020. King Canute founded the monastery of Bury S. Edmunds.
1061. Harold’s collegiate church at Waltham consecrated.
1042-66. Edward the Confessor’s religious enthusiasm resulted in the building
of Westminster Abbey.
1070. William the Conqueror appointed Lanfranc archbishop of Canterbury,
and the newly imported bishops built magnificent cathedrals on the Norman
model, though most English cathedrals formed part of monastic foundations (p.
04).
; an The First Crusade, preached by Urban II and Peter the Hermit, followed
by others, marked an era of religious zeal (p. 304).
1113, 1118. The Knights of S. John and the Knights Templars were founded as
military religious orders—set up as a result of the Crusades—and they built a
special type of round church (p. 390).
382 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

1128. The Cistercians built their first English monastery at Waverley, Surrey,
afterwards followed by Rievaulx (1131), Fountains (1132), and Kirkstall (1152), all
three in Yorkshire.
1174-9. William of Sens built the choir of Canterbury Cathedral.
1175-6. The Carthusians built their first English monastery at Witham
(Somerset).
1221. The Dominicans (Black Friars) came to England and were followed in
1224 by the Franciscans (Grey Friars) and in 1240-1 by the Carmelites (White
Friars) and all built spacious churches for preaching.
1376. Wyclif asserted the freedom of religious thought, protested against the
dogmas of the Papacy, and translated the Bible into English, so that ordinary people
might read it for themselves.
1367-1404. William of Wykeham built at Winchester, New College, Oxford,
and elsewhere, in the Perpendicular style which had originated in the south
transept of Gloucester Cathedral (1329-37) (pp. 394, 406).
1536-40. Dissolution of the Monasteries, after which Henry VIII handed over
many monastic estates to nobles and merchant princes, and this resulted in the
erection of mansions and manor houses throughout England.

SOCIAL
Pre-Roman period (to 55 B.C.). The earliest traces of man in Britain, in the shape of
rudely-fashioned flint implements, date back very far, long before the country was
severed from the European mainland in the floods of the last Ice Age. In the
Palaeolithic (Old Stone) Age, upland caves provided him with shelter; in the
Mesolithic (Middle Stone) Age, antler and bone tools supplemented those in flint.
Newcomers to Britain in the Neolithic (New Stone) Age, about 2500 B.C., intro-
duced farming and stock-breeding, and of them, the ‘Windmill Hill’ group,
coming from northern France, built great ditch-surrounded camps of which there
are considerable remains in the south, as well as ‘long’, unchambered barrows.
Another group, hailing from Spain and France, passed to the west and to Wales,
north and west Scotland and Ireland, making their burials in both long and round
barrows, earthen mounds containing the megalithic ‘dolmen’, ‘passage’ and
‘gallery’ graves constructed of upright and lintel great stones (p. 2F). Then, about
1800 B.C., came the bronze-using ‘Beaker Folk’ from Brittany, who produced the
megalithic sacred monuments such as the Avebury and Stonehenge circles and the
stone rows and ‘menhirs’ (p. 3). Next came the ‘Food Vessel’ people into Wessex
(c. 1700 B.C.) followed by a blending of all the stocks which after c. 1400 B.C.
produced the ‘Urn’ people, whose culture became uniform over the country.
Megalithic building and the use of the ‘long’ variety of barrow ceased about 1500
B.C., but round unchambered barrows of changing types continued sporadically
even until late Saxon times. Meanwhile, fresh continental immigrations by people
speaking Celtic languages occurred in the later Bronze Age (to c. 500 B.C.) and in
the Iron Age, passing via southern and eastern England to the remoter parts of the
British Isles. Thus by repeated contacts and its own resources British culture
became well advanced.
Roman period (§5 B.C.—A.D. 410). §5 and 54 B.c. Julius Caesar landed in Britain,
and his expeditions were introductory to the subsequent Roman occupation.
A.D. 43. The definitive Roman conquest of Britain began, and progress was
made in developing her natural resources such as tin, iron, and lead mines, and the
mineral waters of Bath and elsewhere were exploited. Agriculture received an
impetus, due to improved methods and to the settled government maintained by
the Roman legions, while Roman dress and language were adopted by those in
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 383

contact with the new rulers. Where the Romans planted their standards, there they
erected buildings to maintain their system of civil administration and social life;
and in Britain, as in other Roman colonies, their building enterprise has been
demonstrated by the excavation of forums, basilicas, baths, temples, and villas, as
at Bignor (Sussex), Darenth (Kent), Corstopitum (Northumberland), Fifehead-
Neville (Dorset), Silchester (Hants), Chedworth (Gloucester), and Bath (p. 206).
There are ruins of a Roman lighthouse at Dover and of fortifications in the
city walls of London, York, Lincoln, and Colchester, and the affix ‘chester’ (Latin,
castra=camp) signifies a Roman military settlement, as Winchester, Leicester,
Gloucester, and Exeter. Roman roads were important not only for military purposes,
but also for promoting civilization by opening communications between different
parts of the country. The four great roads in England were: (a) Watling Street
from Dover to London and Wroxeter; (6) Ermine Street from London to Lincoln
and York; (c) Fosse Way from Exeter, via Bath to Lincoln; (d) Icknield Street from
Wallingford to Caister-by-Norwich.
A.D. 77-83. Agricola, Governor of Britain, built forts from the Clyde to the Forth.
A.D. 122-128. Hadrian built his stone wall, 80 miles long, from the Tyne to the
Solway Firth.
A.D. 143. The wall of Antoninus Pius, of turves and clay, 36 miles long, was
built across the Forth-Clyde isthmus.
A.D. 198-211. In the time of the Emperor Septimius Severus, after the occur-
rence of devastating incursions of north British tribes in which the two walls were
wrecked, the Antonine wall was abandoned and Hadrian’s wall rebuilt, together
with the forts both before and behind it. The Emperor spent the last three years of
his life in Britain campaigning against the northern raiders, and died at York in
AD. 211.
A.D.410. After the departure of the Romans, much of their work was destroyed
by the invading barbarians, and the chief record of the period is in the writings of
Gildas and Nennius.
Anglo-Saxon period (A.D. 449-1066). 449-c. 600. The Jutes settled in Kent, and
Saxon kingdoms were formed in Sussex, Wessex, Essex and Middlesex, while the
Angles established themselves in East Anglia, Mercia and Northumbria. The
legends attaching to the name of King Arthur tell us that the Britons offered
strenuous resistance to the advance of these heathen invaders, but by the end of the
sixth century the latter had subdued the country as far west as the Severn and the
Mersey and there were two Anglian kingdoms north of the Humber.
c.608-800. England became more settled under the ‘Heptarchy’, of which
Wessex, Mercia and Northumbria were the chief kingdoms. The conversion to
Christianity of Saxon kings and their people (p. 381) is evidenced by the numerous
churches, towers and crosses of this period, many of which remain.
802-39. Egbert, king of the West Saxons, strongly advanced the cause of
Wessex against the other English kingdoms and the Britons of Cornwall.
865-71. Danish raids, suffered from the opening of the century, turned to
full-scale invasion, and the Danes occupied much of the north-eastern half of
England.
871-99. Alfred the Great, king of Wessex, resisted the Danes, and after the
Treaty of Wedmore (878) held the southern and south-western parts of the country.
He founded schools, encouraged trade, made laws, established a navy and started
the ‘Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’.
899-924. Edward the Elder, son of Alfred, adopted a militant policy, and
utilizing a system of ‘burhs’ or fortified towns to hold his territory, made himself
master of England south of the Humber.
384 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE
991-1016. The people were impoverished by the raising of the “Danegeld’ to
buy off fresh Danish onslaughts. However, Cnut (Canute), a Dane, became the
acknowledged king of England at the latter date.
1042-66. Edward the Confessor, who was Norman by association and educa-
tion, consolidated the kingdom, introduced Norman architecture and appointed
the Abbot of Jumiéges to be Archbishop of Canterbury, and thus Norman influence
began before the Conquest.
Norman period (1066-1154). The Norman Conquest linked England to the
Continent and introduced the feudal system, and feudal castles were built to
strengthen the position of the Normans. Towns, which grew up round abbeys and
castles, became trading centres, and through their merchant guilds laid the founda-
tions of local government; but villages continued to be mere collections of rudimen-
tary huts. Settled government promoted the pursuit of learning which later resulted
in organized schools and universities, like that of Oxford in the thirteenth century.
French was the language of the Court till the thirteenth century, when, owing to
the resentment created by the introduction of strangers by the Angevin kings,
English began to supplant it, and the final fusion of the English and Normans took
place. The Magna Carta (1215) limited the king’s power, and safeguarded the
liberties of his subjects.
Plantagenet period (1154-1399). 1154-1216. The fusion of the native English
and Norman settlers was reflected in the architecture.
The framework of government by representatives of nobles, clergy, and commons
was evolved, and the King’s Council developed, and in 1264 burgesses were sum-
moned to Simon de Montfort’s Parliament.
1277-83. The conquest of Wales led to further development in the planning
and design of border castles.
1272-1307. Edward I, though he continued the struggle to retain his French
possessions, was able to consolidate his position at home. Law was codified and
administered by the Courts of King’s Bench, Common Pleas, Exchequer, and
Chancery; while lawyers and schools of law rose in importance.
1326. ‘To encourage the wool industry, the wearing of foreign cloth was
severely restricted, and foreign skilled textile workers, weavers and dyers, were
welcomed as settlers in England. Flemish and other immigrants came to the chief
centres of the industry, particularly to East Anglia. There was a consequent increase
in the prosperity of the country, as seen in the development of manor houses.
The Universities of Oxford and Cambridge were more fully organized under
different faculties. Matthew Paris, a monk of S. Albans Abbey, wrote a Latin
history of England up to 1259. Froissart (1333-1404), the Frenchman at the English
Court, chronicled incidents of the ‘Hundred Years’ War’; while Chaucer (1344—
1400) in his ‘Canterbury Tales’ supplies by far the most valuable materials possessed
by any European country elucidating the manners, customs, and modes of life and
thought of people during the Middle Ages. The English Bible translated by Wyclif
(1320-84) and his disciples, which was largely circulated as the spiritual authority
for the laity, also aided in standardizing the English language.
c. 1350-1400. During this period the English language came to be used instead
of French in parliamentary proceedings and in the law courts.
1349-81. ‘The rise of the farmer class and of the free labourer after the ‘Black
Death’ (1348-9), which had swept away one-third of the population, resulted in the
Peasant’s Revolt (1381), and social unrest. The towns continued to increase in
importance.
About 1200 armoured warriors began to wear linen surcoats. These bore heraldic
devices, as did their shields and horse-trappings. There thus came into being the
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 385

new science of heraldry, which was to influence ornament in architecture. During

the fourteenth century a transition was made from chain mail towards plate armour,
and the surcoat gave place to the short, tight-fitting jupon, itself abandoned shortly
after 1400, leaving the plate armour fully exposed. Gunpowder appears first to have
been used in Britain in 1327 by Edward III against the Scots.
Lancastrian and Yorkist period (1399-1485). Development in national life was
continued, and even during the ‘Wars of the Roses’ (1454-85) Englishmen culti-
vated the land and lived the free life described in the contemporary ‘Paston letters’.
The demand for wool in the Netherlands encouraged sheep farming in England,
and the consequent prosperity led to the erection of large parish churches in sheep
rearing counties. Increase in home trade, development of foreign commerce, and
the change from villeinage to free labour gave importance to the guilds which
controlled craftsmanship. All this industrial activity promoted the building of
moot halls, market halls, guildhalls, inns, and bridges, besides houses for successful
yeomen and traders. The adoption of printing after its introduction into England
by Caxton in 1477 gave new facilities for study and an impetus to the building of
schools of the type of Winchester (1382) and Eton (1440), and of colleges in the
universities.
Tudor period (1485-1558). The marriage of Henry VII united the Houses of
York and Lancaster and gave a great impulse to the development of political
institutions. A notable social feature was the decline of the clergy, as the one great
Media2val profession, and the rise of successful lawyers, medical men, wealthy
merchants, and yeomen, who were gradually absorbed into the landed gentry. This
was accompanied by the employment of Justices of the Peace who administered the
law from their country houses and in Quarter Sessions. This upward movement,
which was aided not only by the suppression of the monasteries and the distribution
of their wealth amongst the new classes, but also by the spread of education and
facilities for foreign travel, produced a national type of domestic architecture for
houses of country squires which now display a new standard of comfort. The old
nobility declined in importance, and thus the position of the monarchy was
strengthened, especially through the Privy Council, which, with its offshoot, the
‘Star Chamber’, exercised wide judicial authority; while the House of Commons
was strengthened by representatives from new boroughs—changes which indicate
a movement towards modern methods of life and government. Henry VIII took
much interest in building schemes, and introduced foreign artists, such as Da
Trevigi, who was appointed Court architect; Torrigiani, the sculptor, and Holbein,
the painter and designer in wood and metal.
1515-30. Cardinal Wolsey, who was also Lord Chancellor, built palaces,
founded colleges, and patronized art. The writings of Colet and More reflect that
breaking away from Mediaeval ideals which coincided with the last yet brilliant
phase of English Gothic, known as Tudor architecture.
HISTORICAL. The varying history which influenced English architecture is here
traced by salient dates and events which, though they may not be directly connected
with architectural changes, help us to keep our touch on the pulse of that living art
which is the outcome and expression of national fortunes.
55 B.c. Julius Caesar’s first expedition into Britain opened the way for that
Roman influence which was to exercise such power in moulding English civil,
judicial, literary, and artistic life.
A.D. 43-7. The Emperor Claudius invaded Britain, and the lowland zone was
made into a Roman province.
71-83. The Roman governors Cerealis, Frontinus and Agricola completed the
conquest of northern England and lowland Scotland.
N H.O.A.
386 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

410. The Roman troops withdrew from Britain.

449-c. 600. The English (Angles, Saxons, and Jutes) conquered the greater part
of Britain amidst much internal strife.
800-900. The Danish invasions mark a lapse into barbarism, when the country
was a prey to constant invasion and ruthless pillage by hordes of heathen Danes,
who plundered and destroyed churches and monasteries till repelled by Alfred the
Great (871-99), who laid the foundation of English unity.
965-1042. Further Danish invasions resulted in the election (1016) of Canute
the Dane, as King, and his line lasted till 1042.
1042. The accession of Edward the Confessor, son of the English King
Ethelred, paved the way for the introduction of Norman architecture.
1066. The Norman Conquest not only brought England into contact with
Continental civilization, but also inaugurated a great new era for England; for
whereas. the Romans came and went, the Normans came and stayed, and their
ultimate fusion with the old inhabitants produced a hardy, enterprising race which
was no longer Anglo-Saxon or Norman, but English, and the same process took
place in architectural development.
1154-89. Henry II of England had married in 1152 Eleanor of Aquitaine,
divorced wife of Louis VII of France—a union which led to far-reaching results,
because by this marriage Henry became possessed of more than half of France,
resulting in rivalry between the two countries which developed during the suc-
ceeding centuries, and led to the ‘Hundred Years’ War’ (1337-1453) (p. 533).
1096-1291. The nine Crusades, which brought about intercourse between East
and West, involved England in international movements, especially in the reign of
Richard I, ‘Coeur de Lion’ (1189-99), who spent two years on the third Crusade,
two more imprisoned in Germany afterwards and five defending his royal inheri-
tance in France. The Crusades influenced the fortification of castles; gave rise to
the use of the pointed arch in Western Mediaeval architecture; and gave an impetus
to learning and to the universities, and in the foundation of the militant-religious
orders.
1337-1453. The war with France, known as the ‘Hundred Years’ War’ (p. 533),
was signalized by the campaigns of Crecy, Poitiers, Agincourt, and the siege of
Orleans, and finally resulted in the loss of the English possessions with the exception
of Calais (1453).
1500. By the beginning of the sixteenth century new social conditions had
already rendered the old feudal castle obsolete as an institution in national life, even
before the general use of gunpowder, and new military methods made it useless as
a defensive fortress. Houses were now built as residences, such as Sutton Place,
near Guildford (1523-5), one of the earliest examples of a non-castellated domestic
residence (p. 463).
1520. Henry VIII and his courtiers visited the French King Francis I on the
‘Field of the Cloth of Gold’, and on their return to England introduced the Renais-
sance style, recently imported into France from Italy.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The character of Romanesque and Gothic architecture in Europe has already been
considered (pp. 306, 367). The development of Mediaeval architecture in England
from the departure of the Romans till the sixteenth century shows a more complete
sequence of styles than in other countries. It is usually divided into periods roughly
corresponding with the centuries and having their own special characteristics; these
are known as Anglo-Saxon, Norman, Early English, Decorated, Perpendicular, and
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 387

eae

ai
ies

pl oe
=f) st

C EARLS BARTON: ower

/ Be eel
ear
Cte!
(Peal bved ETI
PLAN / O

; _ WINDOW: WORTH CH. SUSSEX GLO'STERSHIRE:

S. BENET : TOWER WINDOW
z CAMBRIDG E : : YORK:
YOUNGER WINDOW
IMPOST TOWER
388 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

B. Temple Church, London: interior looking E.

Rotunda 1185, see p. 390; Choir 1240, see p. 393
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 389

Tudor. The table given below of the nomenclature of the periods is based on the
classification made by Rickman to coincide with the reigns of English sovereigns,
and that of Sharpe, whose periods are determined by evolution of window tracery.
These somewhat arbitrary style-names cannot be considered scientific, as they are
based partly on historical periods and partly on architectural character; but, as they
have held the field for so long in all descriptions of English architecture, they have
become, as it were, an integral part of architectural phraseology. They refer approxi-
mately to the type of architecture prevalent during the centuries with which they
are identified, and can best be understood by study at first hand of buildings
belonging to the different periods, and of architectural details in the various
museums. The periods subsequent to the departure of the Romans in 410 are
classified alternatively as follows:
Dates Periods Style names
449-1066 (5th to 11th century) Anglo-Saxon
1066-1189 (part of 11th and 12th cent.) Norman (Transition, 1154-89)
1189-1307. = (13th century) Early ae {ceomer Ne
1307-1
307-1377 14th cent ury)
(34 D ecorateted a leer tales
ketteee
1377-1485 (15th century) Perpendicular ...... Rectilinear
1485-1558 (first half of 16th century) Tudor
Although each period is thus defined, it must be remembered that the transition
(the Norman Transition is specially named) from one style to another was slow and
gradual and is often difficult to trace. The architectural character of each period is
treated separately, and may be read in conjunction with the Comparative Analysis
(p. 489) which demonstrates the gradual evolution through the different periods of
plans, walls, openings, roofs, columns, mouldings, and ornament.
Pre-Roman period. ‘The few traces that have been found of building in England
before the Roman occupation indicate that it was so primitive in character as hardly
to allow of its classification as architecture. Evidences of its type may be seen in
such as the remarkable stone circles of Avebury and Stonehenge, in the stone rows,
and the ‘long’ and ‘round’ barrows or the ‘dolmen’ remains of them in cases where
the earthen mounds which once covered them have disappeared (pp. 2F, G, 3).
Roman period (55 B.C.—A.D. 410). The architecture of the Romans in England
was of the same character as in other parts of Europe, and a considerable amount
still remains, like Hadrian’s Wall (A.D. 122-8); also of buildings in towns, such as
Silchester, Bath, Chester, Corstopitum (Corbridge), Viriconium (Wroxeter) and
Verulamium. Forums, basilicas, baths (p. 206), a theatre (p. 210), amphitheatres,
temples, and villas have been uncovered; while in museums throughout England
mosaic floors, pottery, and sculptures indicate the care which the Romans bestowed
on dwelling-houses and on public buildings in this country. The standardized
architecture of the Romans, which is dealt with in the chapter on Roman architec-
ture (p. 174), was of such a virile character that it inevitably influenced the sub-
sequent Anglo-Saxon and Romanesque (Norman) architecture.
Anglo-Saxon period (449-1066). It is difficult to arrive at a conclusive estimate of
the architectural character of a period when buildings were sometimes composed
either of fragments or of rough copies of Roman architectural details (p. 387).
Timber was presumably largely employed in domestic building, but, because of its
perishable nature, little evidence remains as to the way in which it was introduced.
The great development which took place in the use of that material in later times
is another instance of the natural tendency in England to turn to timber for house
building, as for shipbuilding. Some even assert that the masonry of the early stone
churches, which appear to have been first built about 650, is due to the influence of
390 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE —

timber prototypes, as in the ‘long and short work’ (p. 387C), the triangular-headed
openings (p. 387J), the pilaster strips (p. 387C, E, M) and the baluster mullions
(p. 387B, G, H, P); but these features may equally well be derived from the Roman-
esque architecture of Italy. The few vaults of this period that have come down to us
were founded on Roman, as the simple cross-vaults of a few church crypts. For
Anglo-Saxon vaulting see p. 397. Churches of this period include those at Worth
(pp. 387L, 491C), Barnack, Brixworth (c. 680), Earls Barton (c. 1000) (p. 387C),
Boarhunt (p. 387K, N), Sompting (p. 387E), Wickham, Deerhurst (early tenth
century) (p. 387J), Greenstead (c. 1013), and in Dover Castle, while S. Lawrence,
Bradford-on-Avon (c. eighth century, remodelled tenth century) (p. 387M, Q), and
the church at Escomb, Durham (early eighth century) (p. 491B), are two beautiful
examples on a small scale. S. Martin, Canterbury (seventh century), is a rebuilding
of the church where King Ethelbert (560-616) was baptized by S. Augustine.
Norman period (1066-1189). The English Romanesque or Norman style com-
prises the reigns of William I (1066-87), William II (1087-1100), Henry I (1100—
1135), Stephen (1135-54), and Henry II (1154-89). Norman architecture is bold
and massive, and the distinguishing features are semicircular arches, ponderous
cylindrical pers, and flat buttresses, similar to the architecture of Normandy,
whence it was first introduced by Edward the Confessor, and it was subsequently
established by William the Conqueror.
In Norman vaulting a new system was introduced in which groins or meeting
surfaces of cross-vaults were replaced by specially constructed semicircular ribs
thrown across the sides and diagonals of vaulting compartments, and these ribs
support panels of stone. This novel system gave a new character to Norman
architecture and eventually led, by the gradual introduction of additional ribs, to
the complicated and characteristic ‘rib and panel’ vaults of the Gothic period. For
Norman vaulting see p. 397.
In London the principal Norman buildings are the Keep and Chapel of the
Tower of London (p. 438); the Rotunda of the Temple Church (1185) (p. 388)
(Transitional); S. Bartholomew, Smithfield (p. 391A); and the crypts of S. Mary-le-
Bow, Cheapside and S. John, Clerkenwell.
In the provinces the principal examples are found in the Cathedrals of Norwich
(p. 421), Durham (p. 406), Oxford (p. 421), Gloucester (p. 406), Exeter (p. 406),
Ely (p. 406), Hereford (p. 406), Peterborough (pp. 414, 421), Winchester (p. 421),
S. Albans (p. 421), and Chichester (p. 406), and in Waltham and Tewkesbury
Abbeys, while Barfreston Church, Kent, and Iffley Church, Oxford, are among the
smaller churches. There are also circular churches (p. 305) at Cambridge,
Northampton, Little Maplestead, and Ludlow (ruined), making with the Temple
Church, London (p. 388), a total of five in England. Some manor houses
date from this period (p. 447), and very many castles were established in their
pristine form (p. 437).
Early English period (1189-1307). The thirteenth-century style, also known as
Lancet, comprises the reigns of Richard I (1189-99), John (1199-1216), Henry III
(1216-72), and Edward I (1272-1307). This style, less massive than the Norman,
depends for effect on pleasing proportions, well-defined outlines, and simplicity in
ornament. Tall and narrow lancet openings give height to the design, and exteriors
are marked by projecting buttresses, pinnacles, and steep-pitched roofs. Internally,
groups of slender shafts, connected to the piers by bands, replace the massive
Norman pillars. Lines of dog-tooth ornament in the deeply channelled arch-
mouldings, foliated capitals and bosses, and knots of pierced and hanging leaves,
almost impart life to the stone framework of door and window openings. The rib
and panel vaults of pointed form with transverse and diagonal ribs, which are both
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 391

A. S. Bartholomew the Great, Smithfield, London: the choir looking E.

(1123-50; and later additions.) See opposite page

B, S. Helen, Bishopsgate, London: interior looking E. (Nuns’ choir 13th cent.

with 15th cent. arcade and later additions.) See p. 393
392 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

A. Durham Cathedral from the Wear (1093 onwards) See p. 406

B Durham Cathedral: nave (1110-33) looking E.

 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 393

bold and graceful, now generally spanned the wide naves of churches and cathedrals,
as at Westminster and Lincoln (p. 4178). For Early English vaulting see p. 397.
In London the principal examples are the eastern portion of the Temple Church
(1240), with nave and aisles of equal height, i.e. an English ‘hall’ church (p. 388);
the eastern arm, transepts, five bays of the nave, chapter house and part of the
cloisters of Westminster Abbey (1245-69) (p. 423); the chapel of Lambeth Palace,
and the choir, Lady chapel, and nave (restored) of Southwark Cathedral.
In the provinces the principal examples are Salisbury Cathedral (p. 421), York
(transepts) (p. 423), Lincoln (nave and chapter house) (pp. 396B, 406), Rochester
(choir and transepts) (p. 421), Wells (nave and west front) (p. 421), Lichfield (p.
406), Ely (choir, transepts, and ‘Galilee Porch’) (1198-1218) (p. 406), Worcester
(choir) (p. 423), Bristol (Elder Lady Chapel) (p. 405), besides castles (p. 438),
manor houses (p. 447), and other secular buildings, discussed later in the chapter
(pp. 463, 473-89).
Decorated period (1307-77). The fourteenth-century style, also known as Geo-
metrical or Curvilinear, comprises the reigns of Edward II (1307-27) and Edward
III (1327-77). This style is much more ornate than the Early English and has an
elaboration of decoration from which its name is derived. It is made all the more
magnificent by the geometrical and flowing tracery, sometimes crowned with the
ogee arch, which frames the glowing coloured-glass windows. Clear-storeys were
enlarged at the expense of the triforium. Vaulting ribs became so numerous and
complex by the addition of intermediate and lierne ribs that the vault with many
ribs, often forming star-shaped patterns or stellar vaulting, was a main feature in
the decoration of church interiors, as in Ely choir. For Decorated vaulting see p. 398.
In London the principal examples are Westminster Abbey (three bays of the
east cloister), the Chapel of S. Etheldreda, Holborn (lately restored) and the
Dutch Church, Austin Friars, destroyed in the Second World War.
In the provinces the principal examples are the cathedrals of Lincoln (east end,
i.e. ‘Angel Choir’) (1256-80) (p. 406), Ely (three bays east of octagon) (p. 406),
York (nave, west front, and chapter house) (p. 423), Exeter (p. 406) and Lichfield
(naves) (p. 406), S. Albans (choir) (p. 421); octagonal chapter houses at Salisbury
(p. 405), Wells (p. 405), and Southwell (p. 421); Stone Church, Kent, the Eleanor
Crosses (pp. 486B, 509), besides castles (p. 443), manor houses (p. 448), and other
secular buildings (pp. 463, 473-89).
Perpendicular period (1377-1485). The fifteenth-century style, also known as
Rectilinear, comprises the reigns of Richard II (1377-99), Henry IV (1399-1413),
Henry V (1413-22), Henry VI (1422-61), Edward IV (1461-83), Edward V (1483),
and Richard III (1483-5). The general appearance is indicated by its name, which
is derived from the vertical lines of the window tracery and of the panelling which
covered both internal and external walls, and extended even over buttresses.
Windows, now often crowned with four-centred arches, were, owing to their
immense size, strengthened by horizontal transoms, by primary and secondary
mullions (p. 499M), and sometimes by an inner gallery across the window, as at
York. The triforium practically disappeared, owing to the greater height of nave
arcades and the flatness of aisle roofs, while clear-storey and aisle windows were
increased in height. Fan vaults too are characteristic, with their numerous ribs and
panels, as in the cloisters of Gloucester Cathedral (1377) (p. 399H) and the compli-
cated ‘fan and pendant’ vaults, as at Oxford Cathedral. This peculiarly English feat-
ure is seen in its loveliest form in the Chapel of Henry VII, Westminster (p. 428),
which properly belongs to the Tudor period. For Perpendicular vaulting see Pp.398.
In London the principal examples are the south and west cloisters of Westminster
Abbey (p. 423); S. Margaret, Westminster; the arcade of S. Helen, Bishopsgate
394 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

(p. 391B); porch of S. Sepulchre, Holborn; Savoy Chapel, Strand; Westminster

Hall, as remodelled by Henry Yevele (pp. 437, 502); Crosby Hall (now at Chelsea),
the Guildhall Porch and the Great Hall, Lambeth Palace.
In the provinces the principal examples are the west fronts of Winchester (p.
420A), Gloucester (p. 406), and Beverley; S. George’s Chapel, Windsor (pp. 469,
471); Sherborne Abbey; King’s College Chapel, Cambridge (pp. 468, 469, 470A); the
cathedrals of Canterbury (nave) (p. 405), York (choir) (p. 423), Gloucester (tran-
septs—the earliest example of the Perpendicular style—choir and cloisters) (pp.
382, 406), and Winchester (nave) (pp. 420, 421, 495M); the Beauchamp Chapel,
Warwick (pp. 469, 470B); towers at Gloucester (p. 406) and Canterbury (pp. 405,
418A); many colleges at Oxford and Cambridge (pp. 473, 476), besides castles (p. 443),
manor houses (p. 451), and other secular buildings (pp. 463, 473-89).
Tudor period (1485-1558). The first half of the sixteenth century comprises the
reigns of Henry VII (1485-1509), Henry VIII (1509-47), Edward VI (1547-53)
and Mary (1553-8). The character of the style, which, in ecclesiastical architecture,
was similar to Perpendicular in general treatment, was modified because it was now
called into use for domestic rather than for ecclesiastical buildings. The revived
Roman style, which originated in Italy in the fifteenth century, was gradually
spreading through France to England, where, grafted on the late Gothic or
Perpendicular, it produced a picturesque combination, as the product of craftsmen
trained in Gothic traditions, but working under architects imbued with the
Renaissance spirit and familiar with Classical details. Notable features in domestic
buildings of this period were square-headed mullioned windows, reminiscent of the
Perpendicular style; ornamental fireplaces with wide four-centred arch and lavish
heraldic carving (p. 461A) sometimes provided with iron fire-backs (p. 461L); gables
with lofty carved pinnacles which group up with high moulded chimneys (p. 461F)
and carved finials (p. 461D), as seen in manor houses throughout the country. For
Tudor vaulting see p. 401.
In London the principal examples are the beautiful Chapel of Henry VII,
Westminster (pp. 426, 427), the gateway of S. James’s Palace (p. 4628), and
Morton’s Tower, Lambeth Palace, and portions of some city churches.
In the provinces the principal examples are Compton Wynyates, Warwickshire
(pp. 455B, 458, 459), Layer Marney (c. 1500-25) (pp. 462A, 463), Sutton Place,
Guildford (1523-5) (pp. 457C; 458, 463), parts of Hampton Court Palace (pp. 459,
460A, G), the famous vaulted stairway, Christ Church, Oxford (1640) (p. 400A), besides
many country mansions (p. 452) and other secular buildings (pp. 463, 473-89).
Tudor was followed by Elizabethan and Jacobean architecture (Ch. XXV)in which
may be traced increased Classical influence, until this early Renaissance architecture
developed into the Stuart period of the late Renaissance. The process, however,
was slow, and native Gothic survived in outlying districts till the end of the six-
teenth century and even later, as in the extraordinary church of S. Mary, Warwick,
rebuilt as a ‘hall’ church (1694-1704) (p. 482A), with a remarkable tower, in the
Perpendicular style with Renaissance features, and the famous Beauchamp Chapel
(1443-64) (p. 470B).
THE EVOLUTION OF ENGLISH GOTHIC VAULTING
The various problems which, by their solution, determined the evolution of
Mediaeval vaulting exercised such an important influence on the general character
of the architecture that it is desirable to give a consecutive description of vaulting
evolution through the successive centuries in order to secure an uninterrupted
view of such an integral part of Mediaeval architectural design. In the chapters on
Romanesque and Gothic architecture in Europe (pp. 303, 365) we have dealt
ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 395

B. Salisbury Cathedral: the choir

 396 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

A. Salisbury Cathedral: chapter house B. Lincoln Cathedral: chapter house (1235)

(1263-84). See pp. 405, 421 See p. 406

c. S. Mary the Virgin, Oxford, from S.W. D. Canterbury Cathedral

(14th and 15th cents.; Porch 1637). Norman tower (c. I100-I125).
See p. 490 See p. 490
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 397
generally with the various aspects of these problems, and we here follow the evolu-
tion as it took place in England. The problem for the Mediaeval architect was to
construct a stone vault over the lofty nave of a church of the basilican type, while
leaving clear-story windows in the nave walls above the aisle roofs. While Roman
vaulting consisted in the design either of semicircular vaults or of semicircular
cross-vaults, of which the meeting lines or intersections are known_as groins,
Mediaeval vaulting was of quite a different type; for the simple groins were now
replaced by specially constructed ribs on which the thin vaulting panels were
placed. This was an economical form of'building; for it dispensed with the large
amount of ‘centering’ required for the temporary support of the heavy Roman
vaults, as each rib, when constructed, itself became the support of the vault panel.
The weight of the stone vault, high above the ground, exerted considerable thrust
and so involved the solution of structural problems and resulted in the employment
of responsive features, such as buttresses and pinnacles, to counteract the thrust of
this nave vault, while the numerous ribs meeting on the pier capitals had to be
supported, and so required novel types of piers, thus determining, in a remarkable
degree, the character of English Mediaeval architecture.
Anglo-Saxon Vaulting. The vaulting that was carried out during this period was
based on Roman, like that in the porch at Monkwearmouth, which is perhaps the
only Saxon vault remaining above ground in England; while the vaulting in the
Chapel of the Pyx, Westminster Abbey, though dating from the time of Edward
the Confessor, is of Norman character.
Norman Vaulting (p. 399A, B). The Roman system of stone vaulting was in vogue
till the introduction of transverse and diagonal ribs. Norman vaulting, originally
similar to Roman, was either (a) cylindrical or barrel vaulting, as in S. John’s
Chapel, Tower of London (p. 436c); (6) groined cross-vaulting in square bays, as
in the aisle of S. John’s Chapel, Tower of London, and the crypt of Canterbury
Cathedral (1096-1107) (p. 399A), and it is interesting to note that the earliest
cross-vaults are found over low crypts of churches where they were easier to con-
struct, and had only to support the floor of the church; (c) oblong bays in which the
vaulting ribs or arches across the shorter span were either stilted (p. 370C, G) or in
the later period slightly pointed; or (d) sexpartite (six-part) vaulting (p. 370£), as in
the choir at Canterbury Cathedral (p. 4188), which has the same type of vault-
ing as at the Abbaye-aux-Hommes, Caen (p. 342F). In England the system, so
frequent on the Continent, of raising the diagonal rib to produce the domical vault
seems to have been little used, and the method was either to make diagonal ribs
segmental, as in the aisles at Peterborough Cathedral (p. 399B), or to make the
diagonal ribs semicircular and stilt or raise the springing of the transverse and
longitudinal ribs. A great advance was made by the pointed arch, which was first
used for the transverse and wall ribs only, the diagonal ribs (i.e. those with the
longest span) remaining semicircular. The vault over the nave of Durham Cathedral
(1128-33) has pointed transverse ribs which are believed to be the earliest examples
of a pointed arch to a high vault in England (p. 3928).
Early English Vaulting (p. 399C; D). The pointed arch came into general use in the
thirteenth century, and, without the aid of stilting or other contrivances, sur-
mounted the difficulties created by the intersection of semicircular vaults of dif-
ferent spans (p. 370). The plain four-part (quadripartite) ribbed vault, primarily
constructed as a skeleton framework of diagonal and transverse ribs, was chiefly
used in this period, as in the naves of Durham, Salisbury (p. 415H) and Gloucester,
and the aisles of Peterborough. Intermediate uprising ribs, known as ‘tiercerons’,
were inserted later between the transverse and diagonal ribs to give additional
support to the panels, as in the nave of Westminster Abbey (p. 399D). Ridge ribs
398 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE.

were then introduced to resist the thrust of the opposing ‘tiercerons’ and keep them
in position. In Continental examples the ridge rib is often not continuous and is
only used for those ribs which abut obliquely at the summit. Ridge ribs are gener-
ally horizontal in England, but on the Continent are arched between the bosses.
The courses of the vault panels meet at the ridge in zigzag lines, as in the nave
of Westminster Abbey (p. 373F), Lincoln, Exeter, and Lichfield Cathedrals, as
well as in the churches of south-west France. Wall ribs or ‘formerets’ enclosing
the lateral wall space of the vaulting compartment came into use during this period.
The ‘ploughshare twist’, which sometimes occurs in the panels between diagonal
and wall ribs, as in Westminster Abbey and Southwark Cathedral (p. 373C), is
produced by raising the springing of the wall rib above that of the diagonal rib in
order to increase the size of clear-story windows, whose shape was thus influenced
by the vault.
Decorated Vaulting (p. 399E, F). A general elaboration of vaulting is characteristic
of this period, and is due not only to the greater use of intermediate and ridge ribs,
as in the nave vault of Exeter Cathedral, but also to the addition of ‘lierne’ ribs
(French, dien=tie or bond)—a term applied to any rib other than a ridge rib which
does not start from the springing of the vaulting compartment. Previously each rib
marked a change in the direction of the vaulting surface, but ‘lierne’ ribs merely
follow the curved surface of the panel and, by their number and disposition, often
give an intricate appearance to an otherwise simple vault (p. 399F). The star-shaped
pattern thus produced is called ‘stellar’ vaulting (p. 399G) and there are examples in
Gloucester (1337-77), Canterbury (1379-1400), Wells, Ely (choir) (p. 495k),
Bristol and Winchester Cathedrals (p. 420H), and Tewkesbury Abbey. Vaulting
during this period comprised transverse, diagonal, tierceron, ridge, and lierne ribs,
and this increased number of ribs so decreased the size of the panels they supported
that the space from rib to rib was frequently spanned by a single stone. Carved
bosses (French, bosse=lump or knob) or keystones, which had already come into
use in the thirteenth century, had their origin in a constructive use as keystones
against which the ribs abutted and also in the need for disguising the awkward
mitres made by the meeting of moulded ribs. In the fourteenth century the increase
in the number of ribs led to a corresponding increase in the number of bosses
which, as part of the general scheme, gave to these Gothic vaults an extremely
ornamental and web-like appearance.
Perpendicular Vaulting (p. 399G, H). The intricate ‘stellar’ vaulting of the late
fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries led, by experimental stages, to the type
known as fan, palm, or conoidal vaulting, first used in the cloisters at Gloucester
(1351-77) (p. 399H), in which the rising ribs are formed at equal angles on inverted
concave cones and are thus of the same curve, and these are connected at different
heights by horizontal lierne ribs. The development was somewhat as follows: In
the thirteenth century the vault followed the outline of inverted, four-sided concave
pyramids; in the fourteenth century the introduction of more ribs resulted in
polygonal pyramids with ribs of different curves, while in the fifteenth century the
design was simplified by the introduction of ‘fan’ vaulting in which all ribs are of
similar curve (p. 399H). The reduction of the size of panels, consequent on the
increase in the number of ribs, brought about a return to the Roman method of
construction; for in fan vaulting the ribs and panels were often formed in the same
piece of stone instead of the panels resting as separate stones on the ribs, and thus
the ribs lost their structural use. This method seems to have been first adopted in
vaults where ribs were most numerous, and in Tudor times both systems are found,
as at King’s College Chapel, Cambridge (1512-15) (p. 468); while in others, as in
Henry the Seventh’s Chapel, Westminster, the whole vault has ribs and panels
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 399

__MEDIAAVAL VAULTING |
NORMAN gees
NY ayy Zum

‘.
ea
A
naa ~
‘.
is

EARLY
XN /

BS. uufe}

! ' ! 1 {

es
ae

eo pipoe she xcacce-e goiee

YE OE EAN ELVAULT. iss. EXETER ple ae VAULT: BRISTOL CATHEDRAL

PERPENDICULAR
|
f]
ne '
'
i

STELLAR (WT FAN VAULT.

VAULT: S.MARY REDCLIFFE. BRISTOL CLOISTERS, GLOUC
 400 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

A. Christ Church, Oxford: vaulted staircase B. Oxford Cathedral (Christ Church):

(1640). See opposite page interior looking E. (1158-80)
(choir vault c. 1480-1500).
See opposite page

c. Divinity School, Oxford: interior (1430-55; vault 1480-3), See opposite page
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 401

formed out of the same piece of stone. The problem of supporting the flat, lozenge-
shaped space in the crown of the vault was comparatively easy in cloisters, where
the vaulting compartments were approximately square, but difficulties arose in
adapting fan vaulting to the bays of naves which generally measured twice as much
transversely as longitudinally. In King’s College Chapel the conoids are incomplete
for the sides had to be cut off, forming awkward transverse junctions (p. 468).
Henry the Seventh’s Chapel (1503-19) has hidden transverse arches which pene-
trate above the vaulting and, at a distance from the walls, support pendants or
elongated voussoirs, from which spring the conoids, thus reducing the central
vaulting space from an oblong to a square (p. 426). At Oxford Cathedral, by a
similar method, the pendants, supported by an upper arch, are placed at some
distance from the walls, and from them spring the rib and panel vault (1480-1500)
(p. 400B). Fan vaulting is confined to England, as at Sherborne Abbey (1475); the
Divinity School, Oxford (1480-3) (p. 400c); Trinity Church, Ely; Gloucester
Cathedral (p. 399H); S. George’s Chapel, Windsor (1501-8) (p. 47IH), and the
retro-choir, Peterborough, and the tradition was maintained in the vault over the
staircase at Christ Church, Oxford (1640) (p. 4coA). Pendant vaulting without fan
treatment is frequent in the Flamboyant period in France, as at Caudebec, Nor-
mandy (p. 564D).
Tudor Vaulting. The Tudor or four-centred arch (see Glossary—‘arch’), so
typical of the period, seems to have had its origin in the difficulty of making the
various ribs in the oblong vaulting compartments of naves reach the same height. In
an oblong Mediaeval vaulting compartment which had a lancet-shaped window in the
nave wall, the diagonal ribs are either semicircular or pointed, i.e. struck from two
centres in which each side of the arch must be less than the quadrant of a circle;
and because the transverse and wall ribs are shorter than the diagonal ribs, they
are still smaller segments of a circle. In oblong vaulting compartments of late
Gothic vaults, which often had windows in the nave wall crowned with pointed
arches of equilateral or, in early Tudor times, even of the ‘drop’ arch form (see
Glossary—‘arch’), the diagonal and transverse ribs had to be struck from four
centres in order to accommodate their height to that of the window arch. These of
necessity were low four-centred arches which started with the same curve as the
window arch, but after a certain height the remainder of each rib was struck from
another centre in order to bring the apex of all ribs to the same height as that of the
window arch. The four-centred arches which were used in late Gothic vaults and
conspicuously in fan vaulting were afterwards introduced over doors (p. 460A),
windows (p. 445K, M), fireplaces (p. 4456, J), and wall tombs, as well as in traceried
panels, possibly with a desire to harmonize with the vaulted superstructure.
The special forms of vault used in chapter houses are referred to later (p. 405).

EXAMPLES
The different types of buildings erected during the Middle Ages have been given
in the chapter on Gothic architecture in Europe (pp. 365-78). In England all
classes of buildings, whether ecclesiastical, such as cathedrals, churches, and
monasteries, or secular, as castles, houses, and market-crosses, are generally classi-
fied according to their period, as Anglo-Saxon, Norman, Early English, Decorated,
Perpendicular, or Tudor, of which the approximate dates have been given (p. 389).

CATHEDRALS

The important place which the Mediaeval cathedral occupied in national life has
already been indicated (p. 372). English cathedrals, with the single exception of
402 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

Salisbury, were constantly in process of construction and alteration, and this

characteristic invests them with a special fascination, both architectural and
historical, for by combining successive stages in architectural style in a single
building they one and all reflect national history and development during successive
centuries and also form in themselves a complete record of the evolution of Gothic
architecture. The special constitution and foundation of many English cathedrals
made them monastic in character and were largely responsible for their general
arrangement (pp. 410, 4I1I, 412, 413), from which we can judge of their original
purpose.
The cathedrals may be divided into (a) cathedrals of the old foundation,
(b) cathedrals of the monastic foundation, and (c) cathedrals of the new
foundation.
(a) The thirteen cathedrals of the old foundation which were served by secular
clergy were not affected by the reforms of Henry VIII. They are the cathedrals of
York, Lichfield, Wells, Exeter, Salisbury, Chichester, Lincoln, Hereford, London,
and the Welsh Cathedrals of Llandaff, Bangor, S. Davids, and S. Asaph.
(b) The thirteen cathedrals of the monastic foundation were originally served
by regular clergy or monks, and were reconstituted at the Dissolution of the
Monasteries as chapters of secular canons. They are the cathedrals of Canterbury,
Durham, Rochester, Winchester, Worcester, Norwich, Ely, Carlisle, Peterborough,
Gloucester, Chester, Oxford, and Bristol. The last five only became cathedrals at
the Dissolution. Westminster Abbey was a cathedral church only from 1540 to
1545. When the change in these monastic establishments was made, the abbot
became the bishop, the prior the dean, and the monks became canons and choristers,
while the personnel generally remained the same.
(c) The cathedrals of the new foundation are those to which bishops have been
more recently appointed, viz. Ripon and Southwell, which are old collegiate
churches, as well as the parochial churches of Newcastle, Wakefield, Manchester,
Birmingham, Truro, Chelmsford and Southwark, the abbey church of S. Albans,
Bury S. Edmunds, Coventry, Liverpool, Guildford and others.
Before describing individual examples of cathedral churches it will be helpful
to take a general survey of the features they have in common in this country and in
which they offer a striking contrast to Continental and especially French cathedrals.
Monastic cathedrals are indeed almost peculiar to England and Germany, where a
large proportion of the present cathedral churches once formed part of monastic
establishments with cloisters, refectories, dormitories, chapter houses, scriptorium,
library, guest hall, infirmary, prison, wine cellar, mills, workshops, and gardens
(cf. Monastery of S. Gall, p. 358). The cloisters round which the various buildings
were grouped formed a covered way for the use of monks, but were also planned, as
at Salisbury and Wells, as ornamental adjuncts to cathedrals which were not part of
monastic establishments. The collegiate churches of Lichfield, Ripon, Southwell,
York, and Manchester, and the Irish, Scottish, and Welsh cathedrals (S. Davids
excepted), have no cloisters. Much of this difference in treatment is occasioned by
difference in purpose. In England these churches often served a two-fold purpose
and provided services for monks at one end and for laymen at the other; while in
France the cathedrals were largely built and paid for by laymen themselves and
were designed for their use. In England, owing to this conventual origin, the choir
or eastern arm had to be large enough to accommodate the monks, and it was often
nearly as long as the nave or western arm.
English cathedrals, which often formed part of a monastic group with cloisters
(p. 415J), refectory, and other buildings, are now set in a quiet ‘close’ and not
among the houses of the town, as is so usual in France (p. 534). They are long and
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 403

B, Wells Cathedral; west facade (c. 1206-42). See p. 421

 404 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

B. Worcester Cathedral : the choir (1224-60) c. Gloucester Cathedral: Choir

looking W. See p. 423 looking W. See p. 406
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 405

arrow as compared with French; for whereas in France the length is seldom more
han four times the width, due largely to the double aisles and side chapels, in
England it is often as much as six times the width. This extreme length of vista,
further emphasized by the comparatively low nave vault, gives English cathedrals
much of their stately solemnity. There are fewer side chapels in England than in
France, and this indicates the more general character of the services held for the
laity. Many English cathedrals, such as Norwich and Canterbury, which were
founded or remodelled after the Conquest by Norman prelates, had an apsidal east
end which was sometimes developed into a chevet, but the English type reverted,
as in Durham and Lincoln, to the square eastern termination of the Saxon proto-
type (p. 491A, B). The transepts project considerably and secondary transepts occur,
as at Salisbury, Canterbury, Lincoln, Wells, and Worcester, but in France the
transepts are single and have little projection. The entrance was generally by a
projecting south-western porch which acted as a screen against the wind, and is in
contrast to the large recessed western portals which open directly into the nave in
French cathedrals. The high central tower, as at Lincoln, York, Ely, Gloucester,
Canterbury, and Durham, is effective by contrast with the low nave; its height is
sometimes further increased by a tapering spire, as at Salisbury and Norwich.
Occasionally there are two western towers, while at Lichfield all three towers are
crowned with spires (p. 419B). Flying buttresses are not nearly so common as in
France, owing to the comparative lowness of the nave vault. In France the flying
buttresses to the chevet produce a complex, restless effect (p. §532C) which is absent
from the simple square east ends of English churches. A description of English
cathedrals would be incomplete without a reference to the sculptured west fronts of
Wells (p. 403B) and Exeter, and to those internal fittings such as rood lofts, choir
screens, carved stalls, misericords, bishops’ thrones, sculptured reredoses, fonts,
tombs, sedilia, pulpits, lecterns, brasses, triptychs, wall tablets, alms boxes,
eredences, oak chests, and other fittings which with the tiled floor not only give a
rich and furnished appearance to the interiors of cathedrals and churches, but are
also of importance as historical records (pp. §12, 515-19).
Chapter houses for the transaction of ecclesiastical business were originally
rectangular in plan, as at Canterbury (p.411B) and Bristol (1142-70) (p.413K), but that
at Durham (1133-40) (p. 4I1IE) was apsidal, and that at Worcester (1084-1400)
(p. 411A) is circular. The normal type is octagonal with a centre pillar to support the
vaulting, as Westminster (1250) (pp. 422C, 424D), Salisbury (1263-84) (pp. 396A,
410E, 415G), and Wells (c. 1319) (pp. 377J, 412J), but Lincoln (1235) (pp. 396B,
4IOF, 416A) is decagonal. York chapter house (1280-1330) (p. 410B) is octagonal, $7 ft
in diameter, with no central pillar, as the vault is of wood instead of stone.
The comparative plans (pp. 410-13) will clearly indicate the work of successive
periods in each building, and the views of models (pp. 407-9) show the special
features of a number of cathedrals.
In the short notices which follow, Early English, Decorated, and Perpendicular
are abbreviated respectively as E.E., Dec., and Perp., and an asterisk * denotes
those which were churches of Benedictine monasteries (p. 304).
1. Bangor (p. 412D). Repeatedly destroyed. Present church, which suffered much in the
civil wars, is Dec. and Perp. Thoroughly restored by Sir George Gilbert Scott (1866).
2. Bristol (pp. 409A, 413K). Augustinian monastery. Rectangular Norman chapter
house. E.E. ‘Elder Lady Chapel’. Dec. choir (1306-32); modern nave by Street to match
choir. Peculiar in having nave and aisles of nearly equal height, with lofty aisle windows,
as in German ‘hall’ churches, without triforium and clear-story (p. 590D). Remarkable
canopied wall recesses.
3. *Canterbury (pp. 408G, 411B, 418). First Norman church 1071-7. Choir replaced
406 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

and enlarged 1096-1126; choir rebuilt on the remains after fire and extended eastwards
1174-85 by master-mason William of Sens and his successor. Original Norman work of
singular interest (p. 396D). Contraction in width of choir, to preserve two earlier Norman
chapels. At extreme east is ‘Becket’s Crown’ and Patriarchal Chair (p. 519c). Extensive
crypts of 1100-25 under eastern portion. Double transepts. Splendid late Perp. central
tower (1490-1503). Perp. nave begun 1379 by Henry Yevele. West front and towers
unimportant. A treasure house of thirteenth-century glass. Oblong chapter house (1400)
with fine wooden ceiling. Perp. cloisters on north of great beauty. Numerous side chapels.
4. Carlisle (pp. 409c, 413B). Augustinian abbey. Only two bays of Norman nave
remain. East end of beautiful design with fine tracery windows.
5. Chester (pp. 409E, 413F). Originally the convent of S. Werburgh, became Benedictine
abbey 1093. Built of red sandstone. Dec. nave: northern arcade has triforium and clear-
story combined. Perp. central tower. Cloisters on north. Lady chapel at east end.
6. Chichester (pp. 407F, 412G). Chief example of double aisles, resulting from former
lateral chapels. Fine central spire. Norman nave. Transitional retro-choir. Bell-tower
(fifteenth century) is the only detached example to an English cathedral.
7. *Durham (pp. 392, 408c, 411E). Norman work (1093-1133). Massive E.E. eastern
transept called the ‘Chapel of the Nine Altars’ (1242-80) and central Perp. tower (1465-90).
A group of great dignity which has few rivals. Norman nave (1110-33) is finest in England
with pillars about the same width as openings and quaintly channelled with chevrons,
diapers and flutes. Norman north transept vault (c. 1110) said to be earliest surviving high
vault in England, and Norman nave vaults (1128-33) first to incorporate pointed ribs.
8. *Ely (pp. 408A, 410A, 494E, F, 495J, K). Norman nave and transepts with timber
roof (modern painting). Choir remarkable for carving. Unique central octagon (1322-40)
70 ft in diameter with unequal sides, by John Attegrene, master-mason, has rich wooden
vault with octagonal lantern by William Hurley, master-carpenter. This plan influenced
that of S. Paul, London (p. 906). Exceptional Lady chapel, 100 ft by 46 ft (1321-49) (cf.
chapter house, Canterbury). Imposing west front (180 ft wide) with high tower, the same
width as nave, flanked originally both north and south by transepts with octagonal turrets.
In front of the tower projects the E.E. vaulted Galilee porch (1198-1215).
9. Exeter (pp. 407D, 412E). Unique twin towers over north and south transepts. The
finest specimen of the Dec. style and rich in varied tracery and carved stonework. Unusual
Perp. sculptured screen to W. facade.
10. *Gloucester (pp. 404C, 408D, 411C). Early Perp. south transept (1329-37) (pp. 382,
394) Norman choir cased with Perp. (cf. Winchester). Perp. fan-vaulted cloisters of
singular completeness (pp. 399H, 401). Choir has largest Perp. windows in England.
Elaborate Lady chapel. Central tower (225 ft high) with internal flying buttress.
11. Hereford (pp. 409F, 413H). Norman nave and choir. E.E. Lady chapel and Dec.
central tower. Famous ‘Mappa Mundi’ in south choir aisle.
12. Lichfield (pp. 407E, 413J, 419, 495G, H). Built of reddish stone on sloping ground.
Nave, transepts, chapter house, and west front in E.E. style. Graceful central and western
spires in Dec. style form the only triple group of spires in England. Spherical triangular
clear-story windows. No cloisters.
13. Lincoln (pp. 396B, 408H, 4I10F, 416, 417). Stands on steep hill dominating town.
Some Norman work of 1073 and later at west end. Rebuilt 1192-1320. Choir and lesser
transepts 1192-1200, the earliest example of E.E. work of known date. E.E. main tran-
septs, nave, central tower, Galilee porch and chapter house (1209-53). Dec. ‘Angel Choir’
(retro-choir) also of remarkably advanced design for its date (1256-80). Central tower
heightened (1307-11, from the designs of Richard of Stow), the highest (271 ft) in Eng-
land. Cloisters on the north (1296). E.E. decagonal chapter house, vaulted to central pillar
and surmounted by flying buttresses. Unusual west front consists of screen wall behind
which rise two western towers.
14. Llandaff (p. 413c). Begun 1120. A long low building situated at foot of hill, without
transepts or side chapels. E.E. west front. Two western towers. Nave much restored.
Square chapter house with central pillar. No triforium or cloisters.
15. Manchester (p. 412B). Perp. (1422-1520). Remarkable for double aisles obtained, as
at Chichester, by inclusion of side chapels. Fine stalls.
16. Newcastle. Late Dec. in style. Perp. tower (1474) with spire on crown of arches,
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 407

F. Chichester

G. Salisbury H. Norwich
Comparative models of English Cathedrals. See pp. 401 ff.
408 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

c. Durham p. Gloucester

paark oe aia fs s

nade

Be

G. Canterbury H. Lincoln
Comparative models of English Cathedrals. See pp. 4o1 ff.
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 409

A. Bristol B. Oxford
(before addition of modern nave)

c. Carlisle D. Rochester
(before restoration of spire to
central tower)

E. Chester F. Hereford
Comparative models of English Cathedrals. See pp. 4o1 ff.
 410 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

COMPARATIVE PLANS OF ENGLISH CATHEDRAL

REFERENCE TABLE
NORMAN
EARLY ENGLISH
IL OF NORMAN
DECORATED
PERPENDICULAR
MODERN

PORTION &
DESTROYED!

CHURCH

YORK

[|FOUNDATIONS OF ,
AXON CHURCH

LINE OF
17 W.FRONT! CLOISTERS
PLUMBERY
uae
FRONT
YS

O oon NE SALISBURY a
PETERBOROUGH fab StF 0 10 wor (F) Lincoun 60 “OOM
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 411

OMPARATIVE PLANS OF ENGLISH CATHEDRALS

FERENCE TABLE HS, CORONA OR
NORMAN SITE"OF ye) BECKETS CROWN
EARLY ENGLISH /anton) tase
fy} “4 , ”

DECORATED HH/ Suenreew

:
Mais
g NR 4) 2 : r

PERPENDICULAR ae HANTRY- db 4 (bay

MUM =MoDERN ee Peng) S. ANSELMS HAPEL
RACCHAPEL F
DARK ENS
TRY (UNDE; a d
? ey 4
ie oe
the INFIRMARY Al
ff < 4
_ BOTELERS
; GLOISTERS, ff aj POSITION OF CHAPEL
Shes th LANFRANCS
BAPTISTERY of] CHURCH 1065

Lik qS.HAPEL
MICHAEL'S
oll

CLOISTERS

ma ae NCH

WORCESTER (B) canteRBURY O©atotcester

NORMAN
TERMINATION

CLOISTERS

CLOISTERS

GALILEE MONKS GARDEN

PORCH &

UTORY (NOW BOWLING ALLEY

CHOIR SCHOOL) LATRINES
PRISON
cM maa WH:

D)Norwich Peete
So Oma aa COMMM
ie} 20
AO a Ban COATES BOTT roe
40 60
ee: CE)DuRHAM
8 100M"?
 412 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

COMPARATIVE, PI
PLANS OF ENGLISH CATHEDRA
REFERENCE TABLE LIBRARY-~¢
[aaa NORMAN
EARLY ENGLISH
DECORATED
PERPENDICULAR
MODERN

rH
SU ENTRANCE FROM

(A)s ASAPH Bus ‘TOM QUAD

S. ALBANS Cows
neha te ” On
NORMAN |
CHURCH

=e
ma SITE OF i
| CLOISTERS

CHAPTER
HO. ABOVE

NORMAN cf
BUILDING =
D
GUNDUL 3i
TOWER ©
in -FOUNDATIONS
: OF CHAPELS

PORCH |”
é, CLOISTERS

5 ‘ CHOI
le of 7a vo te
a SCHOOL(IN RUINS) res.
ROCHESTER 19.0 we aS 50 200 = 250 = 300 Ft (K)sourrwen
0 40 60 80 IOOMTE®
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 413

JMPARATIVE PLANS OF ENGLISH CATH EDRALS

REFERENCE TABLE ~SACRISTY
WE. NorMAN
2 |ST CEARLY ENGLISH

RUINS OF ip
CHAPTER WALLOFNORMAN fin CHAPTER
HOUSE CHURCH HOUSE

Ht) SITE OF
pd

““W. TOWERS

Verrcvie
DUBLIN

ies e
7S TRANSEPT FORME
OWER CHURCH OFS.OSWALD
O25

EARLIER
VICARS BUILDING
menfi
CLOISTER
ELDER
LADY
e,5DACRISTY

Ne
BISHOPS
CLOISTER

TOWER PORCI ,

hee heme cate Diicrriecb

BO ie,
ScHooL)
(Now

FDHEREFORD foe
e 2p e
REFECT!
OF
SITE
100 50 100 SOO FT
 414 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

Dee lite

(pls
aa Cy
‘
as
”
2 ries a)

ROSE WINDOW: “(Bint ERIOR F

CENTRE GABLE:
W. FRONT

1-—-20'-0'-—>1
>|
>
TORY

PASSAGE

sia
posal
gees

78'-0"

56-0"
———-->
—

g4!.0"—
--------------1
~-~--~---~~—---~ —
>
-TRIFORIUM
CL!
ARCADE
CHOIR
—+ee
------~52!-o"-—----->|
- {Se —---82': 3s—
$7
C=
=i
44==Fas
ial
le
oe

FEET| 40

(Diexternat Bay (E)TRANSVERSE SECTION TH

METRES |

Fe
SF
NA SS

=| a
a5
i
===

; ae
(oS ae
(J)s, TRANSEPT LOOKS S
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 415

___ SALISBURY CAT MR

aie r

| va
A\\
oh Al Vie a
‘
! = NLR Oa et
== an W it Sah ||Heat
STTNTVAAA fi |Od
‘ aleeef SAMI

ea we
Ke “4

—
=

h
i
e a
2 ys) |

l
Li
MAN
i
Rt
GR
A E E w
iH

NuaNORTHPORCH as eee ENTER: LOOKING

(Bexttrior
68 FROM NE. NW FROM SOUTH
FE MT
TRANSEPT

ale
120

ataON
sale
AKA
Cll

'

B e ae
=
“16.0"
peat
Pe
—

arBAYS
(STS SECTION
K-~-

<3 Ye \° \
ar

ue )

\ mK

Blt?
HWY)

eC ee
= ee

ee ine
VLOOKING W
 gen
MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

"Sse LINCOLN CATHEDRAL?

416 ENGLISH

70+
Mh

iyiyAY
v

= , A
= d1} hohshohoho idi

EL: ANGEL CHOIR asl

: BARAEAR

AN LN IE
ry T|
IEA
tas {
i I .
Yl Hf il siTRU aT
Nt
Ay \ il |
KY es

At mtuuagenii
sv AMLALAARL TPT

ire ee cor (F LONGITUDINAL SECTION “©

- YE Tt,
gO
ZW |,

——— as TS Swe
|
os = Se eh

ANGEL CHOIR LOOKING NE

ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 417

B. Lincoln Cathedral: choir (1192-1200) looking W.

418 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

A. Canterbury Cathedral from S.W. See p. 405

B. Canterbury Cathedral: choir (1174-85) looking E.

 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 419

\i TZ ag
LICHFIELD) CATHEDRAL _

iN}
ariTera WaMPAR Ay Mee Mme
P :
ae ste. = ny LN
Sse
se cEN RT ZE
re We a att: 4 == A 2 qWy
SSee7 Fy) fe Serie Se ee
‘B) EXiERIOR F VESTIBULE
LADY CHAPEL
mn an i}
=
yr lil :

+
[|
a
HY
+4i

E 2S nD
ay 5 + |
ne, | THAI
E °
4 reN
!
THA
=,
| |

LH
sat AISLE. INAVE : AISLE

TRANSVERSE SECTION THRO’ NAVE

‘ oe RTH) We re)
Weg } on il
ais a
ly po = WN \
WY Ari» \

Nees

Se nl

= 4 |\\
INT*: NAVE. LOOKING E. WEST DOORWAY
 420 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

© EAST END
Sa==

allie
eee

Hi
,
rot ae
aif.
s
iF}
| toes.
reese
=
eae

a
a

a2":
senesees
[lees

SECTION

HN Ba
i WZas = eS

i ae “A
5le

jou

N
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 421
similar to S. Giles, Edinburgh (p. 522), King’s College, Aberdeen, and S. Dunstan in the
East, London. No triforium in nave or choir. Fine modern stalls.
17. “Norwich (pp. 407H, 411D). Long narrow Norman nave (1096-1145), aisleless
transepts, and choir with apsidal chapels. Bold central spire, choir, clear-story, some
windows on south of nave and vaulting throughout are Perp. Remains of original bishop’s
throne behind High Altar. Eastern apsidal chapel replaced by Lady chapel, since des-
troyed. Chapter house, resembling Durham, also destroyed.
18. Oxford (pp. 4008, 4098, 412c). Augustinian Priory. Norman nave and choir (1158-
1180). E.E. chapter house and Lady chapel. Nave pillars, alternately circular and polygonal,
support lofty Norman arches beneath which is triforium gallery—an unusual arrangement
in order to give height. Norman central tower with E.E. upper part and short spire. Nave,
shortened by Cardinal Wolsey when building his college of Christ Church, forms a
vestibule to choir, which has fine vaulting with pendants.
19. *Peterborough (pp. 403A, 408F, 410D, 414, 494A,.B)..A Norman church (1117-
1193) with finest interior after Durham. Nave timber roof is probably oldest in England,
with painted wooden ceiling of lozenge-shaped compartments. Nave aisles vaulted (cf.
Ely). Apsidal choir enclosed on the east by rectangular Perp. retro-choir, fan-vaulted, as
at King’s College, Cambridge. Grand E.E. western facade (c. 1193-1230), 158 ft wide, has
a portico of three gigantic arches, the full height of cathedral. A gable crowns each arch,
and angle abutments are carried up as small towers with spires. Other towers rise immedi-
ately behind, over western bays of the aisles. Central archway encloses two-storeyed Perp.
porch.
20. Ripon (pp. 407B, 413G, 494C, D). Begun c. 1179, but nave and much of choir
rebuilt later. Central and two western towers. Saxon crypt. Rich choir stalls with taber-
nacle work. Perfect E.E. western facade (c. 1233) (restored by Sir George Gilbert Scott).
21. *Rochester (pp. 409D, 412H). Norman and E.E. crypt, Norman nave, Norman west
doorway. E.E. walled-in choir and transepts. Perp. clear-story and wooden roof.
22. *S. Albans (p. 412F). Much destroyed and altered in modern times. Norman nave
(longest in England, 284 ft), transepts, and choir. Western portion of nave is E.E. Dec.
marble shrine of S. Alban disccvered and re-erected by Sir George Gilbert Scott.
23. S. Asaph (p. 412A). Rebuilt in Dec. style. Central tower, formerly with timber spire.
No triforium. Perp. roof and choir stalls. Restored by Sir George Gilbert Scott.
24. S. Davids (p. 413E). Situated in valley of the Alan close to the sea. Central tower.
Two-storeyed south porch. Transitional nave arches support a carved oak roof of Perp.
design (1508). Dec. rood-screen.
25. Salisbury (pp. 395, 407G, 410, 415). Ona level site, surrounded by the greensward
of a wide ‘close’, broken only by elm trees. Almost entirely in the E.E. style (1220-58). Is
characteristic of English Gothic, as Amiens is of French (p. 541). Double transepts,
central tower, Dec. spire, 404 ft high, the loftiest in England. West facade (1258-65) is
unimpressive, but a fine vaulted north porch projects boldly. Dec. cloisters. Restorations
by Sir George Gilbert Scott. Vaulted octagonal chapter house (1263-84) (p. 396A).
26. Southwark (S. Saviour, or S. Mary Overie) (pp. 373C, 393). Restored nave. E.E.
choir and retro-choir or Lady chapel.
27. Southwell (p. 412K). Norman nave, transepts and towers. E.E. choir. Dec. octagonal
chapter house without central pillar, the chief glory of the cathedral, probably the model
for York. Rich and well-preserved carving. No cloisters.
28. Wells (pp. 403B, 407A, 412J) (c. 1180-c. 1425). E.E. nave, double transepts, and
western bays of choir. The E.E. west front (150 ft wide, including buttresses) is flanked
by towers arcaded and enriched with sculpture—the highest development in English
Gothic of this type of fagade. Central tower, eastern Lady chapel and octagonal chapter
house. Unique triforium of close-set openings. As illustrating the comparative heigh to
width of English and French cathedrals, Wells is 32 ft wide and 67 ft high (two to one)
and Amiens is 46 ft wide and 140 ft high (three to one).
29. *Winchester (pp. 408E, 410C, 420, 495L, M). Has greatest total length (560 ft) of
any Mediaeval cathedral in Europe. Norman transepts and tower (1079-93). Norman nave
and choir (1079-93) transformed by veneer of Perp. on Norman core and a vaulted roof.
Largest E.E. retro-choir (1202-c. 1235) in England with Dec. stalls (cf. Gloucester).
Tombs and chantries. Timber vault (1510-28) to choir.
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

B. North transept (1245-60) c. Chapter house vault (1250)

Westminster Abbey. See opposite page
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 423

30. *Worcester (pp. 404A, B, 407C, 411A). Level site on banks of Severn. Norman crypt,
transepts, and circular chapter house (the only one in England). E.E. choir. Dec. and
Perp. nave, cloisters, and central tower (196 ft high). Interesting monuments, including
royal chantries of King John and Prince Arthur (p. 473).
31. York (pp. 4088, 410B). Largest in area and width, 106 ft within the walls, of any
English Mediaeval cathedral. E.E. transepts remarkable for beauty of mouldings and the
‘Five Sisters’—a name given to lancet windows of north transept, each 50 ft high and 5 ft
wide. Unique fourteenth-century stained glass. Nave and octagonal chapter house, with
wooden roof and without central column, of Edwardian Gothic (1261-1324). Perp. tower.
No cloisters. Nave—second in height to Westminster Abbey—and choir have wooden
imitation of stone vault. West front of French type. In spite of size the cathedral is less
impressive than Durham in outline and grouping.
S. Paul, London. See p. 906.
Note. A comparative table which contrasts characteristics of English and French Gothic
cathedrals is given (pp. $59 ff.), and will be found of interest.

MONASTERIES
The importance of the monastic system during the Mediaeval period throughout
Europe and the general plan and purpose of monastic establishments are fully
dealt with elsewhere (pp. 304, 307-8).
Westminster Abbey (pp. 422, 424-6, 428) stands on what was Thorney Island,
opposite an ancient ford across the Thames. Traditionally said to occupy the site of
a church built by Sebert in 616, the Benedictine monastery was founded by S.
Dunstan in 960, and partly rebuilt (1055-65) by Edward the Confessor just before
the Norman Conquest and dedicated to S. Peter. From the Confessor onward,
kings were pulling down, rebuilding, adding to and repairing the abbey church,
and so its character changed from Norman to Gothic; and the successive and
merging phases of Early English, Decorated, Perpendicular, and Tudor, with their
own peculiarly English features, find a place in various parts of the abbey church;
while the Early Renaissance has also left its imprint on magnificent monuments,
and even the more ponderous art of Queen Anne and the Georges is faithfully
reproduced in the memorials to England’s dead. Originally the church formed part
of that great triple group—monastery, church, and royal palace—the last of which
was superseded by the Houses of Parliament, thus keeping pace with the growth
and changes of the English Constitution as it passed from absolute to constitutional
monarchy and representative government.
The monastery was one of the largest Benedictine foundations, with a typical
lay-out (p. 425H), which comprised the abbey church and a square cloister court,
surrounded by open arcades of various dates (pp. 424D, 425A), with refectory,
dormitory, and octagonal chapter house (1250) (p. 424D), with a fine vault (p. 422C)
whose thrusts are balanced internally on a slender clustered pier, and met externally
by bold flying buttresses (p. 426A). There was also a common court (now Dean’s
Yard), an inner court (now Little Dean’s Yard), and the infirmary, besides mills,
workshops, orchards, gardens, and the usual trout stream which, from the heights
of Hampstead, here joined the Thames, and still runs under Great College Street.
The precincts covered a large area, and formed a self-contained community, the
germ of the later City of Westminster. Most of the existing monastic buildings date
from the time of Abbot Litlington (mid-fourteenth century), and include the
abbot’s residence (now the deanery), with Jerusalem Chamber and dining-hall;
but the Chapel of the Pyx and monks’ day-room, forming the dormitory under-
croft, come down from Edward the Confessor’s time. The greater part of the abbey
church was rebuilt on a grander scale by Henry III (his master-mason being Henry
of Westminster), and to him are due the present eastern arm, north and south
 42 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

WESTMINSTER A, ABBEY
P\
j \

eM “Thy Ee

&
: a
+ =
13 | 2
é FS :
i; +
: ,
=
5)
9Fs
-

CADINT: BAY. (B) TRANSVERSE SECTION tHro NAVE. Y-Y

CHAPELS MONUMENTS
A. STANDREW E. STUOHN BAPTIST J. S'BENEDICT Ay -—-N \ SF . THECONFESSORS SHRINE 1066 5. EDWARD III
B. STMICHAEL F. STPAUL K. ST BLAIZE . HENRY III 1272 6. HENRY
Vil EQUEEN
C. ST JOHN EVANGLS! G. STNICHOLAS ~—_L. ST FAITH 3. QUEEN ELEANOR 1290 7. MARY QNor SCOT
D. ISLIPS CHAPEL H. ST EDMUND M. ST EDWARD

HI SAXON € NORMAN 1055

EARLY ENGLISH [2
[ml ove pe la
E24 DECORATED 13
PERPENDICULAR] |,
xy cae IN XIll CENT. ae by

ESTE Mes
LATE PERPENDER |:
YARD
: ‘ py TO NICHOL
eee |ieee ¥ -MOOR’S DESIGN 1736-4
sy | NORTH TRANSEPT REFACI
[a SIR GILBERT SCOTT 18}
Pet
PASSAGE :
*PRISON
iat
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 425

WESTMINSTER ABBEY

Ss
SS
as
SS

===
oae>
(oe
es
|eee my]

;=
-_—
rT
zs
-—=
— ~

|
= lo
r=
SH
SS
SEm
cee
zfo
1

Be
tower
=.
(===
=

nee
eee
ec
bec
eee
Rt
en
ee
ees
is
a=
EL
SY
WS)
Se
Pe
aso
ap

4 /,

NAVE PIER ‘ Hf, \

TEMP. EDWARD II Fala A Wily

i00 0 500
Tiers a Se Weems ees SY SereT
I ee a ar asa sa
Deine i AriMe,
army oes
) ait uri
HY I,
Kp ( AE TMC sar
Dan af Var a = ich
ae i Has all Seer UNA
ulema
Cale UAH bt
ae art :
a a
t= oar
\ bn

bag

es |
an i W/E =, Lip!

PLAN!OF +7 eee
w AR rt = =, UI

(H)monastery (J)EDWA
aml gas Hy
)HENRY Vs CHANTRY CHAPEL
 426 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

WESTMINSTER ‘ABBEY : HENRY: Vils: CHAPEL.

iy

Bi
bs
<%
a

seme eee
eran
PLAN FROM ABOVE
> —t
>)
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 427
transepts, one bay of the western arm, all erected between 1245 and 1260, and four
more bays of the western arm, built between 1260 and 1269. For nearly a century
building was suspended, and the old Norman nave still remained standing, but was
pulled down and the nave continued westward as set forth below. The church is
in the main French in character, and is largely based on Rheims (the French
coronation church) (p. 538). It is an early example in England of the Geometric
style, while the pinnacles and bar-tracery windows are among the first in this
country. The eastern arm of the church, terminating in a polygonal apse, with
ambulatory and cluster of surrounding chapels (pp. 424D, 426A), which form the
only complete ‘chevet’ in England, contains the much-venerated shrine of the
Confessor, and the Coronation chair (p. 519A). The Confessor’s shrine (p. 425])
stands in the centre of his chapel, and to this hallowed spot pilgrims have come from
all parts of the world. Originally buried under the central tower of the Norman
church, the body was translated to this shrine by Henry III in 1269. The monu-
ment, which was much damaged at the Reformation in 1538, is of Purbeck marble,
and on each side of the pedestal are three trefoiled recesses in which sick people
were placed in the hope of miraculous cures. Twisted columns at the angles, filled
with glass mosaics, supported the reredos of the former altar, surmounted by a
frieze of porphyry and serpentine; the tomb is covered by an oak superstructure,
added by Abbot Feckenham (1554).
The interior of the Abbey betrays the French influence in loftiness and verticality
produced by lancet arches and tall clear-story (pp. 422B, 424A). The north transept
facade is emphatically French with cavernous porches and rose window (p. 425B).
The nave (p. 425F), continued westward by Edward III and others (1375-1506),
adhered to the thirteenth-century general design, but the Perpendicular date is
revealed in such details as piers and mouldings. The periods of the building of the
church are clearly seen in the piers themselves; in the sanctuary and transepts a
cylindrical pier is surrounded by four detached shafts of Purbeck marble, as was
usual in the Early English period (pp. 425C, 503K, L); in the first five bays west of
the crossing four attached shafts are added to these four, and in the western part of
the nave, designed by Master Henry Yevele, all eight shafts are attached, i.e. formed
on the pier itself (p. 425E). The western towers were added (1736-45) by John James
from designs made in 1734 by Nicholas Hawksmoor. The church, with an extreme
internal length of 511 ft 6 ins, is notable for an unusually spacious triforium used for
coronation ceremonials. Its nave vault, 102 ft high (p. 399D), the highest Gothic vault
in England, has a complex system of strutting by flying buttresses across aisle and
north cloister (pp. 425A, 497T). The church abounds with chapels and monuments,
including—besides the Confessor’s shrine—that of Henry III (p. 472M) and other
kings, and these with many others (p. 472C, K, L) form a unique museum of sculpture
of all periods, while over the east end of the ambulatory stands the richly sculptured
fifteenth-century Chantry of Henry V (p. 425G). At the extreme east end is the cele-
brated Chapel of Henry VII (1503-19), built by the brothers Robert and William
Vertue as a magnificent mausoleum of the king, on the site of a Lady chapel of 1220,
and forming the culminating triumph of English Mediaeval architecture (pp. 424D,
426, 428). This is the chapel of the Knights of the Bath, and the low seats of the
Esquires are backed by the richly carved canopied stalls of the Knights, embellished,
as is the rest of the chapel, with elaborate heraldic devices (p. 517F). The tomb of
Henry VII and of Elizabeth of York (p. 881) is enclosed by a metal screen of Gothic
design, forming a chantry chapel (pp. 426£, 428). The famous fan vault of lace-like
tracery (pp. 426, 428), with pendants hanging apparently unsupported, is really con-
structed on half-concealed transverse arches of which the pendants are merely
elongated voussoirs, and around these pendants the conoidal web is built up. Instead
 isa vA oO - n am = oa (a) Ss ta] > < | <x 4 O a a aa O H 2) 4 aa

a
SERGE

* <a
“aaa
Saree,
fe+ RY
RATA
err
TR
MUS

e
one

Westminster Abbey: Henry VII’s chapel (1503-19) looking west and on right the bro
screen (1509) enclosing the Chantry Chapel and tomb of Henry VII and his Queen.
See p. 427
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 429
of being attached to the clear-story wall, as in previous experiments of the kind, the
main conoids are advanced upon these arches so as not to interfere with the broad
clear-story windows, and are supported on pendants, and connected to the clear-
story by other conoids above the level of the springing of the windows—a master-
piece of English masonry. The buttresses are in the form of octagonal piers, between
which the windows form a mere screen, and are many-sided on plan, while the
flying arches are filled with tracery (pp. 426F, 497P).
The Abbey is impressive as a triumph of English Gothic architecture, as an
outward and visible sign of English religious devotion, and as a record in stone of
English history. It has grown with the national growth, and has woven itself into
the fabric of the nation’s life. At once the most sacred and most famous shrine in
England, this venerable abbey represents the growth of centuries, both in its own
building and in national history. From even before the time of the Confessor and
onwards, it was slowly built, altered, adorned, and repaired. It has passed under the
direction of divers master-masons and architects, from Henry of Westminster down
to Wren and others of our own time. The Abbey and the nation have always been
closely associated; for not only did the abbey church serve the monks of the
Benedictine monastery, but it was also the centre of popular pilgrimages to the
Confessor’s shrine. It has also, through the centuries, been the scene of the gorgeous
coronation pageants down to that for the present Queen, Elizabeth II; as well as of
those memorial services for many of England’s greatest sons, who have achieved
distinction in every field of human endeavour. This association of ‘the Abbey’
with the nation’s recognition of those who have greatly dared is enshrined in the
words of Nelson when, in the battle off Cape S. Vincent, he exclaimed: “Victory or
Westminster Abbey!’
In its structure it is an epitome of architectural art; in its monuments and statues,
tombs and tablets it is a record of the success of many men and women in many pur-
suits in many parts of the world: Roman Catholic, Anglican, and Nonconformist ;
poet, priest, and king; warrior, writer, and play-actor; scientist and artist—all
are commemorated within its walls. A royal foundation, associated with the memory
of an English king, the burial-place of kings in the past, the coronation-place of
kings to-day, the Abbey is, in very truth, the national shrine for the honoured dead,
not of England only, but of the whole British Commonwealth.
Fountains Abbey, Yorkshire (p. 432), appears to have been founded (1135)
soon after Rievaulx, the first Cistercian establishment in that county (1132), and
before Kirkstall (1152). It is thought to have been named from the springs in the
valley of the Skell. Although in ruins, owing to the care with which the place has
been uncovered, it is easy here to make a mental picture of a great monastery
(p. 432A, C). The gatehouse (p. 432B) led into the outer court; south of this were the
guest house and the infirmary of the conversi, or lay brethren, and east of it was the
cellarium, no less than 300 ft long, comprising storehouses and refectory of these
conversi on the lower floor, with their dormitory above. Opposite the gatehouse is
the conventual church, of which the nave and transepts date from about 1147, but
the choir appears to have been enlarged between 1203 and 1247, and at the same
time the transept known as the ‘Chapel of the Nine Altars’ was built. The tower, by
Abbot Huby (1494-1526), is still the dominating feature in this beautiful valley.
The door in the south-east angle of the nave leads into the cloister court, round
which were ranged the chapter house, the monks’ dormitory and its undercroft, the
calefactory or warming house, the monks’ refectory, the kitchen with two great
fireplaces, and alongside was a washing lavatory, part of which still remains. Still
farther east were the cells for refractory monks and the abbot’s lodge, north of
which a corridor led to the infirmary hall, with adjacent chapel, cellar, and kitchen,
430 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

The chapter house, of which the vaulting is now destroyed, was rectangular, and
against the walls were stone benches rising one above another on which the monks
were wont to sit. The complete monastic establishment must have existed till the
time of Abbot William Thirsk (1526-36), after which the estate was sold (1540)
to Sir Richard Gresham, whose successor pulled down the infirmary and the stone
wall, and built Fountains Hall (p. 432B) on the site in 1611 (p. 894B).

PARISH CHURCHES
The building of churches in England progressed on distinctly national lines, and
the 9,000 parish churches of the Mediaeval period indicate the evolution of the
style, while the enlargement through the centuries of the parish church can be
traced in the plans (p. 491).
S. Andrew, Heckington (1345-80) (p. 431) is a fine type of English parish
church. It has (p. 431C) a western tower, nave with aisles, south entrance porch,
transepts, aisleless chancel with priest’s door, square east end due to Anglo-Saxon
influence, and a sacristy. The interior is on the lines of many parish churches, with
close-boarded roof to the chancel and open timber roof to the nave (p. 431B) which
has no triforium. The exterior is simple and straightforward, with its single western
tower and spire, 175 ft high, long roof over the nave and lower roof to the chancel
(p. 431A).
Some larger parish churches which are cruciform on plan have the tower over
the ‘crossing’ of nave and transepts. A spire, usually octagonal, often crowns the
tower, and the change from the square to the octagon was effected in the thirteenth
century by means of a ‘broach’ resting on angle squinch arches (p. 431D, E); while
in the following centuries parapets with elaborate pinnacles and flying buttresses
connected the tower to the base of the spire. The principal entrance was either
through a south porch near the west end or by a door under the tower in the west
facade, which gives dignity to the entrance. English village churches form in them-
selves a miniature history of ecclesiastical architecture in this country. Nearly every
church has its own peculiar attraction, and with accessories and fittings is a mine of
information for student and antiquary (pp. 405, 506, 509, 510, 515).
There is no feature of these churches more typically English than the timber roof,
with all its manifold variations of structure and design, as gradually developed out
of the combinations of rafters and beams. These were manipulated by English
carpenters to form varieties of roofing, much as the same simple timber material
was skilfully woven together by the shipwrights to form the wooden walls of Old
England. These timber roofs form such an integral part of multitudes of parish
churches that a description of their construction is here given, which can be
applied, according to the type, to analyse any given timber roof. For chapels see
p. 469.

TIMBER ROOFS
The English developed as did no other nation the construction of various types of
open timber roofs, which culminated in the elaborate hammer-beam variety of the
fifteenth century, often gaily painted in gold and colours. The French, on the con-
trary, favoured the stone vault, which generally necessitated external flying
buttresses, and this makes a marked contrast, both internal and external, between
the churches of the two countries.
Timber roofs were beautiful features of English Mediaeval churches, and their
intricate construction was an important part of parish churches. Owing to the
rich variety allowed by their highly decorative nature, the interaction of local
styles and the fact that many of the earlier examples were subsequently replaced—
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 431

;ANDREW: |
IBCKINGTON (|)
INCS. fA
Zo
~~
y \
a] Ny | 7f FI: mes

h
Sa d :
| 4
Mh
\y

\\\ i
(B)INTERIOR
Lookinc W.
soour
4

aN = =

if
ri i)

Ee af
p___ o-143—NI it
JARS i> LI
: 7 = ==
= 90 4
| 2= } 3 pj i he |

1 LOUVRES | | - 25
| Ht | 80
| 4 Versi Pie =
=
| a= ms 70-4

| ee z
| 253 Ss a 20

| de pee
~

i = — 50-115

| = DOOR

in: = .2 40-4
ae oe -
| heen Ho
cai 30}
: Ze if ik ‘| =

i| \ ‘Ls4
| aN || 2

-
| 104-3
| | ENTRAN ‘
TO TOWER |
STAIR
Ee SecriON tna!
 32 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

FOUNTAINS ABBEY: YORKSHIRE

, al
le

e“aie
l re

a HUBY'S TOWER FOUNTAINS HALL

b. WESTERN GUEST HOUSE ~ One MULE
e . EASTERN GUEST HOUSE Terre eS. . GATEHOUSE

d . INFIRMARY OF CONVERSI NAVE 1

. BREWHOUSE
(=. GARDE ROBE H i . THE ABBEY
f. KITCHEN an atta tes FISHPONDS
. MONKS’ REFECTORY . OUTER COURT
N. CALEFACTORY
. UNDERCROFT: MONKS’ DORMITORY;
kJ. INFIRMARY KITCHEN CLOISTER
l ABBOTS HOUSE

HM PARTS EXISTING
or
PARTS DESTROYED

© FEET-:1I00 50 i

PLAN METRES 0 ; i 2 30 40 50 60
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 433
especially after the mid-fourteenth century, when roof pitches often were lowered,
lead having become a popular substitute for less permanent coverings—evolution is
by no means so clearly apparent as in the case of vaults. Few surviving roofs are
earlier than the thirteenth century, and the majority are later Mediaeval. Construc-
tional evolution is more readily demonstrated by the roofs of manor houses (p. 444)
or barns (p. 483). ‘Single’ roofs (lacking principals), ‘trussed-rafter’ (p. 435A),
‘hammer-beam’ roofs (p. 435F, H, L), and those having a ‘crown-post’ (known also
as a ‘king-post’) standing on a tie-beam to support a ‘collar-purlin’ (p. 4468),
almost invariably belong to the south-eastern half of the country; the dividing line
running approximately along the oolitic limestone belt shown in the inset map,
Pp. 379. In the south-east too, the ‘principal rafter’ of roof trusses serves as a common
rafter as well as to support side purlins, tenoned into them. The ridge-piece, if any,
runs under the common rafters rather than between them as is modern practice. In
the north-western half of the country and in Wales, roofs were almost invariably
‘framed’, there being well-defined principals supporting purlins and a ridge-piece
upon their backs (p. 485c). Frequently, there were ‘wind-braces’ arching from the
purlins to the principal rafters (p. 500B). ‘Arch-braced’ roofs, common from the
fourteenth century, are found in both halves of the country. In general, roofs
tended to become more elaborate and ornate as time elapsed. There was very much
overlap in the types developing in succession.
The English open timber roofs of the Middle Ages (pp. 435, 500) may be classi-
fied as: (1) Trussed-rafter roofs. (2) Tie beam roofs. (3) Collar-braced roofs.
(4) Hammer-beam roofs. (5) Aisle roofs.
(1) Trussed-rafter roofs (p. 435A) are nearly always steeply pitched, averaging
fifty-five degrees; they are rare in churches after c. 1400. The fundamental form of
roof in the south-east was that composed of ‘couples’ of rafters, each pair separate,
without a ridge-piece; but as the rafters exercised outward thrust they were usually
joined together by a collar, or pair of collars, or were stiffened further by braces
from collar to rafters, as at Stow Bardolph Church, Norfolk. Sometimes the braces
were extended past the collar, scissor-wise, as at Lympenhoe Church, Norfolk, or
the scissor braces were themselves considered sufficient. The rafters rested on the
outer portion of the wall, and thus left an unsightly ledge on the inside, covered by
upright struts, which also added to the stability of the roof. The triangle thus
formed is held to be the origin of the hammer-beam arrangement (p. 435K), when
principals had been developed. The arched trussed-rafter roof was obtained by the
use of curved timbers connecting the rafters and collars, as at Solihull Church,
Warwickshire, and it was sometimes lined with boards to form a pentagonal
‘barrel’ ceiling, ornamented with ribs and bosses (p. 435C).
(2) The Tie-Beam roof (p. 435B, E) is found in connection both with steeply-
pitched and low-pitched roofs. In early use the tie-beam represents a “baulk-tie’
which joined the wall-posts of timber buildings (p. 478F), and in stone buildings
was often haphazardly placed to prevent the wall plates from spreading. It came to
serve, usually cambered upwards, to carry an ornamental or plain crown-post,
which in its turn and with the aid of struts sustained a collar-purlin, linking the
collars and giving rigidity to a roof otherwise of the trussed-rafter class (pp. 4465,
500A). Even so, the type was rather frail, and many elementary or naive devices
were tried for the purpose of propping-up side purlins from the tie-beam (p. 486H)
before true roof principals were evolved. So long as roofs were steeply pitched, the
tie-beam obstructed the upper space; when from the thirteenth century roofs were
progressively lowered it came into its own again, but then as a part of a truss, with
principal rafters supporting purlins and ridge-piece, the triangle thus formed
having various arrangements of vertical struts and tracery (p. 435B, E). Curved
434 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

braces often connected the underside of the tie-beam with vertical wall-pieces, and
thus the whole was framed together in the form of a depressed arch, as at S. Martin,
Leicester (p. 435E). A final phase for this class of roof (fifteenth and sixteenth
century) was to depress the roof-pitch to such an extent, even less than ten degrees,
that the roof could be carried on a cambered tie-beam with only a modicum of
firring (pp. 446K, 480K).
(3) The Collar-braced roof, which may be said to originate about 1300, is a natural
descendant of the ‘cruck-truss’ roof of the western half of the country (p. 467B),
in which principals of the cruck type—spaced down the length of a building to
carry purlins and a ridge, and these the rafters—are raised upon walls instead of
starting from the ground, as formerly. In the process, the curved ‘blades’ or prin-
cipal rafters of the crucks tend to be straightened out, and the former tie-beams
appear as a collar connecting them together. When, as is usually the case in prime
examples, braces are added below the collar to link it with the principal rafters, the
outcome is what is known as an ‘arch-braced’ truss. Among domestic buildings,
Stokesay Castle hall (p. 442B) affords a straightforward and very early example
(thirteenth century). The roof pitch usually is steep—about fifty-two degrees,
descending to below fifty degrees in the fifteenth century. In south-west England,
where the ‘framed’ principle of roof construction was not so strongly traditional as
in the north-west, arch-braced church roofs often lacked a ridge-piece; and in
south-eastern England (including East Anglia), where it was quite alien, it was
nevertheless soon adopted but very frequently to produce hybrid forms in which
the ‘single’ and the ‘framed’ methods of construction of the roof members were
confused (p. 435D). This mixture of practice is very marked in such secular examples
as Sutton Courtenay, Berks (fourteenth century) (p. 500c) and Cobham, Kent
(sixteenth century) (p. 480c). In the same region in the fifteenth century, as well as
in Somerset and Devon, arch-braces sometimes swept to the roof apex without the
intervention of a collar (p. 471C), or were omitted altogether. In all the variants of
the type, there normally were arch-braces too at the feet of the principal rafters,
connecting with wall-posts to carry the roof load down the inner wall faces and
giving a pointed-arch profile to the lower edge of the roof trusses.
(4) The Hammer-beam roof, found principally in the south-eastern half of the
country, was evolved during the fourteenth century, perhaps from the triangle at
the foot of the trussed rafter roof (p. 435F, H, L). It consists of a series of trusses,
repeated at intervals, to support the intermediate purlins and rafters, and its
object is to transmit the weight and thrust of the roof as low down as possible in the
supporting wall. The component parts of each truss are the two principal rafters
and hammer-beams with struts, curved braces, and collars which vary in number
and design. The hammer-beam itself is merely a lengthened sole piece (p. 435K),
of which the projecting part is supported by a curved brace from the wall piece,
and in its turn it supports a vertical strut to the principal rafter. This rigid system
of timbers, all tenoned and pinned together, is designed to resist the outward
pressure of the rafters, and is supplemented in the Gothic period by external
buttresses. It has been suggested that the hammer-beam was the result of cutting
away the centre of the tie-beam after the introduction of the curved brace, but there
is little in common between a hammer-beam and a tie-beam roof, except that, in
both, the trusses are at intervals. Moreover the tie-beam was used even in con-
junction with the hammer-beam, as at Outwell, where the alternate trusses have
hammer-beams. The chief varieties of the hammer-beam roof are: (a) those with
hammer-beams, struts, collars, and curved braces, as at Little Welnetham, Suffolk;
(6) those in which the collar-beam is omitted and curved braces are carried up to a
wedge-shaped strut at the ridge, as at Wymondham, Norfolk (p. 435), and Trunch,
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 435

TYPES OF
\

A jj t i I In nN ) ‘

oeery AS
Gz eN wf

COLLAR BRACED ROOF

S. MARY MAGDALEN N:: PUL HAM
TE BEAM ROOF
S. MARTIN : LEICESTER

Wy tI OY so gu i
HAMMER BEAM ROOF
WYMONDHAM : NORFOLK

(L) Senet 30' 6'---------- + Ye

HAMMER
DOUBLEKNAPTON BEAM ROO
: NiNORFOLK
IN: DETAIL OF HAMMERBEAM
END OF HAMMERBEAM AT G.
436 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

THE TOWER OF LONDON

srre or // Yyvrg FEAL
i? a D uk ES

D4 58
Sy
wets
Sm mn

{5
Pig tee

SS

BAD 1918.

s
10So
* .

a » Wi presence
fs) la gy CHAMBER ig
F ©COUNCIL is =
BScHaMBER Mie «
pb kt 3207-2

FROM 5.E.
| MIDDLE TOWERS BRICK TOWERI7 BROAD ARROW Tr.
2BYWARD « IOMARTIN «= I8BELL TOWER
3 LEGGES MOUNTII S.PETER'S Cx19 GUARD HOUSE
4.N.BASTION —12WATERLOO Brs.20 WAKEFIELD Tr.
5 BRASS MOUNT:I3 BEAUCHAMP Tr.:21 S.THOMAS'S ~
6 DEVEREUX Tr. 14 WHITE TOWER22 TRAITORS GATE
7 FLINT TOWERISBARRACKS 23LANTHORN Tr.
8 BOWYER TOWkI6 CONSTABLE Tr-24 SALT TOWER.
82. BLOODY Tr. 16 CRADLE Tr 25 WELL TOWER
100 © 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 FEET
3 5 0 iio id 200 METRES

o> LAE] ENTRANCE

Aae Sya FROM
: He \'| TOWER HILL
Tr tl ae Mt
= !NN
> t
tI : 5
ill=i
Gayvile
il
i
Cee ee
INTERIOR OF BLOODY TOWER GATEWS
BYWARD TOWER BLOCK PLAN TRAITORS GATE BEYON
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 437

Norfolk (p. 435F); (c) those in which short hammer-beams support curved braces
instead of struts, with collar-beams above, as at Capel S. Mary, Suffolk, and
Hampton Court Palace (p. 463); (d) those in which curved braces rise from
hammer-beam to ridge, as at Palgrave, Suffolk; (e) those with an arched rib
which, springing from wall piece to collar, gives additional rigidity, as at Eltham
Palace (1481) (p. 500G), and in that most magnificent of all timber roofs at West-
minster Hall, by the distinguished master-carpenter, Hugh Herland, which dates
from 1397-9 (p. 500D-F). (f) Double hammer-beam roofs, as at S. Margaret,
Ipswich, Knapton (p. 435L) and Middle Temple Hall (1572) (p. 500H), have a second
range of hammer-beams further to stiffen the principals and transmit the weight
through the first range to the wall: they appear from the fifteenth century onwards.
(5) Aisle Roofs (p. 435G, J) usually reflected the design of the main roofs. Roof
pitches changed in concert with those of the high roofs, except that they quite
frequently were at a less angle in order to facilitate clear-story lighting of naves.

CASTLES
Just as the parish church is an indication of the religious life of the people, so is the
English home, whether feudal castle or manor house, an index of social life under
the feudal system, when every castle was not only a fortified stronghold, but also,
like the manor house, a centre for administering justice and dispensing hospitality.
Castles were built with little regard for domestic comfort and often retained their
fortified character till the fifteenth century (pp. 436, 442, 445).
Anglo-Saxon period. ‘There were no castles, as the forts or ‘burhs’ built at this
time were for community use; properly speaking, castles were private strongholds
for king or lord, and were an outcome of the feudal system, which did not apply in
England until the Conquest, though one or two earthworks were built under
Norman influence before that event.
Norman period. Of some fifteen hundred castles in England, more than twelve
hundred were founded during the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Only a few of the
most important had stone keeps from the outset; the majority began as ‘motte and
bailey’ earthworks. The motte or mound usually was partly natural, partly artificial,
its sides steepened by a ditch dug around its base. The flat-topped crest sometimes
was broad enough to accommodate a timber dwelling. In other cases it served
solely as a citadel, carrying a wooden defence tower, raised on angle posts. The
dwelling and ancillary buildings then were sited in the bailey, this being a zone
which looped from the foot of the motte, defined by ditches and earthen ramparts,
and which was spacious enough also to provide refuge for dependants, peasantry
and stock in times of need. An inclined wooden bridge connected the bailey with
the motte. The fringe of the motte crest and the summits of the earth ramparts
were lined by palisades of close-set timber baulks, or occasionally by rough stone
walls.
Thetford, Norfolk, affords a fine instance, 80 ft high, of the hundreds of sur-
viving mottes, and there are very many others with later stone buildings upon them,
as at Berkhamsted, Herts; Windsor (p. 439A); and Lewes, Sussex, each
constructed before c. 1125. Particularly early examples are those at Cambridge
(1068) and York, where there are two (1069, 1069). Dromore Castle, N. Ireland
(c. 1180) (p. 441A) has its motte and bailey almost in pristine condition, and is a
relic of the Norman overlordship of Ireland after 1171.
Stone ‘curtain’ walls soon began to replace the perishable timber palisades, and
in the twelfth century, particularly the latter half, mottes then assumed that form
known as the ‘shell-keep’, because of the empty-looking crowning ring of high
walls; though actually there usually were timber or stone buildings abutting the
438 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

inner wall face. The bailey stone walls rode up the mound to join those of the
shell-keep.
Windsor Castle (p. 439A) has a shell-keep of about 1170 (the upper half and the
windows are nineteenth century), with an elongated bailey on each side. Other
twelfth-century examples are Conisborough, Yorkshire (1185-90); Carisbrooke,
Isle of Wight (c. 1140-50); Launceston, within which a round keep was built
about 1240; Restormel (p. 441B); and Trematon. The last three are in Cornwall.
The greatest castles of the period had stone ‘donjons’ (nowadays known as keeps)
rather than mottes, and similarly had baileys related to them. The earliest type
was the rectangular ‘hall-keep’, in which the great hall and the private chamber
were laid side by side, above a storage floor at ground level; sometimes there was
an additional, entrance, floor between the two levels. About 1125 the ‘tower-keep’
became a frequent variant, the private chamber then being above the hall; and by
II50 practice was turning in favour of the polygonal or circular plan, since the
square-angled keep was vulnerable to mining.
The Tower of London (c. 1086-97) (p. 436), a hall-keep, only assumed after
several reigns its complete form as a ‘concentric’ castle, with successive lines of
fortification—a plan probably based on Muslim models. Here, the rectangular
keep of three storeys—the upper was divided into two, later on—92 ft in height,
stands in the centre of an inner bailey, surrounded by a wall with thirteen towers
(c. 1250), which is, in its turn, enclosed by an outer bailey and wall with eight
towers and an encircling moat (c. 1280). Other examples, numbering about fifty,
include Colchester (c. 1090), Corfe, Dorset (c. 1125), and Castle Rising, Norfolk
(c. 1140), also hall-keeps; Rochester (1126-39), with wall fireplace (p. 519L) and
Hedingham, Essex (c. 1140) (p. 440A), which are tower-keeps; and Chilham,
Kent (c. 1160), Orford, Suffolk (1166-72) (p. 440B) and Conisborough, York-
shire (1185-90) with octagonal or circular plans, each having protruding spurs. Keeps
tended to become less magnificent as the strength of the outer defences advanced.
Early English period. During the thirteenth century, castles acquired really high
curtain walls, with lofty towers projecting at intervals to give command of their
whole length. Thus defence passed from passive to active. Occasionally rectangular
(e.g. Framlingham, Suffolk, c. 1200), the mural towers mostly were polygonal or
circular, against the danger of mining. ‘Crenellation’, or the indentation of parapets
by ‘embrasures’, leaving upstanding ‘merlons’, with a rampart walk or ‘alure’
behind the parapets, was practised almost with the first high walls; from about
John’s reign (1199-1216), a ‘license to crenellate’ became necessary for all who
wished to fortify a residence. ‘Machicolations’, floor apertures over gateways or
between corbels of parapets, through which beseigers might be assailed with mis-
siles, came progressively into use during the century. Castle gateways assumed an
ever-increasing importance, and after mid-century, virtually supplanted the keep
as the primary stronghold, though keeps with round or quatrefoil plans continued
to be built for a time, chiefly in Wales and in the north. The grandest of all castles,
representing the peak of mediaeval achievement, are those of Edward I (1272-1307),
built after the conquest of Wales in 1282, together with one, Caerphilly, built a
score of years earlier (1267-77).
Beaumaris, Anglesey (1283-1323) (p. 441C), with its concentric plan, is
typical and perhaps the most perfect among them. It has inner and outer baileys,
massive curtains and mural towers and two great gateways, all enclosed by a moat.
Another concentric Welsh castle is Harlech (1283-90) (p. 441D). Caernarvon
(1283-1323) and Conway (1283-9) are less regular in plan and have only single—
yet mighty—defences. The main gateways of such castles, powerful though they
are, were further protected by outworks or ‘barbicans’.
ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

Bodiam Castle, Sussex (1386). See p. 443

440 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

A. Castle Hedingham, Essex: B. Orford Castle, Suffolk:

Keep (c. 1140). See p. 438 Keep (1166-72). See p. 438

c. Tattershall Castle, Lincs: Keep (1436-46). See p. 444

 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 441

eh
ee ‘

A. Dromore Castle, N. Ireland B. Restormel Castle, Cornwall

(c. 1180). See p. 437 (12th cent. and later). See p. 438

agree
c. Beaumaris Castle, Anglesey D. Harlech Castle, Merionethshire
(1283-1323). See p. 438 (1283-90). See p. 438

E. Bolton Castle, Yorkshire F. Deal Castle, Kent

(c. 1380). See p. 443 (c. 1540). See p. 444
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE >

_sl
STOKESAY vate ee SHIROPSHLURE:

(A)oreat HALL « TOWER

FROM COURT
Early 13th cent.
c1280-¢1292
12% - c1300
Late 16th. cent
Modern

EXTERIOR INTERIOR

(Due IN G™ HALL () PLAN "P22... 2... FIREPLACE IN N. ROOM

ACNILWOR TT CASTLE. WARWICKSHIRE

KITCHEN

a?
: :
Lf
THE KEEP

a: 3)’.
2"
LOWER WARD

STABLES—’
ui HT
ail
==
me
Tn=—==s5——

p LEICESTER'S
P BUILDINGS
SS PO S=

FREBLACE INT HALL NE PLAN |* capes

 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 443

Castles in general now were often located on low-lying sites, with moats or other
water defences, rather than on inconvenient eminences. In the quieter regions
there was a growing tendency to risk safety for comfort, and from about 1250,
fortified manor houses were in process of becoming a popular alternative to full-
scale castles.
Stokesay Castle, Shropshire (c. 1280-1300) (p. 442) is an instance. It has an
essentially domestic plan, of a kind rapidly becoming typical, and only the modest
protection afforded by a crenellated polygonal tower, moat, curtain wall and gate-
way (the latter rebuilt c. 1570). The northern tower, erected in the early thirteenth
century, has a jettied, half-timber third storey with seventeenth century windows.
Decorated period. During the fourteenth century, the great gateway remained a
chief feature of castles, though becoming more domestic and less military in
purpose as time passed; increasingly, its accommodation was associated with that of
other domestic and ancillary buildings ranged round the castle walls. By mid-
century, the great day of mediaeval strongholds may be said to have passed, and by
its end, the typical castle of central and southern England was a rectangle of build-
ings arranged around a court, the surviving military function being recognized by
thickened outer walls, towers at the angles and sometimes at the centre of each side
too, except where the gatehouse lay. Around the whole was usually the moat.
Bodiam Castle, Sussex (1386) (p. 439B), though built for coastal defence, is on
this plan, while Maxstoke, Warwickshire (1346), a defended manor, is similar
except in its thin, low walls and the fact that its domestic buildings line only a
portion of the circuit. Even in the more unsettled parts of the country, castles were
of similar, courtyard type—the windows looking inward—but more formidably
strong, high and compact; as Bolton, Yorkshire (c. 1380) (p. 441E), another
fortified manor, with five-storey angle towers.
Kenilworth Castle, Warwickshire (p. 442), particularly interesting in repre-
senting many periods of construction, was brought approximately to the courtyard
form in this century by buildings erected (1392) by John of Gaunt, which included
a magnificent banqueting-hall, with dais, screens, kitchen and other offices. The
Norman keep (1160-80) formed part of the circuit, and between 1200-60, a large
outer bailey had been added, with various towers on its walls, the moat reconstructed
and a large lake formed to protect the whole. This concentric castle had withstood a
stern siege in 1266. Subsequently, Henry VIII made his contribution to the
buildings, and during the reign of Elizabeth the Earl of Leicester built the great
northern gatehouse and erected the portion known as Leicester’s buildings in 1571.
Raby Castle, Durham, a manor for which a licence to crenellate was received in
1378, has a fine vaulted kitchen, which as was quite usual in mediaeval great
dwellings stood detached as a precaution against fire.
Perpendicular period. During the fifteenth century, such few further great castles
as were constructed still more insistently followed the rectangular plan, the
precursor of the wholly residential Tudor mansion. Herstmonceux, Sussex
(1441), although built for coastal defence, is no exception. It is a spectacular,
moated structure of red brick with stone dressings, with a charming gatehouse
bearing quite unmilitary windows. Due to the development of fire artillery,
defences on the old lines were obsolescent; gun ports now supplemented arrow
slits. Fortified manors, sufficient against local disorders, were far more frequent
than castles.
Raglan ‘Castle’, Monmouthshire (c. 1430-69) is an exceptionally elaborate
instance of a fortified manor, as it occupied a strategic location. Its apartments are
arranged informally around twin courtyards, the hall, with its attendant private
and service rooms, dividing the courts. Nearby is a massive, moated tower, linked
444 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

to the private apartments by a light bridge. Others among the many fortified
manors are Wingfield, Derbyshire (1441-55) and Ashby-de-la-Zouch, Leicester-
shire, (1474). In the north of England, where conditions were for long unsettled,
‘tower-houses’ and their smaller versions, the ‘pele-towers’, were the appropriate
response.
Warkworth Castle, Northumberland (p. 445), has a remarkable tower-house
keep built at this time (c. 1400) upon an old Norman motte. The plan is rectangular,
with a cruciform internal subdivision which occasions bold projections on each of
the four sides. Spacious apartments are arranged around a small central air-shaft or
‘lantern’, the entrance and stores being on the ground floor, the hall and ancillary
rooms and the chapel on the first floor, and the chambers on the second. The hall
is 41 ft long, 25 ft wide and rises through two floors. Buildings of many periods
(twelfth-sixteenth century) lay in the shovel-shaped bailey to the south of the
tower; these already included splendid domestic accommodation, of which the very
full suite in the tower was a duplication. The church in the bailey, commenced in
the fifteenth century, apparently was never completed.
Tattershall, Lincolnshire (1436-46) (pp. 440C, 445), a five-storey tower-house
about 112 ft high, built of excellent brickwork, is rectangular in plan, with angle
turrets. Its commodious apartments are compressed into a solid block reminiscent
of the old keeps. It stands on the edge of a moated inner bailey of a thirteenth-
century castle.
Tudor period. Castle building now was drawing to a close, and some of the older
structures already falling into ruin. There were few new constructions of first rank,
save for a fine series of artillery forts along the south coast, numbering about
twenty, built after 1540, in the time of Henry VIII. These, however, were purely
military, not also dwellings. Deal, (p. 441F) and Walmer, both in Kent, are
examples. Occasional fortified manors were built in the south, such as Thornbury,
Gloucestershire (1511-21); and in the north a number of tower-houses and many
pele-towers, the latter well-suited to provide havens in sudden border forays. Yet
even these steadily acquired accretions at their bases, for pleasanter living.

MANOR HOUSES
One of the earliest types of dwelling in England was the aisled hall, known well
before Roman times. Originally the chief form of tribal building, its social status
declined temporarily in the Romano-British period, when it might be used in
relation to a villa as servants’ quarters, as an outbuilding or barn. In Anglo-Saxon
times it could be on the one hand a palace or mansion or on the other a husband-
man’s steading, accommodating corn and fodder in the ‘nave’, oxen and horses in
the ‘aisles’ and living quarters in the end opposite the entrance. In the Norman
period the aisled timber building definitely emerged as a manorial type of residential
hall, in each case forming almost the sole accommodation for living, eating and
sleeping, privacy not being considered important. Supplementary accommodation,
for cooking, stabling and the like was separate and relatively lightly built. The
manor was a Norman feudal institution serving for local rural governance, and
carrying rights over an extent of land and its tenants. Though the manor house was
non-military in purpose, it for long needed defences against forays, disturbances
and robbers, and thus was often moated and lightly protected. As time elapsed,
standards of convenience and comfort developed, and certain of the original
functions of the common hall were dispersed to separate rooms, so that the hall
became less important, and building plans more elaborate. Norman castle building
led to the use of a second type of manor house, placed on a first floor and thus
usually in stone; eventually it merged with the first, during and after the late
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 445

VARK WORTH CASTLE: NORTHUMBERLAND

ly
=
(yA i
ia
Nh iG
oat Py

- be
| Stee ||

On; a

THE GATEHOUSE
Pe

2D eatOME Sian5O mu Sun OOMNIZSEs

ie =, Se: i

TT
al

= {
iy, SarSache ry|

HALL CHIMNEY-PIE —— pe IEC Fe * SECOND

- FLOOR

AUDIENCE CHAMBER— WIN

ON FIRST FLOOR PLANS RECESS IN HALL CORRIDOR
 446 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

MEDLZAVAL MANOR HOUSES

S. MARY'S GUILD BOOTHBY
LINCOLN (oemay) PAGNELL (i

CHARNEY-BASSET: BERKS | meh) feweea)

i
a Vad
at
he r ain
SS

THE SOLAR “£aH PLAN

ii) = <=
I ’ A I;‘iS
‘<= = Ss\|=

ik: r
\~ Wa ih <

=
SSS

———
S———

pik 3gCHAPEL FIRST FL.PLAN CHAPEL & TOWER STAIRS

 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 447
thirteenth century. Because of the building material, this class has tended to survive
more often than the timber ground-floor type. It is also to be noted that there
were important differences in methods of structure—particularly of timber roofs
—between south-eastern and north-western England, the dividing line being
approximately the oolitic limestone belt (see inset map, p. 379), where hybrid types
developed, as also in general in the Midlands.
Norman period. Such few examples as remain are mostly in the south-east. They
have suffered variously drastic modifications. In the majority, stone-built, the
domestic accommodation is raised on a first floor, over an ‘undercroft’ or storage
‘cellar’, this type probably reflecting contemporary castle-keep arrangements.
Boothby Pagnell, Lincs. (p. 446c), S. Mary’s Guild, Lincoln (p. 4468) and the
Norman House, Christchurch, Hants. (p. 446A), are instances. On the first floor
there might be little more than the one room, the hall, or additionally a smaller
private chamber or ‘solar’, at the opposite end to the entrance. Cooking was
probably done outdoors, and supplementary accommodation provided in frail
shelters elsewhere in the enclosure. The second type, often wholly in timber, was
a ‘nave-and-aisles’ single-storey structure, like a very simple church, all ancillary
needs being provided for separately, as before. Roofs in general were of the ‘trussed-
rafter’ kind typical in the south-east, lacking a ridge-piece; in the north-west, there
normally were principals spaced down the length of the building, carrying purlins
and a heavy ridge.
Early English. In the thirteenth century it was still necessary to retain some
defensive character, and many licences to ‘crenellate’ or fortify manor houses were
granted by Henry III. Most of the known examples, numbering about thirty-six,
are again in the south-east or in central England, the ground-floor type of hall now
being the more frequent and plainly gaining in favour. Plans varied quite a little,
and had not yet settled down to what was to be the orthodox disposition in the later
Middle Ages. Houses with the first floor hall might yet have only the single upper
room, be sub-divided to provide a solar, or have the solar as a conjoined room
whether on the same axis or placed crosswise; sometimes a chapel is the sole
adjunct or there is a latrine chamber too. There are other variants; but the most
significant development is the alliance of the two-storey block with a ground-floor
hall of stone or timber, in which case the upper room becomes a solar, and its
undercroft provides ‘service’ rooms (for food preparation and storage and domestic
utensils) to the great common hall. The more pretentious, though not all, of the
ground floor halls remained aisled, and in some cases one end was partitioned to
form a service room or rooms, with perhaps a solar above them, reached by stairs
from the hall or externally, the whole being under one roof. Thus the two types of
manor-house plan tended to merge. Kitchens normally were separate, outdoors at
the inferior or ‘lower’ end of the hall. Late in the century, as illustrated again at
Stokesay (p. 442E), by the 1280-92 additions, there was a new and important
move towards establishing the solar at the superior or ‘upper’ end of the hall,
raised over a storage basement or ‘cellar’, leaving the service rooms at the lower end
intact, along with what then became an extra private or sleeping chamber over.
This scheme, double tier at either end of the hall, the whole under one roof, became
very popular for the smaller mansions in the south-east after the middle of the next
century. As in the Norman period, ground floor halls had a central hearth for an
open fire or brazier—actually slightly nearer the upper end—the smoke escaping by
a louvre in the roof timbers above, or through small gablets at the two ends of the
roof apex in the case of hipped roofs. In the case of the two-floored manor houses,
wall fireplaces had been in use since late Norman times (as at Boothby Pagnell,
see above); when they are not present, braziers would have served. Windows, often
448 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

transomed, grew larger, and there was some use of glass, though wooden shutters
still were normal. Main floors were of stone or tiles, upper floors of wood (or stone,
if over vaults), inferior apartments of rammed earth.
Little Wenham Hall, Suffolk (c. 1270-80) (pp. 380, 446), the best-preserved
manor-house of the period, is of brick, with stone and flint dressings. The plan
(p. 446M) is L-shaped, comprising a small chapel adjoining a first-floor hall, both
standing over stone-floored storage undercrofts having quadripartite brick vaults
carried on stone ribs. The hall has fine, two-light foliated ‘sitting-windows’ on each
wall (p. 446H, K); its tiled floor and chestnut beamed ceiling are sixteenth century.
The entrance to the vaulted chapel is flanked by traceried openings (p. 446L), and
from it opens a turret-stair in the re-entrant angle (p. 446N) leading down to the
undercrofts and up to a room over the chapel which was probably a solar.
Charney Basset Manor House, Berkshire (c. 1280) (p. 446), can only be
definitely ascribed to the thirteenth century as regards the two-storey south wing,
but it is clear that this has always been a solar block, originally built in relation to a
ground-floor hall, perhaps aisled, occupying a position similar to that shown on
the plan (p. 446F). Such a combination of hall and first floor solar represents an
important development. The undercroft to the solar probably afforded the service
accommodation to the hall; the kitchen, however, would be external, reached by a
passage running across the nearer part of the hall. Solar and chapel are timber
floored; the roof timbers of the chapel (p. 446G) are not original; those over the
solar (p. 455C) are genuine, and interesting in that they demonstrate the fundaments
of south-eastern roof structure. There is no true principal; a cambered tie-beam
supports a ‘crown-post’ (or ‘king-post’—the first term is preferable for the type)
which, with the aid of struts, carries a ‘collar-purlin’ running longitudinally to
stiffen the ridgeless pairs of trussed rafters. The system is quite different from that
at Stokesay Hall (p. 4428), which showsa north-western method by which arch-braced
principals carry a ridge and side purlins on their backs.
Other examples are Little Chesterford, Essex (c. 1225), a stone, two-floor solar
block, crosswise to an aisled, ground floor timber hall; and Warnford, Hampshire
(‘King John’s House’) (early thirteenth century), a flint-walled ground-floor hall,
with columned aisles, from which one end is divided by a wall to form a service
room.
Decorated period. The larger manor houses of the fourteenth century were
generally castellated, and the greatest assumed a quadrangular plan, as did the
castles of the period (p. 443), and had a central courtyard entered through a gate-
house, protected by a portcullis and drawbridge over a moat around the whole
group of buildings. The typical manor was smaller, and much more compact,
nevertheless normally standing in its walled or moated enclosure. In all, however,
the essentials were much the same, for a common type had now been established,
centred on a ground-floor hall, and only the lesser manor houses maintained the
former immature types of disposition. Typically, a porched entrance led to a
passage which crossed the lower end of the hall to a second doorway in the opposite
wall, the passage being separated from the hall by a screen with two doors or open-
ings, while on its other side there were three doors into the service rooms. The
term ‘screens’ is applied to the whole of this passage, which sometimes was ceiled,
and allowed a minstrels’ gallery above. Such galleries, popular from the fifteenth
century, were often added to older buildings. The screens originated in projecting
timber spurs or ‘speres’, giving protection against draughts from the doors; they
were often connected to a roof principal which defined the passage, and which
consequently is known as the ‘spere-truss’. The hall was the whole height of the
house, and at its further end was a shallow platform or dais, a feature which had
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 449

ACE. KENT.

GREAT
HALL
HEARTH

= COURT E
oe ee
ORIGINAL vyELIZABETHAN
) 20 40 FT BUILDING, ZlADDITIONS.

GROUND PLAN D DETAIL OF CHIMNEYS BLOCK PLAN

HADDON HALL
AM
DERBYSHIRE. |
NO i
nae
iiae
‘ “hteithee
im ine et
nd , ne i ut
iie a
Sy
Su
ae:‘ Re | We
tt ik if

7 i |
i

Eval
=e iat
bat!
,
fifi as a
sa &

stot
FROM S.W. LIST OF DATES
-HAPEL
ae RagOF
1070
TO
= 1250

BANQUETING HALL
H.O,A,
 450 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

GREAT CHALFIELD:D. WILTSHIRE

OPENINGS \ FINIAL
(A IN HALL yy € )TO SMALL
GABLES

——— =-3k
33"
8H
[==
===

Ys
me
}
+

D ty

Ee |
1K
en)

100

| GREAT HALL
}2 DINING ROOM
fi} 3. WITHDRAWING RMS,
|4 LAUNDRY
5 ENTRANCE
= is Fe]
j \7 BREAKFAST RM.
Ali’ 8. SERVANTS’ HALL
9 BAKERY
'10 KITCHEN
\ 11 BUTTERY

meine i
Oi:THE GATEWAY
WITH BRIDGE ACROSS MOAT THE GATEWAY rrow cou
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 451

made its appearance in earlier times. The solar block now regularly stood at the
upper end of the hall, but the solar itself now became known as the withdrawing-
room; from its still usual position on the upper floor, a spyhole could allow the
master to survey the hall below (p. 450A, F). In important houses, a lady’s bower and
additional rooms indicate an increased desire for privacy, and a chapel in this wing
would have a gallery for the master and his family, while the retainers were below.
The hall, which attained its greatest development in this century, was still a
sleeping room for the retainers and had its floor strewn with rushes and its walls
hung with tapestries and trophies of the-chase. Glazed windows were as yet rare.
Though wall fireplaces with hooded canopies were increasingly common, the hall
sometimes still had a central hearth for an open fire or brazier burning turf, wood or
charcoal, and a smoke louvre in the roof, as at Penshurst (p. 449) (1341-8). In this
great hall the Lord of the Manor held his court and administered justice, and here
too, on the dais, the family dined at the high table, while at long tables in the body of
the hall his vassals took their meals. The dais sometimes had a lofty bay window
which gave additional dignity to this part of the hall. Of the three doorways in the
‘screens’ on the side away from the hall, the central one led by a passage to the kit-
chen, still often detached from the main building, in case of fire, and in such case
connected by a covered way. Another door gave on to the buttery (Fr. bouteille =
bottle, from which the word butler, i.e. bottler, is derived) and the third on to the
pantry (Fr. pain =bread), where butter, cheese, and bread, as well as platters and
salt-cellars, were kept. In a large house, the larder (Jardarium), in which the meats
were larded or preserved, was an important adjunct and formed a store room.
Other examples are Ightham Mote, Kent, (p. 4538); Baguley, Cheshire;
Smithills, near Bolton, Lancs; and Sutton Courtenay, Berks, which illustrates
a type of development of the south-eastern trussed-rafter roof (p. 500c), having an
arch-braced part principal. Other south-eastern experiments with roof principals
led to the hammer-beam roof (p. 434), of which that of the Hall of Westminster
Palace (1397-9) (pp. 437, 500) rivals in magnificence any ecclesiastical work of
the ki
Perpendicular period. In spite of the Wars of the Roses, the fifteenth century
witnessed an improvement in social conditions and commercial prosperity. This
was duly reflected in the architecture of manor houses by further provision for
domestic comfort. The hall, with fine bay-window, canopied fireplace, and open
timber roof, continued to be the principal feature; furniture was still scanty, trestle
tables were in use, and the floor was only covered with rushes or matting. The
withdrawing-room and lady’s bower were now used only as sitting-rooms, while
bedrooms increased in number, and the hall ceased to be the general dormitory.
The kitchens at Stanton Harcourt, Oxon., and New College, Oxford, show the
importance frequently given to this department, to which, besides buttery, pantry,
and larder, were now added a scullery, bakehouse, brewhouse, and dairy, while
corn mills, granaries, and stables became more numerous. East Barsham Manor
House, Norfolk (c. 1500-15), with a fine detached gatehouse, has turrets and
ornate chimneys showing the early use of brick in England.
Great Chalfield Manor House, Wilts. (c. 1450) (p. 450), is a singularly pictur-
esque example, though much restored. It is almost surrounded by a moat and forms
part of a group of church, house, and stables, approached across the bridge and
under the gateway which leads into the forecourt. It had no fortifications, as it
stood in the peaceful county of Wiltshire. The groined two-storeyed porch leads
through the screens to a typical hall (about 36 ft by 20 ft 6 in and 20 ft high) with
bay-window and panelled ceiling of wood and plaster (p. 450F). There are also
curious masked openings (p. 450A, B) through which those in the upper chambers at
452 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

either end could look down into the hall; and west of the screens are the kitchen and
offices. The facade has two oriel windows (p. 450B, D), and gables with fine carved
finials (p. 450C). This delightful group, somewhat resembling that at South
Wraxall (p. 456C), is typical of the homeliness of English manor houses.
Oxburgh Hall, Norfolk (1482) (p. 450), is a fine specimen of brickwork, but it
has been partly restored. The plan is quadrangular, with buildings round a court
surrounded by a moat. The magnificent brick gatehouse is flanked by towers, seven
storeys high, and is reached across a bridge which spans the moat, and leads to a
courtyard and on to the great hall through the usual screens (destroyed 1778). The
King’s Room (p. 450H) in the gateway tower is said to have been occupied by
Henry VII in 1487.
Haddon Hall, Derbyshire (p. 449), nestling on a hill-side amidst pastoral
scenery, is famous both from historical associations and architectural interest.
Dating from the Norman period onwards, its plan (p. 449H) somewhat resembles an
Oxford or Cambridge college (p. 476), for the banqueting-hall, of the fourteenth
century, is between the two courts, while the long gallery, south of the upper court,
is Elizabethan (p. 881). The stepped entrance in the north-west angle is in an
unusual position, with no driving way, and reminds us that in the Mediaeval period
riding on horseback was a usual mode of travelling, but a carriage entrance leads
into the upper court. The banqueting-hall, with its fine windows, great fireplace,
and open timber roof, together with the long gallery (pp. 882, 884A) and the
severe and simple chapel, give one a good idea of this stately, semi-fortified manor
house amid its balustraded terraces and raised gardens.
Hever Castle, Kent (rebuilt 1462) (p. 454A), with moat and drawbridge, and
South Wraxall Manor House, Wiltshire (1440) (p. 456c), show the change
from the fortified type to the later dwelling-house. Rufford Hall, Lancs. (fifteenth
century), of which little survives except the wonderfully fine hall, is a rare instance
in which a movable screen, shielding the approach to kitchen, still survives (p.
457A), and at its upper end has a canopied tester (p. 457B) which lent extra dignity to
the high table. The Bishop’s Palace, Wells, though a semi-ecclesiastical building,
has a fortified wall with gatehouse and moat, while the old Archbishop’s Palace,
Croydon, still retains its fine timber roof. Cothay Manor House, Somerset (1480)
(p. 454C), is a gem of the period.
Tudor period. Manor houses of the first half of the sixteenth century were princi-
pally erected by new and wealthy trading families, who were taking the place of the
old nobility, while the suppression of monasteries by Henry VIII provided him
with both money and lands with which to enrich his favourites, who vied with one
another in the building of fine houses. The Tudor house, with its increased number
and variety of rooms, was usually still built round a quadrangular court from which
many rooms were entered direct. Under the changed conditions such features as
battlemented parapets and fortified gateways were retained for ornament rather
than defence, while the addition of numerous ornamented chimneys is evidence of
the increased comfort within (p. 458A). The entrance to the quadrangle was under a
gatehouse, opposite which on the other side of the court was the porch leading to
the ‘screens’ of the great hall, which now definitely declined in importance, owing
to the addition of other rooms, and also to the reduction by legal enactments of
military retainers. The hall, however, still remained a feature on which much
artistic skill was lavished, and this is seen especially in the richly carved wall fire-
place, oak-panelled walls, and timber roof, while the furniture, which became more
plentiful, followed, as in previous periods, the architectural style (p. 519D, E, F, M).
We now first hear of such additional rooms as the study, summer and winter parlours,
and private dining-rooms; while bedrooms, though often only ‘thoroughfare’
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 453

A. Ightham Mote, Kent: hall (14th century). From a 19th century litho-
graph by Joseph Nash. See p. 451

B. Ightham Mote: chapel (c. 1520-7). See pp. 451, 469

454 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

i ee Ec ios 2

c. Cothay Manor House, Somerset (1480). See p. 452

 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 455

A. Athelhampton Hall, Dorset (c. 1485-1509): the courtyard. From a 19th

century lithograph by Joseph Nash. See p. 459

B. Compton Wynyates: hall c. Charney Bassett Manor

with screens and minstrels’ House, Berks (c. 1280) : the solar.
gallery (1520). See p. 459 See p. 448
456 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

hy
fm
bat.

: VAS

c. South Wraxall Manor House, Wilts: S.W. front (1440). See p. 452
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

: BE “eaeaaneenn:
ee ee g SSRBREEEEEG7 :
PURE
RR T8275
|| @¢ ee re
PUL OOUTQUUODIE
r
A. Lower end, with movable screen B. Upper end, with canopied tester
Rufford Hall, Lancs: interior (15th cent.). See p. 452

c. Sutton Place, Guildford: entrance to hall (1523). See p. 463

 458 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

COMPTON WYNYATEES
WARWICKSHIRE

=f 1) ceoRGIAN
ADDITION

WINDOW wCOURT (C)pLAN

SUTTON DPLACE : SURREY

a al ere |

20 ff i : al —2@
5 rT 2 — oo E

. I" “B el,
10 fj ' COURT
LSeuinl B Wea lt é al
SY A TL IME SEW =o Lo |CHAPEL =
is Ns
‘ ihe i hy io f bear +a «4 j
aN. aa | OL : alk

INTERIOR OF BAY
= ee Sa

GROUND PLAN (H)SWANGLEOFCOURT

SS
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 459

rooms, were increased. Hengrave Hall, Suffolk (1538) (p. 4548), had no
fewer than forty bedrooms, and an inventory includes, besides kitchen offices,
pastry-room, laundry, linen-room, and still-rooms, in addition to those of the
previous period. Gardens were now laid out on definite architectural plans to form
fitting frames for the houses, with paved alleys, yew hedges, stone steps, and
balustraded terraces.
Athelhampton Hall, Dorset (p. 455A), is a very fine Tudor structure, dating
from the reign of Henry VII, and its notable features are the gatehouse (with oriel
window), since destroyed, the beautiful octagonal bay-window of the hall, and the
projecting porch, with its pointed archway. The hall, which measures about 38 ft
by 22 ft, is of the usual type, with bay-window, panelled walls, and open timber
roof.
Bramhall Hall, Cheshire (p. 456a), dating from the fifteenth century and later,
is one of the many half-timber houses of Cheshire. Its bay-window is characteristic,
but the hall (36 ft by 26 ft) is somewhat peculiar in being only 12 ft high. It has some
beautiful leaded glass, but the pendant plaster ceiling no longer exists.
Speke Hall, Lancashire (p. 4568), is one of the best-preserved half-timber
houses so characteristic of this part of England, and owes its charm to the dis-
position of the timbers, the quatrefoil filling, and the carved barge-boards and
finials, which are in marked contrast to the style of brick and stone buildings.
Compton Wynyates, Warwickshire (1520) (pp. 455B, 458), one of the finest of
Tudor mansions, was completed by Sir William Compton, a London merchant and
favourite of Henry VIII. The entrance, under a low square battlemented tower, has
a four-centred archway, surmounted by a three-light mullioned window. Opposite
the entrance, on the other side of the court, are the screens, with the minstrels’
gallery over (p. 455B), and these give access to the buttery and kitchens, and to the
hall with its bay-window (p. 458B). South of the court are the drawing-room and
chapel, while numerous turret stairs communicate with upper rooms. East of the
hall are the eighteenth-century additions. The exterior shows a charming mingling
of red brick, stone, and half-timber work, to which time has given beautiful and
varied tints.
Hampton Court Palace (pp. 460, 46I1E, 923) is one of the most remarkable
domestic buildings in this country, and much of it (p. 460G) remains as built from
c. 1520 for Cardinal Wolsey (1472-1530) from the designs of the chief mason, Henry
Redman. Fitted with gorgeous furniture and tapestries, the palace seems to have
excited so much royal envy that in 1526 the Cardinal made it over to Henry VIII,
who between 1531-6 added north and south wings to the west front and the Great
Hall and the Chapel, the designer then being John Molton, royal mason and
successor of Redman at Hampton Court, who died in 1528. The eastern portion
however, was pulled down by Sir Christopher Wren and rebuilt in the Renaissance
style (pp. 914,923). The palace has a delightful position on Thames-side (p. 460H),
with the grand avenue through Bushey Park intended by Wren as an approach to
the Great Hall, while on the east are the radiating avenues and Long Water. The
original part of the palace is of mellow red brickwork, in diaper pattern, with
battlemented parapets. The smaller courts and the Tudor chimneys (p. 460C) well
exemplify the beauty of brick architecture in the time of Wolsey. Its ancient walls
are invested with the glamour of kings and queens, poets and scholars, courtiers and
ecclesiastics; they testify to the vanished pomp and glory of bygone ages. Entering
by the Trophy Gates on the west, we pass through an outer court on to the bridge,
over the ancient moat which surrounded the palace, and on through the great gate-
house (p. 378), with angle turrets, oriel window, and terra-cotta medallions of Roman
emperors obtained by Wolsey from the sculptor Majano (p. 380). Underneath
 460 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

i |
i if 14 |
iti ii i
SMH
rTT1 fr |
f 1 z
Wy ae Uy
Paes
|

EP

FLOWER-POT GaTES (ELINTERIOR ® GREAT HALL (Heney vi)

y DD ae
MOLY HENRY < WEEE Res“. SS cy “ Ss 0,500,

Lilli, | Ne : CHAPEL . DIANA;: // @ a (O00

10p F

Ys
La - S FOUNTAIN Pp:
y YURERVY I NCOURT iN
IN) MI-CARDINAL. WOLSEYA\\Learn dS
yy es \GREAT HALLS
AHENRY VIUIS
[Harel -
SS

+ CLOCK

és PleAN wari
FEET 100,
a
50,0 190 == HOWING WREN'
METRES O 10 20 30 40 50 i560 ROPOSED UAY-O0
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 461

Gres CEILING
STONE, CHIMNEY PIECE
S.JAMESS PALACE :LONDON
WATCHING CHAMBER :HAMPTON C?

\APPERTON
1ANOR HOUSE

=
Oe:
Om
HALNAKER :SUSSEX

| erPs
a SKIPTON

* ; OORWAY TAEATAMA
\ ELLING: MELCOMBE HORSEY CHANTMARLE: AGS | IRE BACK: COWDRAY: SUSSEX
462 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

A. Layer Marney Towers, Essex: B. S. James’s Palace: Tudor gateway.

entrance tower (c. 1520). See p. 463 See p. 394

ZW!
V/ ae

c. Little Moreton Hall, Cheshire: courtyard (1550-9). See p. 463

 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 463

the gateway to the Clock Court (p. 460A) steps lead to the Great Hall of Henry
VIII (106 ft by 40 ft, and 60 ft high) (p. 460E), entered as usual through screens. Its
walls are hung with tapestry, and the hammer-beam roof, by James Nedeham, is one
of the richest of its type. This hall still retains its dais, and an oriel window (p. 460F)
which forms a great feature of the exterior of the hall seen from the Clock Court
(p. 461E), so called from a curious astronomical clock over one of its gateways. To
the east of the Great Hall is the so-called Watching Chamber, with its plaster
ceiling (p. 461C), and still farther east is the Tudor chapel with linen-fold panelling,
Renaissance altar-piece, and coloured pendant roof. The famous Fountain Court,
surrounded by cloisters, and the Ionic colonnade (1690) in the Clock Court are
striking and restrained examples of the art of Sir Christopher Wren, and near the
latter a grand staircase leads to the state rooms (now the picture galleries) in the
east facade (p. 460B). On the south of the palace, extending to the river, are
the Privy Garden, with its handsome iron gates by Tijou, and the Pond Garden, and
to the north is the wilderness and Flower Pot Gates (p. 460D). Since the time of
George II, Hampton Court has ceased to be a royal residence, but comprises suites
of rooms for fortunate pensioners of the Crown.
Sutton Place, Guildford (1523-5) (pp. 457C, 458), was built by Sir Richard
Weston, a trusted counsellor of Henry VIII. The plan was quadrangular, formerly
entered through a central gateway which has been demolished. The entrance to the
great hall, placed centrally on the axis of the former gateway, is an early instance of a
desire for symmetry as opposed to convenience, and is flanked by bay windows in
the corner of the facade. The terra-cotta work shows the influence of Italian
Renaissance, as in the delicate flowering in the hollows of the mullions (p. 4578).
Other typical examples are Layer Marney Towers, Essex (c. 1500-25) (pp. 380,
462A), Horham Hall, Essex (1502-20), Barrington Court, Somerset (1514-48),
and Little Moreton Hall, Cheshire (1550-9) (p. 462C), with its long gallery,
75 ft by 12 ft 6 in, sometimes regarded as an early Renaissance building.
Elizabethan mansions of the latter half of the sixteenth century, though incor-
porating new features, are based on Tudor models (pp. 868, 881).

SMALLER HOMES
The feudal system provided quarters for vassals and retainers within the castle
walls, and in a similar manner monastic communities lodged their dependents and
labourers in various conventual buildings, and both these great mediaeval institu-
tions not only housed their dependents, but also protected them against marauders
and outlaws. As population increased and conditions changed, more accommodation
was required, and, nestling close under the protecting walls of the castles, primitive
dwellings were erected to meet the simple requirements of an unexacting age, and as
commerce expanded these tenements increased in number and were formed into
thriving trading towns. Townships also grew up round the wealthy monasteries
which formed refuges in case of danger, and these rising communities waxed strong
enough to enter into conflict with the monastic authorities under whose protection
they had developed. In some of these new towns the interests of the feudal lord
conflicted with those of the mitred abbot, and this resulted in divided allegiance, as
in Rochester, which is an instance of a town which grew up under both castle and
monastery. The origin of these towns, with their consequent lack of municipal
freedom, is accountable for the absence of town halls which are such characteristic
buildings of the period in the free towns of Belgium, Italy and Germany. A typical
house of the town tradesman consisted of a shop with arched openings on to the
street, closed at night with hinged wooden shutters; there he plied his craft or sold
his wares, and above were his sleeping-rooms. The character of the buildings
 464 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

= THE SWALLER HUMES

(H)cousTon’s HOUSE: BRSTOL-GLOS THE MIDDLE HOUSE: MAYFIELD: SUSSE)

 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 465

B. Farm at Bishop’s Frome, Herefordshire. See p. 469.

(Timber wing c. 1400, centre c. 1575, further wing c. 1625)
466 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

caiatnciinson
Sicha
”

A. House at Colchester, Essex (late 15th century). See p. 469

B, Farm at Maiden Newton, Dorset (16th cent.). See p. 469

 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 467

B. Small house with crucks, Putley, c. Small house at Normanton-on-

Herefordshire. See p. 469 Soar, Nottinghamshire.
See p. 469
0] Z oO 4 nq = jaa) Q Ss jaa > < 4 <x a4 O a a aa) O B 2) a4 aa]

King’s College chapel, Cambridge (1446-1515).

Choir looking W. See p. 398
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 469

depended on local conditions and the materials at hand. Thus in stone districts
town houses were solid and substantial, and the Jew’s House, Lincoln (early
twelfth century) (p. 464A), is a splendid relic which has come down from Norman
times. In the clay lowlands of East Anglia the local brick gives colour and warmth to
many a Mediaeval building. In districts where timber was plentiful, half-timber
houses were common, and the interesting group of Tudor Houses, Chiddingstone,
Kent (p. 4648); the Abbot’s House, Butcher’s Row, Shrewsbury (c. 1450)
(p. 464F) and a House at Tonbridge, Kent (p. 464c), give a good idea of the black
and white blending of beam and plaster, while Colston’s House, Bristol (p. 464H)
illustrates another interesting type. There are also many other houses of scarcely
less social importance such as the ‘Paycocke’s’, Coggeshall, Essex (c. 1500)
(p. 464D), and those at Finchingfield, Bletchingley (p. 464£, G) and Mayfield
(p. 464J), the latter somewhat after our period (1575).
In the country, besides castles and manor houses of the nobility and gentry,
there were the homesteads of small free-holders or yeomen of the Middle Ages,
which were based upon the manor-house model, having a centrally-placed hall or
‘house-part’, usually combining the function of kitchen in later days, flanked at one
end by service rooms and at the other by private rooms. A through passage crossed
the house at the ‘lower’ or service end of the hall. Wall fireplaces did not become
usual in yeomens’ houses until Tudor times, which then gave complete freedom to
add an upper floor. Up and down the country there still remain many picturesque
Mediaeval smaller houses as at Abbey Dore (p. 465A), Maiden Newton (p. 4668),
Colchester (p. 466A), Bishop’s Frome (p. 4658), Lavenham (p. 467A) and
Normanton-on-Soar (p. 467C), and that with crucks—a form of construction lim-
ited to the north-western halfofEngland—at Putley, Herefordshire (p. 4678). Such
houses were of much greater social importance in their time than would appear to-
day. The homes of the peasants were quite primitive and might have only one room.

CHAPELS
Chapels varied in treatment according to the type of building to which they were
attached and the special purpose for which they were erected, but a nave, to which
aisles were sometimes added, was common to all. Some were attached to royal
castles, as S. John’s Chapel (Tower of London) (p. 436c, D, E); to royal palaces, as
S. Stephen’s Chapel, Westminster (1349-64) (p. 560C); to manor houses, as
Compton Wynyates (p. 458D) and Ightham Mote (p. 4538); to colleges, such as
Merton College, Oxford (1274) (p. 482B), King’s College, Cambridge (1446-—
1515) (pp. 468, 470A, 475B), and S. John’s College, Cambridge (p. 476); to
schools, as Eton College (pp. 471, 477A); to ecclesiastical palaces, as Lambeth
Palace (1250); or to bridges, as at Wakefield (fourteenth century); while others
were designed as royal mortuary chapels, such as S. George’s Chapel, Windsor
(1473-1516) (p. 471) and Henry VII’s Chapel, Westminster (1503-19) (pp. 424D,
426), or mortuary chapels of noble families, such as the Beauchamp Chapel,
Warwick (1443-64) (p. 470B), which suggests Henry VII’s Chapel. The Pilgrim’s
Chapel. Houghton-le-Dale, Norfolk (1350) (p. 471), is a complete example.
Lady chapels in most of our English cathedrals form a church within a church,
as at York, Winchester, Salisbury (p. 410B, C, E), Worcester, Gloucester (p. 411A, C),
Exeter, S. Albans, Chichester (p. 412E, F, G), Chester, Lichfield, and Bristol
(p. 413F; J, K). The Chapels of the Nine Altars at Durham (p. 411£) and Fountains
Abbey (p. 432C), and the Trinity Chapel and ‘Becket’s Crown’, Canterbury (p.
41 1B), are unusual eastern terminations, due to special circumstances.
Chantry chapels were frequently endowed, previous to the Reformation, for the
saying of masses for the souls of the pious founders and their families. These
470 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE
— _ ~ “|

A. King’s College chapel, Cambridge (1446-1515) from S. See p. 469

B. S. Mary, Warwick: Beauchamp chapel, interior looking E. (1443-64). See p. 469

 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 471

Vm
-3}
—=
—=-
=-0=

ZAG Wea <—

\
Te ie <i
C.KITCHEN
UPTON
TOWER
OWER
‘SCHOOL
f-CHAPEL
g[ANTE
CHAPEL
h.ENTRANCE.
aa a i 3 28 i rit
ee el rp
pPecemereamecence

S.GEORGE’S CHAPEL: WINDSOR _

ego BORE : VIEW or COLLEGE (@

tg if} ES
Ral | Ih WZ Sy
Was O +
WANN Ah AyUse 7 hy iia)
\ Tats! (Wy A A in|
\I I if asd || 1) {I
) H Ws Tt I I
| TWAS NA Ta
i! Y | t ae I
Pa ihe 1 Int
A | ") af | |
h I | | ul
iy MW thy i Ht
] A r a3 z
alti >
at q WAN ZWW\
| 1) ! 4 Mea Aah AC i
] i H Hf ily ya |
i !
i
wt
if i i i
eeearaie ‘it
nH ree ft4) ;
Loni a9
i I

\
i ay MY) ype

Wy
/ Jap G Zi, Y
} cH Ar
OY?
Ye si
 72 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

CHANTRIES$ SHRINES & TOMBS

SAMRYCE, CHANTRY SALISY Cis

BISHOP BRIDPORT TONE: eceee
=P=a
ISLIPS CHAPE
CHAPEL: S. ALBANS eas

ll
il |
= Lig
i
ii
)
l ii
]
y

mm
Hh
fa
ae ‘ined
Lins
| | ae 6] ,

hil
Re
ae
Oe
Ta

ALBANS SHRINEA PLAN (Siens) THOS oeCAN

S. ALBANS ABBEY Be SHRINE nere

or
HENRY IIlS Tow
Gate raHe TOMBS in SANCTUARY: WESTMSE WESTMINSTER ABB
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 473
chapels were most numerous in abbeys and cathedrals where the privilege of burial
could only be obtained by some beneficent offering. In English cathedrals, chantry
chapels often occupied one or more bays in an aisle, and were enclosed by open
screens, Or were external additions to the original building, while others were
independent structures within the edifice. The Chantry Chapel, Worcester (1504)
(p.472D-F, H), erected toArthur, son of Henry VII,isa remarkably fine internal struc-
ture, of which the whole surface is covered, both externally and internally, with tracery,
and sculptured; while the roof is a fine specimen of fan vaulting in miniature. This
chapel never received the recumbent figure for which it was designed. The Chantry
Chapels, Tewkesbury Abbey, are famous for their number and richness. Among
many others elsewhere are the Ramryge Chantry Chapel, S. Albans (c. 1520)
(p. 472A), and Abbot Islip’s Chapel, Westminster (p. 472C); and Chaucer’s
Tomb, Westminster (p. 472K), with its prayer place and fine traceried canopy,
seems to be a rudimentary chantry.
Shrines also figured largely in English cathedrals, such as S. Alban’s Shrine,
S. Albans (p. 472G), and the Shrine of S. Thomas de Cantelupe, Hereford
(p. 472J), but many were destroyed at the Reformation.

COLLEGES
The University of Oxford appears to have been formed by English scholars from
the University at Paris, and it dates from about 1167, while that of Cambridge
(1209) arose through a migration from Oxford. Colleges were similar in general
equipment to monastic establishments, and were based on the plan of the Mediaeval
house, with hall and rooms grouped round a quadrangle; so that the colleges of
Oxford and Cambridge and the Inns of Court, London, still give a good idea of the
arrangement of hall, screens, and dais, with the bay-window and timber roof, of a
Mediaeval manor house.
Halls of residence, or colleges, for communities of teachers and students to
promote discipline and common interests date from the thirteenth century, and
approximate dates of the foundation of some Colleges are appended:
Oxford (p. 475A): University College, 1249; Balliol, 1263; Merton, 1264;
Exeter, 1314; Oriel, 1326; Queen’s, 1340 (rebuilt 1692-1716) (p. 963); New,
1379; Lincoln, 1427; All Souls’, 1438; Magdalen, 1458; Brasenose, 1509; Corpus
Christi, 1517; Christ Church, 1546; Trinity, 1555; S. John’s, 1555; and Jesus,
1571.
Cambridge (p. 475B): Peterhouse, 1284; Clare, 1326; Pembroke, 1347; Gonville
and Caius, 1348; Trinity Hall, 1350; Corpus Christi, 1352; King’s, 1441; Queens’,
1448; S. Catharine’s, 1473; Jesus, 1496; Christ’s, 1505; S. John’s, 1511; Magdalene,
1542; and Trinity, 1546.
S. John’s College, Cambridge (1511) (pp. 461B, 476), may be taken as typical
of the plan of Oxford and Cambridge Colleges, though they vary in size and lay-out.
The typical entrance gateway bears the arms of the founder, Lady Margaret
Beaufort (mother of Henry VII), and a statue of S. John, and, with its four angle
turrets, forms a fine outstanding feature of the College, which is of patterned
brickwork. To the left, on the upper floor, is the library, with its pointed windows,
while to the right is the chapel, since rebuilt by Sir George Gilbert Scott, and forming
the north side of the first court. Immediately opposite the entrance are(on the left) the
kitchen and butteries, and on the right the hall, with its pointed traceried windows,
buttresses, and large bay-windows. The second court, with its time-worn plum-red
bricks, and containing the Master’s Lodge, was added in 1598, and from this,
through a second gateway tower, is reached the third court, on the north side of
which is the second library, built in 1623, and on the west side is the Renaissance
474 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

loggia (1669). The remainder of the buildings round the three courts are students’
rooms, while from the third court the ‘Bridge of Sighs’ (1826) crosses the river to
the New Court and college grounds.

SCHOOLS
There were, according to Bede, schools in England in the seventh century, as early
as there were churches, but it appears that they were not monastic in origin, though
often associated with cathedrals and collegiate churches. The first were probably at
Canterbury (598), Dunwich, Rochester, and York (630), where Alcuin (Charle-
magne’s educational expert), a secular clerk and not a monk, was master in the
eighth century, and where later the ‘song’ school was divided from the original
‘srammar’ (i.e. for Latin classics) school. Then came the grammar school at
Winchester, which, we are told, was attended by one of the sons of King Alfred
‘with other boys of gentle birth’. From his time onwards there were many grammar
schools attached to cathedrals, churches, hospitals, and guilds. After his conquest of
the Danes (897) more schools were founded, as at Bedford, Derby, Stafford,
Bridgenorth, and Warwick, and even in 1123 the last appears to have been in
continuous existence for 400 years. Even King Canute is credited with establishing
schools, as at Bury S. Edmunds, while King Harold founded one at Waltham Cross.
These were pre-Conquest schools. After the Conquest the secular schoolmaster or
chancellor held a clearly defined position, and we find that in 1138 Henry the
Schoolmaster gave teaching licences for the City of London. There were also
grammar schools in towns founded by guilds—that at Louth is mentioned in 1276,
that at Stratford-on-Avon in 1295, and that at Boston in 1326, and it is recorded
that Thomas 4 Becket attended S. Paul’s School in 1127. Further schools followed
the increase of colleges at the Universities; and when William of Wykeham founded
New College, Oxford, he also started Winchester College (1382) (p. 477B) to feed
it, and this, the standard type of English public school, was followed by Henry VI
when he founded Eton (1440-1) (p. 477A). In addition to public grammar schools
and monastic schools for novices, a new type of charity schools sprang up in the
fourteenth century for choristers, as at Durham, Reading, Coventry, and West-
minster (1364), and the present Westminster public school was founded (1560) on
the model of other grammar schools, of which there were at least 200 before
Edward VI, while there were between 300 and 400 grammar schools, free and open
to all classes, in most towns by 1535. During the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries
other schools were kept by priests of newly endowed chantries, as at Oswestry
(1406), Middleton (1412), Durham (1414), Sevenoaks (1432), City of London
(1442), Alnwick (1448), Hull (1482), Chipping Campden (1487), Macclesfield
(1502), and S. Paul’s (1509). There were also schools of hospitals, as of Ewelme
(p. 480), and of S. John’s Hospital, Coventry (1545). With the reaction against the
secular clergy, some schools had fallen under monastic rule, and these suffered
severely at the Dissolution of the Monasteries (1536-40), so that it became neces-
sary to start further schools, as at Sutton Coldfield (1544) and Tonbridge
(1553). The Chantries Act (1548), which abolished guilds and chantries, was also
disastrous for schools, while ‘song’ schools too were mostly suppressed as super-
stitious. Some schools, however, survived; some were re-established by Edward VI,
others owed their rise to Reformation influences in his reign, and all these were
called ‘Free Grammar Schools of King Edward VI’, such as Berkhamsted (1549)
and Sherborne (1550). Shrewsbury (1551), Bedford (1552), and Christ’s
Hospital (1553) are conspicuous among many schools that were started after the
Reformation.
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

pl Fi
A. Oxford: aerial view from N.W.
1, New College. 2, Queen’s College. 3, Magdalen College. 4, All Souls’ College.
5, University College. 6, Radcliffe Library. 7, S. Mary. 8, Brasenose College.
9, Exeter College. 10, Divinity School. 11, Old Ashmolean Museum. 12, Sheldonian
Theatre. 13, Bodleian Library. 14, Clarendon Building. 15, Indian Institute.

ea VE ro
B. Cambridge: aerial view from S.
1, Senate House. 2, S. Mary. 3, King’s College. 4, Clare College. 5, Trinity Hall.
6, Trinity College. 7, Gonville and Caius College. 8, S. John’s College. 9, Magdalene
 476 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

COLLEGIUM SANCTI IOHANNIS EVANGELISTA.

4 vi a20e a: 935 aq

ee i

S. John’s College, Cambridge, from E. (founded 1511). See p. 473

1, Entrance gateway. 2, Library. 3, First court. 4, Chapel. 5, Chambers. 6, Kitchen. 7, Hal
8, Second court. 9, Masters’ lodge. 10, Third court. 11, Library. 12, Loggia.
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 477

A. Eton College: aerial view. See p. 474

I, Entrance. 2, Chapel. 3, College Hall. 4, Upper School. 5, Weston’s Yard.
6, Provost’s Lodge. 7, Headmaster’s House.

B. Winchester College: aerial view. See p. 474

1, Entrance tower. 2, Outer Court. 3, Chamber Court. 4, Chapel. 5, Hall.
6, Cloisters. 7, Fromont’s Chantry. 8, Old School. 9, Classrooms. 10, Headmaster’s
House. 11, Moberley Library. 12, Warden’s Lodging.
 478 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

AUST, AL, OF CROSS: WINCHES Tin

at nih
DWELLINGS
REMOVED
4
¢

et E
eS ; = 20 30 40M™5
CHURCH From NE. Cra

» Grenrrom S.E.
SCALE FOR PLAN ey ae ease ws
10 O 10 20 30 40 SOFT
5 0 10 15 MTBS

at HOPE: COVENTHY
MA

court | LIVING RMS hae

mi ie MATRON |
tc: acMlenes|ir
ie Le diz a j

a oe TT =i wae
foul
= Tyee TT ZS
V7 2
Ini
E11
aS
i
NNO
Wwe
Ri
¥
5CU
of
Cy> Ze 8
N/E
EP
;=SH
Ze 25
if
mi |mM
iwi
|
fod =
—o i)
lignan
ey THE Pal
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 479

HOSPITALS, ALMSHOUSES, AND BEDE HOUSES

Hospitals, Almshouses, and Bede Houses increased in number on the decline of the
monasteries, some of whose lost service they were designed to meet, and thus there
was much similarity between them in purpose and design. These buildings were
founded in the main by persons charitably inclined, as refuges for the infirm and
destitute, and were endowed with revenues for their support.
The Hospital of S. Cross, Winchester (1136) (p. 478), believed to be the oldest
almshouse in England, was founded by Bishop Henry of Blois for thirteen poor and
aged men. A second foundation was added by Cardinal Beaufort in 1445. It is a
remarkable group of massive gatehouse, fine cruciform late Norman church (com-
pleted in 1225), and quadrangle around which are the master’s house, refectory, and
dwellings.
S. Mary’s Hospital, Chichester, founded as a nunnery but after 1562 used for
eight poor persons, dates from the end of the thirteenth century. The doorway
leads into the hall (p. 478E) flanked by dwelling-rooms and covered by a wide-
spreading timber roof (p. 478F), while behind the screen of the hall is a chapel,
with ancient seating.
Ford’s Hospital, Coventry (1529) (p. 478), much damaged in 1941, was a
fascinating old refuge in the traditional half-timber style, founded for five poor men
and one woman. The living-rooms range round an inner half-timber court and the
exterior had fine carved barge-boards.
The Almshouses, Cobham (1598) (p. 480), also called the Priests’ College,
form a most attractive group close to the parish church with its famous brasses
(p. 509). They were founded by Lord Cobham on the site of a chantry, and consist
of a quadrangle round which are the dwelling-rooms, while there is a large hall with
canopied fireplace and arched timber roof (p. 480C).
The Hospital, Ewelme (1436) (p. 480), founded by the Duke of Suffolk,
consists of rooms round a quadrangle with cloister walk, above which rise dormers
with carved barge-boards. Steps lead at the upper end to the church, in which are
the tombs of the founders, while to the south are the school buildings in fine
patterned brickwork. The triple group of hospital, school, and church on rising
ground is one of the most picturesque in England.
The Bede House, Stamford (1490) (p. 480), was founded by Alderman Browne,
for ten poor men and two nurses. The dignified entrance porch (p. 480J) leads into
a quadrangle, south of which is the dormitory, arranged, like that of S. Mary’s,
Chichester, as a long hall with cubicles on either side and a chapel at the end, with
large transomed windows; while to the north are nurses’ and wardens’ quarters.
Other examples are to be found in many English towns, such as S. John’s
Hospital, Northampton (1140), the Great Hospital, Norwich (1246), S. John’s
Hospital, Sherborne (1437), Christ’s Hospital, Abingdon (1446), and Ley-
cester’s Hospital, Warwick (1571) (p. 481), with its fine half-timber work and
galleried Court.
INNS
Inns of the Middle Ages, as well as monasteries, provided accommodation for
travellers, whether the king and his retainers, merchants, wandering scholars, or
pilgrims, while many inns were used as posting houses.
The Guesten Hall, Worcester (1320) (p. 485), south of the cathedral, must have
been a most beautiful building, but it is now a picturesque ruin. It appears to have
been set apart for strangers, because the monastic rules did not allow guests to sit
with monks at the table. The fine timber roof (p. 485C) now covers Trinity Church,
Worcester.
 480 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ee

ALMSHOUSES (PRIESTS COLL): COBHAMxen

ae our 4 - ; LOSS 7,

HALL

AY PLANS USL ES
e.g9 2p30405060 reer aeons Lest
HOSPTDAL 6 GRAMMAR ae EWELMEDa

INMATES
CARDEN

Sake
CATE
@ LIVING RY“ BEDRMS OVER |=
b KITCHENS

Byexniean
BEDE MOUSE (BROWNE'S MOSPS)STAMPORD Lane
b NURSES’ KITCHEN
cee
WARDEN’ S HOUSE
e CUBICLES s

i,
OE erlTeWi
e Ni
falW
\
l E
as aa Je E = |

J EXTERIOR From S.
ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 481

bay

A. Leycester’s Hospital, Warwick (1571). See p. 479

B. Leycester’s Hospital: courtyard

 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

A. S. Mary, Warwick: nave looking E. B. Merton College chapel, Oxford

Rebuilt as a ‘hall’ church, 1694-1704. from S.W. (1274). See p. 469
See p. 394

c. The Guildhall, London: Great Hall, before damage in 1940, looking E. (1411-46).
See opposite page
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 483
The George Inn, Glastonbury (fifteenth century) (p. 484J), is a substantially
built structure with mullioned and traceried windows.
The Feathers Inn, Ludlow (p. 484N), built as a private mansion, is a delightful
half-timber building and, although dating from 1603, is a reminder of local
Mediaeval art.
Among the Smaller Inns, which still exist (p. 484) may be mentioned the
Fighting Cocks, S. Albans; the George, Norton S. Philip; the Bell Inn,
Woodbridge; the Anchor Inn, Ripley; the Six Bells, Hollingbourne; the
King’s Head, Sissinghurst; the Eagle and Child, Alderley Edge; the Star,
Alfriston; the Fox and Hounds, Barley; the Falstaff Inn, Canterbury, with its
fine wrought-iron sign, and the Dolphin Inn, Norwich.
GUILDHALLS
The Guildhall, London, dating from 1411-46 (p. 482C), is the most important
hall erected by the Guilds in the Middle Ages, but was partly burnt down in the
Great Fire of 1666. It was altered by Wren, and has a Gothic-like facade (1789) by
George Dance, Junior; but it was not until the nineteenth century that Sir Horace
Jones restored the Great Hall to its original appearance and supplied a Gothic
style open roof (1864-70), destroyed by enemy action in 1940 and again
replaced in 1954 as a panelled flat ceiling on stone arches. It has been the stage upon
which some of the most important events in English history have been enacted.
The Guildhall, York (1448-80), severely damaged by bombing in 1942, was of
unusual design, with a handsome, low-pitched roof carried on tall oak columns.
The Guildhall, Exeter (1464), with an Elizabethan frontispiece, the Guildhall,
Cirencester (c. 1500) (p. 485D) and the Guildhall, Lavenham (c. 1529) (p. 485G)
are other examples. The Hall of the Butchers Guild, Hereford (1621) (p. 485E)
though after the period maintains Mediaeval characteristics.
MARKET HALLS AND CROSSES
Markets were established in most provincial towns where the farmers could bring
their produce for sale, and Domesday Book records about fifty such markets, while
annual fairs provided other facilities for commerce, and sometimes, like the markets,
were held in churchyards. The Market Hall, Ledbury (1633) (p. 485F), has a
covered market with sixteen oak pillars, over which is the Town Hall. The beautiful
Market Crosses, Salisbury (fourteenth century) (p. 486A) and Chichester (1500,
restored 1724) (p. 486c), still serve their original purpose, which was akin to that of
the market halls, and show the similarity in type of the commercial and ecclesiastical
architecture of the period.
TITHE BARNS
Many old tithe barns throughout the country are fascinating in the simplicity of
the rough but honest craftsmanship which went to the making of their walls and
primitive timber roofs. The Abbot’s Barn, Glastonbury (fourteenth century)
(p. 486D-F), and the Old Barn, Fullstone, near Sittingbourne (p. 486G—J), show
the sturdy character of this type of building and the carpenter’s skill in framing up
the timbers, both in wall and roof, while the barns at Bradford-on-Avon (1350),
170 ft long (p. 488A, B), Frocester, Gloucestershire, and Preston Plucknett display
similar directness in construction.
City WALLS AND GATEWAYS
Towns which date from the Roman period and earlier were surrounded by defensive
walls upon which Mediaeval walls were afterwards constructed, but much has been
destroyed to allow for expansion. London, Canterbury, Colchester, Lincoln,
 484 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

MEDLZEVAL INNS { 5 \

BZ : <=

aii i=
=

THE FIGHTING CO THE BELL INN;

S. ALBANS: HERT WOODBRID:GE
SUFF
in bare “foya -

aa hale
THE ANCHOR INN, |_| ecg DoS fe ett &CHL
F EAGLE
RIPLEY SURREY. |S) yeaa eee aaate) alt ERLEY EDGE

THE SIX BELLS: ||

HOLLINGBOURNE. |

S\THE KINGS HEAD: ieee THE FOX 6 HOUN!

FDsissINGHURST ae GEORGE INN= GLASTONBURY (BARLEY: HERT

=
oe raeDOR rm
a Rs vA
fai S (Ty

\THE FALSTAFF INN: = THE FEATHERS Ih

CANTERBURY THE DOLPHIN INN: NORWICH LUDLOW :SHROF
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 485

THE GUESTEN HALL : WORCESTER

SCALE FOR PLAN
FEET | | 2 &)
Y AS s
METRES‘

RIOR L

PASE SONS
Eig 7! Ca
Ode tp
1a e

——S
re=
fi Se
= Hy Nesom,
=:(|

PUELESEENN
Bea AIEE ANN
sagiit i aS

ied Ue

a =
seer ——

GJ GUILDHALL: LAVENHAM: SUFFOLK

 486 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

MEDIZEVAL CROSSES & TITHE BARNS t

(t
( a |

4 es |
ren ae
se oer Sn ‘

CITY CROSS
: SALISBURY ELEANOR +: NORT HAMPTON MARKET CROSS: CHICHESTER

THE ABB OTS BARN

\ {Ed
:GLASTUNBURY
yD
=
GAINS
= a } ANY IN GABLES / GN
°@
GAN
Wi
cee
Mi 4
} on s
Ne J . Nas?
Cs
| ao Ih

pep ff SII
J f
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 487

CITY WALLS
MBERTONS TWR) y-MORGAN'S MOUNT
6 GATE WAYS
TER |BONWALDES- ‘NgaTe )PHOENIX CHESTER
THORNE Twr OR KING
R ES
KalLvaro Gare! SHARLE
ij CATHEDRAL-
fl
WATER! LINEN HALL .GATE
GATE :
CITY] WALL
CITY
\ WALL NEW GATE

LEE
PEMBERTONS TOWER

5 9 % leMILE

-AN or CITY WALLS YORK MICKLEGATE BAR

(4 ea
i i a
oS fs Se 2 rn

2;
KIRKBY LONSDALE QLD LONDON BRIDGE PRG nen FROM 9. IYLESFORD: KENT
488 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

c. Pack-horse bridge, Coombe

Bissett, Wilts. See p. 489

B. Tithe Barn, Bradford-on-Avon, D. East Farleigh bridge, Kent

interior (14th cent.). See p. 489
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 489

Gloucester, Chichester, Southampton, Chepstow, and Winchester among others,

most with fragments of Roman origin, still retain portions more or less perfect of
their Mediaeval walls and gateways.
The City of Chester (p. 487) still possesses its walls in fine preservation to a
height of about 12 ft. They are about two miles in length and surround the city, and
are strengthened at intervals by towers, of which King Charles’ Tower is an example;
both this and the Pemberton Tower show the walking way behind the parapet on
which the defenders could keep watch.
The City of York (p. 487) still retains about two and a half miles of its Mediaeval
wall on both sides of the River Ouse, principally dating from the reign of Edward
III. The ramparts (p. 487F) are protected and strengthened by battlemented towers.
Micklegate Bar (p. 487E), Bootham Bar (p. 487G), and Walmgate Bar, dating from
the time of Edward I, are among the six imposing defensive gateways, each of which
has portcullis, turrets or bartizans, and cross loopholes crowned by battlements.
BRIDGES
Bridges, which were important means of communication, were often semi-religious
in character, and their maintenance was imposed on various authorities. Old
London Bridge (1176-1209) (p. 487L), commenced by the religious fraternity of
‘Fratres Pontis’, and designed by Peter, priest of S. Mary Colechurch, was one of
the most famous of all Mediaeval bridges, and must have presented a strangely
picturesque appearance. It rested on eighteen solid stone piers, strengthened by
‘starlings’ to protect them against the scour of the tide. These piers, connected by
arches, supported the roadway with its houses and shops which paid for the upkeep
of the bridge, while on a pier near the centre was the chapel of S. Thomas of
Canterbury. The bridge lasted over 600 years and was pulled down in 1832 when the
present structure, designed by John Rennie, was completed 200 ft farther west.
Stopham Bridge (p. 487H), Kirkby Lonsdale Bridge (p. 487K), Aylesford
Bridge (p. 487M), Wakefield Bridge, with a chapel, and Warkworth Bridge,
Northumberland, are in good preservation. East Farleigh Bridge (fourteenth
century) (p. 488D) is an excellent example, while the Pack-horse Bridge, Coombe
Bissett (p. 488C) is a survival of Mediaeval times. The Bridge, Crowland (p. 487]),
is a peculiar triangular structure with three pointed arches, carrying three roads
over three waterways.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
The evolution of English architecture is here traced by comparison of plans, walls,
openings, roofs, columns, mouldings, and ornament through the Anglo-Saxon,
Norman, Early English, Decorated, Perpendicular, and Tudor periods, as set
forth in Architectural Character on pp. 386 and 389.

PLANS
Anglo-Saxon (p. 491). A church was frequently planned as a simple rectangle
(p. 491A) or as two unequal oblongs, of which the larger was the nave and the smaller
the sanctuary, and the distinction was clearly marked, both internally and externally
(pp. 387N, Q, 491B, C). These were joined by a chancel arch, under which steps
usually led to a sanctuary (sometimes on a lower level). The latter was generally
square-ended, following the Celtic type, as at Bradford-on-Avon (p. 387Q); but
another type, derived from the Roman basilican church, had an apsidal end, as at
Worth (p. 491C) and Brixworth. Towers are without buttresses, as at Earls Barton,
Northants (p. 387¢), S. Benet, Cambridge (p. 387P), and Sompting (p. 387).
Norman (p. 491). The nave was lengthened, with aisles usually half its width,
490 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

transepts were developed, and there was sometimes a tower over the crossing, and
the sanctuary became apsidal in cathedrals and some churches (p. 491D, E). Many
cathedrals were rebuilt in this period, and in those of Norwich, Durham, Ely,
S. Albans, and Winchester the naves are conspicuous for their length. S. John’s
Chapel, Tower of London (p. 436c, E), is a Norman church in miniature. Towers
are square and massive, as at S. Albans and Iffley, and a timber spire occurs at
Canterbury (p. 396D). Churches in East Anglia have round towers, due to Scan-
dinavian influence or the absence of stone suitable for square angles, as they are
built of knapped or unknapped flints. Plans of English cathedrals are given on
Pp. 410, 411, 412, 413. For plans of castles and manor houses of this period see
PP- 437> 444.
Early English (p. 491). Church plans were very similar to the Norman, and the
difference was chiefly brought about by the introduction of the pointed arch, which
made it-possible to construct oblong instead of square vaulting compartments, each
complete in itself; while many Norman apses were lengthened into square-ended
sanctuaries of Anglo-Saxon type (p. 49IH—-N). The ‘broach’ spire rising from the
square tower without a parapet was introduced (p. 492A), and the steeple of S. Mary,
Oxford (pp. 396C, 475A, 492E), is an early example of a tower surmounted by clus-
tered pinnacles behind which rises the low pyramidal spire. Plans of English
cathedrals are given on pp. 410, 411, 412, 413. For plans of castles and manor
houses of this period see pp. 438, 447.
Decorated (p. 491). Nave bays of new cathedrals and churches were given a wider
spacing than in earlier periods; and in proportion as piers became more slender, the
floor space was increased, thus the interiors were more spacious (p. 49IP-S).
Several great central towers were now carried up, as Salisbury (pp. 395A, 407G, 415B),
and Lichfield (pp. 407E, 419B). The ‘broach’ spire gradually gave way to the lofty
spire with parapets, angle pinnacles, and spire-lights, while moulded ribs, orna-
mented with crockets, accentuate the angles of these tapering spires (p. 492);
sometimes the spire is raised on an octagonal basement, as at Bloxham (p. 492H).
Plans of English cathedrals are given on pp. 410, 411, 412, 413. For plans of castles
and manor houses of this period see pp. 443, 448.
Perpendicular (p. 491). Owing to the building activity of preceding centuries, few
ecclesiastical buildings of first importance were planned, though many were altered
or enlarged. Many parish churches indicate the tendency to reduce the size of piers
and to throw the roof weight externally on projecting buttresses, which were
rendered more necessary by the increased size of windows (p. 491T, U). Towers
were erected without spires, as the Bell Tower, Evesham (1533), and elsewhere
(p. 492D, F, G, J), but when a spire occurs it rises behind a parapet, as at S. Peter,
Kettering (p. 492K). A novel type is at Newcastle, where open flying buttresses
support a central pinnacle (p. 492B). Plans of English cathedrals are given (on pp.
410-13). For plans of castles and manor houses of this period see pp. 443, 451.
Tudor. Few churches were built and they were similar in plan to those of the last
period. King’s College Chapel, Cambridge, and the magnificent royal tomb-house
of Henry VII at Westminster Abbey are the last ecclesiastical edifices of importance
in the Gothic style. The most characteristic buildings of this period are the numer-
ous manor houses for which a distinctly domestic plan and type of architecture
were developed (p. 452).

WALLS
Anglo-Saxon. Walls were generally of rough rubble with ashlar masonry at the
angles in ‘long and short’ courses, as at Earls Barton (p. 387c). Pilaster strips are
also frequent, but no instance of buttresses occurs.
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 491

EVOLUTION OF ae PLANS
ANGLO-SAXON Te

(U)s. NICHOLAS. LYNN.

on et eeu ps
 492 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

TOWERS i& SPIRE

PERF. S.NICHOLAS: fligsd tea

——————

S.MARY: OXFORI
(150 F)

ea
erridinisbey
Sits
+ roe:

3 —=
[Sceaeee
:
eee
ooee
meee
=
BUERAUIIONNL
GASRZANY
SAU
Rich
eos
thats
Genii

S. NEOTS
(128 FT)

Wie54 F =
Bh) Oe
BS beh at =

S. MARY: BLOXHAM oa 1 MAGDALEN COLL: OXFORD (usrt) S, PETER: KETTERING

 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 493

Norman. Walls are thick but often defective in construction, as the core was
imperfectly bonded with the facing, which, in the later period, was frequently
ornamented with arcading. The height of interiors is nearly equally divided between
nave arcade, triforium, and clear-story (pp. 414E, 494B), and, as in the churches at
Caen, a passage occurs between the clear-story windows and the arches carrying
the inner part of the wall, useful for window repairs (p. 391A). Broad, flat buttresses
succeed the Anglo-Saxon pilaster strips and are often flush with the corbel table,
which often supports a plain parapet (pp. 494A, C, 497A, B, 511A), useful for roof
repairs.
Early English. Walls retain the massive character of Norman work, but more cut
stone and less rubble core was employed. The concentration on buttresses of the
weight of roof and vaulting began the process carried out in succeeding periods of
reducing the walls to a mere enclosing screen of stained-glass windows. The
excellent proportions between openings and piers give a light and graceful appear-
ance, as in the transepts of Salisbury Cathedral. Buttresses gradually became more
pronounced than in the Norman period till they were generally equal in projection
to their width, in order to resist the outward pressure of the pointed vaults. They
were formed in receding stages by weathered offsets which were often gabled, and
their angles were sometimes chamfered (pp. 494E, 497C-F). Flying buttresses
(p. 497Q, T) were first utilized as external features in this period, but were not
common till later. In church interiors the nave arcade usually occupies half the
height, and the upper half is equally divided between triforium and clear-story,
as in the choirs of Ripon (p. 494D) and Ely (p. 495K), and the nave of Lincoln
(p. 416C); but sometimes the triforium was reduced in order to allow of a greater
display of glass above, as at Westminster (p. 424A) and Salisbury (p. 415F). Parapets
have moulded copings and ornamental patternwork (p. 5118).
Decorated. Walls were gradually transformed, owing to the increased size of
traceried windows. Tracery was sometimes extended as panelling even over walls
(p. 495J). Buttresses of great projection were still in stages, and were sometimes
ornamented with niches, crocketed canopies, and finials (p. 497H, J), while angle
buttresses, set diagonally, were introduced (p. 497G) and flying buttresses were
sometimes pierced (p. 497R). The internal division of nave arcade, triforium, and
clear-story shows, in the latter part of the period, the tendency to reduce still
further the height of the triforium in order to secure larger clear-story windows
(p. 416), while in other examples there is extreme ornamentation (p. 495H, K).
Parapets were occasionally pierced with flowing tracery (p. 5IIC), but this was a
French feature, and the English generally preferred the battlemented form.
Perpendicular. Walls were profusely ornamented with panelling, resembling
window tracery, as in the late Perpendicular or early Tudor Chapel of Henry VII,
which is most elaborate in detail, and a miracle of beauty (p. 426A). Knapped flint
was used as wall facing for panels, in conjunction with stone tracery in Norfolk and
Suffolk. Parapets, embattled, panelled, or pierced (p. 511D, E, F), were ornate, as at
Merton College, Oxford (p. 4828). Buttresses project boldly (p. 497K, L, M) and
chapels were sometimes formed between them, as at King’s College, Cambridge
(pp. 468, 470A), and elsewhere. Flying buttresses span the aisle roofs and are moulded
or pierced and sustained by pinnacles (p. 497N, S). Interiors frequently consist of
two stages, viz. nave arcade and clear-storey. In place of the triforium there is often
a mere line of panelling as at Winchester (p. 495M) and S. George’s Chapel,
Windsor (p. 471H), or of niches for statuary as in the Chapel of Henry VII, West-
minster (pp. 426E, 428). Parish churches frequently have no triforium, owing to flat
aisle roof.
Tudor. Walls followed on the same lines as the last period, as the Chapel of
 494 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

THE COMPARATIVE TREATMENT OF

NORMAN TRANSITIONAL EARLY ENGLISH
gt (LANCET)
i | |
| *

:
af “
|
3 7 3
| anil hu t | 7 ||
ill ML
sess I ie |
well A ll Mh
:
! :
t =a |
= 1.;
|| / fife
sole ere eer e I|
a 1 | — =. it

: 19 = =e 2
; | i ia : |
= BETH | | | ees = | |
aa ay :
= ——s

A)EXTERNAL BAYS

PRS

—->k
——-3I,I"—
—-24'3
-—-3
21
3-=———
—
———
il!{ |

B)INTERNAL BAYS (PINTERNAL (= INTERNAL BAYS

PETERBOROUGH CHOIR RIPON CHOIR ELY PRESBYTERY
19 : Dp. 88 ad 40 z FEET
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 495

ENGLISH GOTHIC CATHEDRALS

DECORATED DECORATED PERPENDICULAR
GEOMETRIC) (CURVIUNEAR) | (RECTILINEAR)
|
|
|

hy ty ee
ae
ie |
7 NS i
Wi a

ie :
|fila BeUiLNs lil EERE a:
lly) ia || | | aa a Ta
ang| EE Se

GYEXTERNAL BAYS (J EXTERNAL BAYS LJEXTERNAL BAYS

LETTE erie We Wy HY

al aa |
= SS Sa ee es al
= Ss WY X= Ve |

| (aN 7 |!
Fell He

:| }|
i. A

eal i 8
; H i | |
tt Wy iis 1 |
if i
| | = |
alba ik a |
a E | =

= INTERNAL BAYS INTERNAL BAYS

LICHFIELD: NAVE INCHESTER: NAVE
496 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

Henry VII (p. 426A), but in domestic buildings there is some novelty, as in the
extended use of red brickwork with thick mortar joints, in which patterns were
formed by darker ‘headers’, as at Hampton Court Palace, Compton Wynyates, and
other manor houses. Buttresses have traceried panels, as in the Chapel of Henry VII,
and are crowned with finials, often ornamented with crockets, while flying buttresses
are often pierced (pp. 426A, F, 497P). Interiors have much panelling.

OPENINGS
Anglo-Saxon. Arches, as in the chancel arch, Escomb, and the tower arch, Sompting,
are semicircular (p. 387D) and often unmoulded, and the sides or jambs frequently
have ‘long and short work’. Doorways are plainly framed with square, unmoulded
jambs, and semicircular arches (p. 387C, D). Windows have square jambs and either
round or triangular heads, as at Deerhurst (p. 387J), with the occasional addition of
a central baluster, as at Worth (p. 387H) and S. Mary the Younger, York (p. 387G),
and another treatment is that at Earls Barton (p. 387A, B, C).
Norman. Arcades invariably consist of semicircular arches (p. 494B), unmoulded
in the early part of the period, as in S. John’s Chapel, Tower of London (p. 436c),
and in the later period they are enriched with mouldings, as S. Bartholomew,
London (p. 391A), and Waltham Abbey. Doorways and windows have jambs in
square recesses or ‘orders’ enclosing nook-shafts. These ‘orders’ are frequently
carved with zigzag and beak-head ornament, as at Etton (p. 498A, B), or elaborately
sculptured, as at Barfreston, Kent. Windows are small and the internal jambs are
deeply splayed (pp. 388B, 499A). They are in single lights, often flanked by blind
arcading (p. 494A), although double windows with central shaft occur (often in
towers), while three openings, the middle being the largest, are grouped together, as
in S. Bartholomew, London (p. 391A), and elsewhere (p. 494).
Early English. Arcades are of more slender proportions, and pointed lancet arches
come into general use (p. 494D, F), at first side by side with round arches (p. 494Cc, D)
and in connection with vaulting, and then in arches, as at Westminster Abbey and
the Temple Church (p. 3888). Doorways (p. 498C, D, E) have jambs enriched with
mouldings, detached shafts, and carved ornaments, crowned with lancet arches and
hood moulds. Windows (p. 499B-E) of lancet shape are grouped in two, three,
or even five lights, as in the ‘Five Sisters’? in York Minster (p. 423). The glass
is often near the face of the wall, thus making deep internal jambs. The early form
of ‘plate’ tracery (p. 499D) cut through a plate of stone was developed into ‘bar’
tracery, an innovation which led to extraordinary developments in design. The two-
light windows of Westminster Abbey, with geometrical tracery (1245) are among
the earliest bar traceried windows in England (p. 425D). Cusps let into the
soffit of tracery arches in separate pieces, were introduced, as at Raunds, Northants,
especially in circular lights, but in later window-heads the cusps are an integral part
of the traceried mouldings. The spaces between the cusps are known as trefoil
(p. 442D), quatrefoil, or cinquefoil according to whether they are composed of three,
four, or five openings.
Decorated. Arcades became wider in proportion to their height and were crowned
with equilateral arches (p. 495H, K), i.e. struck from the points of equilateral
triangles, as at York and Lichfield, and the ogee arch came into use. Door-
ways (p. 498F-L) have jambs of less depth than in the Early English style, and
are ornamented with engaged instead of detached shafts. Windows (p. 499H, J, K)
are large and divided by mullions into two or more lights, and the enlargement of
clear-story windows proceeded pari passu with the diminution in height of the
triforium. Tracery at first consisted of geometric forms, as at Westminster Abbey,
the cloisters of Salisbury (p. 415J), the choir clear-stories of Lincoln (p. 416G) and
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 497

COMPARATIVE BUTTRESS k S

HIGHAM
FERRERS COLL.‘OXON.

BRAMPTON DEBENHAM S.M. MAGD\: LAVENHAM S. LAURENCE: DIVINITY

OXFORD EVESHAM SCH.:OXON.
aS
HEELS
00ll-—=—pfe —=—-—p44

al
i

& HENRY VII CHA

a!

ileal
5

LA
Ti ear}
6

HAPTER HOUSE:
LINCOLN CAYTHORPE SHERBORNE WESTMINSTER
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

COMPARATIVE DO ORWAY'S
[ NORMAN |
(B) ARCH & JAMB
MOULDINGS

ETTON _Al DOTTED LINES

HOW
SHOW JAMB SHAFTS s
CHURCH fll if f ie me
SS Nally x Zo

YORK~ NAG gc gO | NS
SHIRE. Pesmsi” Nu Niji" Sy Tt é
L SOFFIT —, > ws “a

CAP LINE—

My. [EARLY ENGLISH] |, (E)cater otis GO

il CLARE CHURCH, SUFFOLK Y vortep une JAMB

shows
YY, SHAFTS AND
yy MOULDINGS
Yyy}

YiUy ~\ SOFFIT
Ly NC PLANE
YY.
‘
XZ Bi,”
DOG-TOOT Lyboas
Yyyp\_ . WALL
CAP LINE Yra ope
Ys
SECTION OF
CAP & BASE

“a
77>) DOTTED LINE
ty SHOWS JAMB

0 iP JD pan eae
PERPENDICULAR} (P)
2% nouns
MERTON COLLEGE,O oF Tie
urs Oa
q %
KZ GA 4 “GG
SECTION (N) Yy YY, Loy Wy WALL
THRO JAMB > cael
MOULDS
SCALE FOR ELEVATIONS ~fxwt—tet
24 9 6 7 8 9 I pee
SCALE FOR JAMB& ARCH MOULDS ‘2.x? Oe eo 2 1? INCHE
SCALE FOR CAPS & BASES Site! 2.4 3.6 78 910 W125 4 jycup
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 499

COMPARATIVE WINDOWS
yr ARLY
Ke‘
T@Q\V
4
1 ey
TT
Z
i {Es
ca
t
lt Mle |

| Mes
I]
i
|

iL
= 2. SS i =
WALTHAM (B)WNELSFELD ILEY ([)CASTLE HALL MEOPHAM
ABBEY SUSSEX WILTS NCHESTER KENT

ae hk
aa § 4 Yiim™
i by
\@
| hia = Z/
DUSTON WA
@)

N
WX SSX Yyy
Tsar SS

7
=ree (JHOLBE ACH CH:LINCS
s as aes Ee
BADGEWORTH: GLOS.

SCALE FOR ALL THE, .<4— WINDOWS EXCEPT (M)

SES
SS. (PERPENDICULAR

NY pA

ae
SS
SS
a
(ee

L) WAWN VRE i)S.GEORGE'S CHAPEL: WINDSOR .MICHAEL : BASINGSTOKE

 500 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

} TBAT ISD
J Wha LASS
Md Ta
Y). fpNM

SS
h Ti Z. ¢ !

fl | foe e |
1.7 ¥) \) ||)
POH} |
:

Lie si N en
| 1A
I(T
taal} } mi 4|

= SS lI |

S. JOHN’S HOSPITAL (BE= SSS =

NORTHAMPTON G™ MALVERN PRIORY: WORCS. SUTTON COURTENAY:BERK
a rik
Eensssry
rs
fri
| 6 ——

= C8! One WALL POST

BETWEEN WALLS
Nis AT FOOT

W ESTMINSTER HALL (betas

A)
WW
NUNN |PSS
AY YWNa Ne IOS
———seS

LN ee
ToT
Ay ae |
ph Me aes HT iT ice
——— =
S) i esMN ee
Wit) Were
. H
< Gia" So ee ES
2
o_o 40 Q’- ---~~-~---
4 ELTHAM PALACE
: KENT MIDDLE TEMPLE
: LONDON
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 501

the naves of Lichfield (p. 495G), and York. In the latter part of the period it consisted
of curvilinear or flowing lines, as in the choirs of Ely (p. 495J) and Wells. Cusps
which, in the Early English style, had often been let into the stone tracery now
formed part of it. Smaller types of windows still occur (p. 499F, G).
Perpendicular. Arcades now usually consist either of ‘drop’ arches (p. 391B)
or in the later period of four-centred arches (p. 495L), of which the spandrels
are sometimes filled with tracery or carving (p. 495M). Doorways are generally
finished with a square hood-moulding over the arch, and the spandrels are orna-
mented, as in the doorway of Merton College, Oxford (p. 498m). Windows, of
which the earliest in the style are probably those at Winchester (p. 420), have
mullions continued vertically through their whole height up to the main arch, an
arrangement which produces a perpendicular effect and gives the name to the
style (p. 499L, M). In many cases they are of enormous size, strengthened by hori-
zontal transoms, and even form a wall of glass, as at S. George’s Chapel, Windsor
(pp. 471, 499M), the east window at Gloucester (38 ft wide by 72 ft high, an area
approximating to that of a tennis court), King’s College Chapel, Cambridge (p. 468),
and Henry VII Chapel, Westminster (p. 428).
Tudor. Arcades are of wider span and are generally crowned by typical four-
centred Tudor arches with spandrels filled with either tracery or carving. Doorways
are based on the Perpendicular type with four-centred arches (p. 461K), often
enclosed in a square hood-moulding, and the spandrels are often carved with
heraldic devices (p. 461B). Large windows with perpendicular mullions and hori-
zontal transoms were now chiefly used for domestic architecture (p. 461), and the
pointed arch was frequently replaced by a square head, to suit the flat ceilings of
living-rooms, and its place externally taken by a hood-moulding terminating
laterally in carved bosses (p. 458A). Projecting bay and oriel windows give variety
and picturesqueness to manor houses, as at Compton Wynyates (p 458B), Great
Chalfield (p. 450D), and Athelhampton (p. 455A), and also of the numerous colleges
of a quasi-religious nature, as at Oxford and Cambridge.

ROOFS*
Anglo-Saxon. Saxon vaults, based on Roman masonry vaults, were plain and simple.
There is no exact knowledge of roofs of this period, as none exist, but they were
probably either of simple timber construction covered with slate (p. 387K, L, M), or
of stone slabs in horizontal layers approaching each other till they met at the apex,
as in early Irish churches. In some illuminated manuscripts buildings are represen-
ted as covered with slates or shingles. The well-known and unique tower roof at
Sompting (p. 387E), formed by four planes lying on the gables and meeting in ridges
above the apex in each case is a peculiar form shown in some Rhenish churches.
Norman. Norman roofs have an inclination of about forty-five degrees finished
with dripping eaves or parapet. The simple framing is either left exposed or there
is a flat ceiling, boarded and painted, as at Ely and Peterborough (p. 414).
Some cathedrals and abbeys of this period originally had wooden ceilings, but were
vaulted later, as Gloucester, Exeter, and the south transept of Durham. The
introduction of rib and panel vaulting (p. 399B) eventually supplanted the Roman
method of cross-vaults in which the meeting lines were simple groins, as in the
crypt of Canterbury Cathedral (1096-1107) (p. 399A) and the aisles of S. John’s
Chapel, Tower of London. Early rib and panel vaulting is seen in the ambulatory,
Canterbury Cathedral, and the choir aisles of Durham Cathedral (1093-6). There is
sexpartite vaulting in the choir of Canterbury (p. 418B), erected by William of Sens
* For the evolution of English vaulting see p. 394, and for a description of English
Mediaeval roofs see p. 430.
502 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

(1195), while the nave vault at Durham has, it is believed, the earliest pointed
arches over a high vault in England (1128-33) (p. 392B).
Early English. Roofs became steeper externally with an inclination of about
fifty-five degrees. Where there was no stone vaulting the framing was left exposed
internally, and in the south-eastern part of the country, a characteristic was that the
braces or ribs, together with the close-set rafters, produced the effect of a barrel-
shaped vault (pp. 435C, 500A). Vaults (p. 399C, D) are marked by the general use of
the pointed arch as in Westminster Abbey, which surmounted all difficulties of
vaulting the oblong nave compartment, which had ribs of such varying span. The
main ribs consisted of transverse, diagonal, and wall ribs, to which were added
later intermediate ribs or ‘tiercerons’ and ridge ribs, as in Lincoln and Westminster
(p. 399D).
Decorated. Roofs are of more moderate pitch, about fifty degrees, and sometimes
have open framing internally, of which Great Malvern Priory (p. 500B), Heckington
Church (p. 431B), and S. Etheldreda, Holborn, are good specimens. Arch-braced
and the simpler types of hammer-beam roof come into favour in parish churches.
Vaults (p. 399E, F) have an increased number of intermediate ribs which tend to
reduce the size of panels, and the ‘lierne’ rib led to complicated star-shaped
patterns known as ‘stellar’ vaulting, as in the choir of Ely (1322) and the nave of
Canterbury (1379), while the number of bosses occasioned by the numerous ribs
adds richness to the vaulting surface.
Perpendicular. Besides arch-braced varieties, timber roofs of the hammer-beam
type are numerous, as at Eltham (p. 500G), especially in East Anglia, and were often
richly ornamented with carved figures of angels and pierced tracery (pp. 435, 500),
while the later roofs in the style became nearly flat and resembled a floor in con-
struction (pp. 435G; J, 446K, 480K). The roof of Westminster Hall (p. 500), erected
1397-9 to the designs of Hugh Herland, master-carpenter, covers an area of nearly
half an acre, and is one of the largest timber roofs, unsupported by pillars, in the
world. Fan, palm, or conoidal vaulting (pp. 399H, 468) was evolved from the ‘stellar’
vaults of the period and consists of inverted concave cones, with ribs of similar
radius, as in the Gloucester cloisters, but the lierne and fan vaults are sometimes
combined, as at Sherborne Abbey (1475). Pendant vaulting was introduced, in
which strong transverse arches support elongated voussoirs forming pendants,
from which spring the vault ribs, as in the Divinity Schools, Oxford (1480-3) (p.
400c), and Oxford Cathedral (1480-1500) (p. 400B).
Tudor. Hammer-beam roofs and other roofs with exposed horizontal rafters were
thrown across the halls of many lordly manor houses giving a distinctive charm, as
in Compton Wynyates and Wolsey’s palace at Hampton Court (p. 460), and these
continued in use up to the Elizabethan period, as in the Middle Temple Hall
(p. 500H). Vaulting continued on the same lines as in the fan vault of King’s
College Chapel, Cambridge, and culminated in the magnificent fan and pendant
vault of the Chapel of Henry VII (p. 428), while the vault of S. George’s Chapel,
Windsor (1501-8) (p. 471H) is an unusual example of side lierne vaults connected to
a central barrel vault. Many plaster ceilings of geometrical and pendant type date
from this period (p. 461C). For examples of timber roofs in English parish churches
of all periods see p. 435.

COLUMNS
Anglo-Saxon. Piers were short, stumpy cylinders crowned with square blocks of
stone instead of moulded capitals, and the roughly formed balusters in belfry
windows appear to have been turned by a lathe and have projecting capitals to
support the thick wall (p. 387B, D, F, G, H, J).
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 503

pe IVE PIBRS, Ce BASES

ISTOURBRIDG WALTHAM
CAMBS. ABBEY.

e eSAINTS eka
oS )
q -ALL
a :

Yi,
ae
C evA
S T

WY/ BRIDLINGTON
a

5, TRANSEPT
Se aarp

TYPICAL PIERS

@® ;
|a\S)
w Sy
ARUNDEL. LAVENHAM.SUFFLK
SUSSEX.

eo ©
S.MARY, OXFORD. SAFFRON WALDEN, ES*

TYPICAL PIERS
SCALE FOR PLANS
3 ‘ 2 “4EET
METRES
 504 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

COMPARATIVE CARVIED VEN

LtRE
Sh, ghey NORMAN
i, i

Ye
"ASR ||

uhIhuy torWwae) \ Loy?

“ T TRS
ert -
aAivar 4
hi"
Or. uP
_JOHNS CHAPEL
TOWER or LONDON

[oe
Or 8k
e PORCH — me
nm elt Y:YOR
i
SAAB
RHOUSE
ELY CATHEDRAL RIDLINGTON PRIOR KS
eget tors
wh |!
Hi =

mH = ia i > |
EVERLEY CHAPTER ice LADY CHAPEL
SOUTHWELL MINSTER ELY CATHEDRAL
It i
Bebe ceytrece tat

wn

(ppoveton: DORSET |WOLBOROUGH:DEVON KENTON : DEVON

 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECT
URE 505

Norman. Piers (p. 503), short and massive, are cylindrical or polygonal, as at
Gloucester, Hereford, Southwell, and S. John’s Chapel, Tower of London (p. 436c),
while at Durham lozenge, chevron and vertical channellings were worked on the
cylindrical piers (p. 392B). Compound piers, with rectangular recesses containing
shafts, as at Peterborough (p. 414J) and Durham (p. 392B), were often used alter-
nately with cylindrical piers, as at Norwich, Durham, and Waltham. The shape of
piers during the Mediaeval period was influenced by the vaulting shafts which they
supported. The small shafts in the recessed ‘orders’ of doorways and windows were
sometimes richly carved. Capitals (pp. 503, 504) are usually cubiform or cushion
type, sometimes carved and scalloped, but some, such as the Ionic capital in the
Tower of London, are reminiscent of Roman architecture, though the Corinthian
type, which occurs in Canterbury (p. 4188), is more frequently seen in France.
Early English. Piers (p. 503) are either compound, cylindrical, or octagonal, and
often surrounded by detached shafts of Purbeck marble (p. 425c) held together by
bands of stone or metal at intervals, as at Salisbury (p. 415H), the Temple Church
(p. 388B), and Westminster Abbey (p. 4228). Capitals were frequently boldly
moulded so as to produce deep shadows, or carved with conventional foliage (p.
504), and the normal abacus is circular on plan, and thus differs from the square
abacus of France. Capitals were also of the ‘crocket’ and ‘water-leaf’ types. ‘The
water table base was common (pp. 498D, 503N).
Decorated. Piers (p. 503), which are sometimes diamond-shaped on plan, are
surrounded by engaged shafts, a development from detached Early English shafts.
Capitals are usually circular on plan; and when moulded are similar to Early
English, but not so deeply undercut, and the carved foliage of oak, ivy, maple, or
vine is more naturalistic (pp. 419D, 504).
Perpendicular. Piers (p. 503) frequently have four semicircular shafts connected
by hollows and side fillets, which are also sometimes carried round the arch (p. 391B).
Piers became more slender and were often oblong on plan with the greater dimension
north and south, regulated by the carrying up of the vaulting shafts from the ground.
Capitals, now often polygonal on plan, have less pronounced mouldings and the
abacus and bell are not so clearly defined (p. 425). Capitals when carved have
conventional foliage, shallow and square in outline (p. 504). Bases to piers are often
polygonal on plan and the ‘bracket’ moulding was in constant use (p. 503V).
Tudor. Piers adhered to the slender Perpendicular type with octagonal moulded
base and capital, and are seen in chantry chapels, sepulchral monuments, choir
stalls, and domestic fittings.

MOULDINGS
Anglo-Saxon. Mouldings were few, and consisted of simple rounds and hollows in
capitals (p. 387D, F) and bases (p. 387D) formed by the axe, which appears to have
been the chief tool employed, but turned balusters in tower windows indicate
greater technical skill (p. 3878).
Norman. The development of mouldings was a marked feature of this period
(p. 507) and are an index of date in all periods. The jambs of door and window
openings were formed in recesses or ‘orders’ and the outer edges were rounded off
in bowtell mouldings (see Glossary), and from this simple beginning the complicated
mouldings of subsequent periods were evolved. The mouldings themselves were
elaborately carved with chevron or zigzag, billet, beak-head, nail-head, cable,
embattled, and double cone, and form an important decorative element in the
style (p. 508).
Early English. Mouldings are bold and deeply undercut, but still follow and
accentuate the outline of the rectangular recesses by being arranged on the ‘wall’
506 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

and ‘soffit planes’ (p. 507G, H, J, K). The bowtell moulding is occasionally accom-
panied by a side or front fillet, and is sometimes so developed with hollows on either
side as to be pear-shaped in section, while sometimes it is pointed and formed as
a ‘keel’ moulding (p. 507G, see Glossary). The chiselled dog-tooth (see Glossary)
succeeded the axed nail-head of the Norman period and gives a play of light and
shade to deeply cut hollow mouldings (p. 508).
Decorated. Mouldings depart from precedent, as they are sometimes formed on
the diagonal or ‘chamfer plane’ instead of on planes parallel either with the wall face
or jamb face (p. 507). There is a tendency to disregard the recesses or ‘orders’,
which are now sometimes disguised by hollow mouldings at their junction. New
varieties are the wave and the ogee mouldings, while the scroll moulding is used in
capitals (see Glossary for these terms). Hollow mouldings are ornamented with the
characteristic ball-flower and the tablet-flower (p. 508). Base mouldings to walls are
strongly marked, as in the exterior of Lincoln(p. 4168) and Exeter (p. 497Q). Cornices
and strings often have their deep hollows filled with carved foliage (p. 508), while
hood-moulds or dripstones are ornamented with crockets terminated with carved
heads or grotesques, as at Cley, Norfolk (p. 498F).
Perpendicular. Mouldings were set on the diagonal plane, being wide and shallow,
and often large and coarse (p. 507). The wide flat hollow known as the ‘casement’
and also the bracket or ‘brace’ moulding (see Glossary) are common. Pier mouldings
are often continued up from the base round the arch without the intervention of
capitals. One set of mouldings, especially in bases, often interpenetrates (i.e. passes
behind or in front of) another, and this gives a complicated and intricate appearance.
Carved mouldings are enriched with tablet-flowers and flowing vine and rose, and
crestings frequently surmount the cornice mouldings (pp. 508, 5I1J, K), and
diminutive battlements occur along the transoms of windows, while the hollows are
enriched with successive cornice flowers.
Tudor. Mouldings are similar to those of the last period, but owing to their use
in fittings of domestic buildings, such as chimney-pieces, wall panels, doors, and
ceilings, they are generally smaller and more refined. The lofty moulded and
twisted brick chimney-stacks are prominent features in this period (pp. 449D, 460C).
Mouldings begin to indicate the influence of the great Renaissance movement
which was gradually being felt in England.

ORNAMENT
Anglo-Saxon. Sculpture was roughly executed, probably by the mason’s axe, and
betrays the influence of Roman art; but in the absence of technical skill little carved
ornament was incorporated in the fabric of the buildings, which, it is believed,
depended on tapestry hangings for internal decoration (p. 387F).
Norman. Carved ornament was now often applied to mouldings. Carved foliage,
especially the acanthus scroll, is clearly due to Roman art, though executed in a
bolder and less refined manner. The tympana over many Norman doorways, such
as the Priest’s door at Ely, are sculptured with effective though rough representations
of Scriptural subjects. Arcading of intersecting arches (p. 414J) along aisle walls are
frequent, and are often piled up in storeys to ornament the whole wall. Stained glass
now began to be used, though sparingly, in small pieces, leaded together in mosaic-
like patterns. The glass panels in the choir at Canterbury (1174) represent Biblical
subjects, set in a blue or ruby ground, and framed in brilliantly-coloured scroll-
work. Timber roofs were coloured, sometimes with lozenge-shaped panels,
as at Peterborough (p. 414H), and the restored roof in Waltham Abbey gives an idea
of the original colour treatment. Hanging tapestries gave warmth and interest to
interiors, as the famous Bayeux tapestry testifies. The font (p. 515A), piscina
 COMPARATIVE MOULA)DI NGS
AE cs NO RM AN
DOORWAY: (A
"
\ RBEC) yy,

ARCH: HEDINGHAM
CASTLE, ESSEX
WINDOW:
WALTHAM
ABY, ESSEX (Five rcal STRINGS
sr
TEMPLE Cit
LONDON
DOORWAY: = "A ——_winpow: , y
WEST WALTON, PY WEST WALTON, Saye H
%. NORFOLK MNORFOLK =“ ¢

a VAULTING RIBS

Weg
aay cai
STRINGS

VAULTING RIB:
wy, HOWDEN, YORKS.

> WINDOW:hauoD
|
AUSTREY:
or a
~~ r
< WARWICKSHIRE.
DOORWAY: BENNINGTON, LINCS. TYPICAL STRINGS

PERPENDICULAR KENIL-
ae
AIL SOULS
OXFORD

WINDOW: 2
FORD S.MARY :OXFORD }\°
ARCH: INCHES as Z TYPICAL
. MARY: OXFORD a CENTIMETRES “ 3 it @ DECIMTES STRINGS
 508 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

Wn TIVE an DHOULTINGS
, Sa Ue NORMAN Za
BILLET NAIL-HEA H
WINCHESTER CANTERBURY UPTON'SLEGNARD —N.HINKSEY

=
S —= S =S
——

BEAK-HEAD DOUBLE CONE EMBATTLED

IFFLEY. S.EBBE:OXFORD ~ STONELEIGH SANDWICH
EARLY ENGLISH
“are
:
OF |HS
U7 Won if
( my
fo BN
SEEN ae es Ss, Ga
4 x

PETERBOROUCH
I~ AY ey » \

SA SS Ae A "DOG=TOOTH
LINCOLN ~-CALILEE - : BINHAM. DUNSTABLE
CATHE LINCOLN DOG-TOOTH: LINCOLN PRIORY PRIORY
NE! SAA.
BI9529
TZ ta)

irene
SOUTAWELL\ BALL- FLOWER: KIDDINGTON TABLET-FLOWER: COGGS

3 ja i “eT :

‘TABLET-

on Bi
CARVINGS:

S.MARY: OXFORD HENRY VII CHAPEL: WESTMS2Becyiica:

(woop)
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 509

(p. §15E), sedilia (p. 515K), gable cross (p. §12A), boss (p. §12J), and corbel (p. 512N)
_ show the craftsmanship expended on carving, fittings, and furniture in many a
country church.
Early English. The dog-tooth ornament in hollow mouldings was used in great
profusion (p. 508L, M) and the chisel replaced the axe of the early Norman period.
Carved foliage is conventional in treatment, and consists of crisp, curling masses of
‘stiff leaf foliage’ (pp. 504D, E, F, 508J, 512P). Flat surfaces, as in Westminster
Abbey (p. 422B), are often carved with delicate ‘diaper’ patterns (see Glossary),
sometimes painted, and doubtless copied from tapestry hangings or painted panels.
Large sculptured figures were often placed in canopied niches, and the west front
of Wells (1230-60), with 300 statues, is a design on the grand scale in which sculp-
ture is combined with architecture (p. 403B). Arcading of pointed arches often
ornamented the lower part of walls, as at Salisbury. Stained-glass windows increased
in number and small pieces of glass were still leaded in mosaic-like patterns, in
which a violet-blue was a favourite colour, as in Becket’s Crown, Canterbury, the
‘Five Sisters’, York, and the rose window, Lincoln. Many fine monuments now
added to the beauty of interiors, and Bishop Bridport’s monument (p. 472B) in
Salisbury Cathedral and the Cantelupe shrine, Hereford Cathedral (p. 472J), are
beautiful examples of the fine decorative stonework of this period, while the Early
English font (p. 515B), piscina (p. 515F), sedilia (p. 515M) and tabernacle (p. 515]),
gable cross (p. 512B), finial (p. 512E), boss (p. 512K), gargoyle (p. 511H), crocket
(p. 5IIN, P), and bracket (p. 512P) show that much careful craftsmanship was
lavished on these features. The Psalters, Missals, Books of Hours, and Chronicles
are a valuable record of contemporary life in which huntsman, shepherd, fisherman,
labourer, scribe, monk, king, knight, and saint all bear their part. The British
Museum and the Victoria and Albert Museum contain armour, caskets, pyxes, and
triptychs wrought in metals, ivory, and wood, with architectural features freely used
in the designs.
Decorated. The ball-flower (see Glossary) and tablet-flower often enrich mould-
ings. Carving generally became more naturalistic and reproduced the actual forms
of ivy, oak, vine-leaves, and even of seaweed (pp. 508, 512L, Q). Figures in canopied
niches were frequently added to exteriors, as at Exeter, and arcading, resembling
window tracery, lined the wall surfaces. Stained glass, losing its primitive mosaic
character, became translucent in tone and more free in design, and the large windows
glowed with luminous coloured pictures of figures in architectural canopies with
borders of vine and ivy, such as are seen in York Minster, Tewkesbury Abbey, and
Merton College, Oxford.
Shrines and tombs in cathedrals and churches (p. 472G, K, L) are miniature
buildings in themselves, with beautiful detail of canopy, crocket (p. 511Q, R), and
pinnacle. Fittings, especially in woodwork, such as pierced screens, bishops’
thrones (p. 517E), carved choir stalls (p. 517D), pews (p. 517A), and pulpits, under
the influence of sacerdotalism, acquired importance in decoration (pp. 417B, 418B).
The font (p. 515C), piscina (p. 515G), tabernacle (p. 515L), gargoyles (p. 5IIL, M),
sedilia (p. 515N), corbel (p. 512Q), eagle lecterns (p. 518E), gable cross (p. 512C),
finial (p. 512F), boss (p. 512L), and the Eleanor Crosses (p. 486B), well show the
decorative treatment of the period, while brasses at Cobham (p. 518M) and Stoke
d’Abernon—the earliest in England—are examples of commemorative monuments.
Perpendicular. Vine leaves and grapes often enrich the mouldings, which also have
cornice flowers at intervals (p. 508U). Carved foliage is both conventional and
naturalistic (pp. 507, 508, 511), while the special ornaments of the period are the
Tudor rose, the portcullis, and the fleur-de-lis, all of which were used abundantly
as in Henry VII’s Chapel. Fine figure sculpture takes the form of angels and
510 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

heraldic figures supporting emblems, such as the portcullis, rose, and crown, as in
Henry VII’s Chapel (p. 428), and the carved angels on the ‘Jacob’s ladder’ at Bath
Abbey. Wall arcading was replaced by panelling, which, resembling window
tracery, overlaid the wall surfaces and buttresses from floor to vault, as at Gloucester,
while miniature battlements decorated window transoms and cornices (pp. 495M,
499M, 516A). Architectural canopies in stained glass have a mellow golden tinge,
produced by silver stain, which sets off the large single figures in ruby and blue,
which are often ranged one above the other. Window design became more pictorial,
as the use of perspective overcame the difficulties inherent in transparent glass.
Heraldic devices of shields with armorial bearings and scroll inscriptions were
frequent, as at King’s College Chapel, Cambridge, Fairford Church, Gloucestershire,
and Canterbury Cathedral. Shrines and chantry chapels, as at Winchester (p. 420J)
and Canterbury, and reredoses, as at Winchester (p. 420G), were often delicately
modelled miniatures of the design of the larger building, which they adorn. Chancel
screens, often supporting rood lofts (many of which have been destroyed since
1561), were formed of mullions, open tracery and sculptured statues under crocketed
canopies, the whole crowned with Tudor flower cresting (p. 511J). Colour was
frequently applied to fittings and timber roofs, as in the churches of East Anglia.
Choir stalls (p. 517F) were elaborate and misericords under choir seats were carved
with grotesques and delicate foliage (p. 517), while bench-ends were terminated
with carved poppy-heads (p. 517B, C, G). Examples of a Perpendicular font (p. 515D),
piscina (p. 515H), sedilia (p. 515P), chancel and rood screens (p. 516), a bench-end
(p. 517C), pulpits (p. 517), rood loft (p. §16c), parclose screen (p. 516A), chantry
chapels (p. 472A, C), a gable cross (p. 512D), crockets (p. 5118, T), finial (p. §12G, H),
pendant (p. 512R), and boss (p. 512M) are given. Metalwork in door fittings, grilles,
and in fine brasses was used in profusion with much variety and beauty of design
and execution (p. 518).
Tudor. Tudor ornament began to appear during the late Perpendicular period in
church monuments, and also in domestic architecture. The Tudor rose (p. 508w)
enriches mouldings and, with curling vine-leaf and tendril, is frequent in the
spandrels of four-centred door-heads. Chantry chapels, as at Worcester (p. 472),
were striking features in some of the cathedrals. Sculpture generally betrays
Renaissance influence, and the roundels at Hampton Court Palace were actually
brought from Italy. Chimney-pieces offered a fine field for the decorative display of
carving with heraldic devices, as in the famous chimney-pieces of Tattershall Keep
(p. 445G, J). Woodwork is finely carved, as in the linenfold panels of walls (p. 461])
and doors, and also of furniture, which now became more plentiful. Modelled
plaster ceilings with moulded ribs give finish to interiors, as at Loseley Park (p.
887A), Levens Hall, and Hampton Court (p. 461c). Timber buildings sometimes
are covered externally with ornamental plaster ‘pargetting’ (see Glossary). Leadwork
also received ornamental treatment, as in the turrets at Hampton Court, and rain-
water heads (p. 461G). Wrought-iron door fittings (p. 461H) and metal work as the
screen to Henry VII’s Chantry Chapel (p. 428) are architectural in character. Glass,
coloured with heraldic devices, was now more largely used in domestic architecture
in patterned lead ‘cames’, as in the windows at Ockwells Manor, Berkshire. Castles of
the feudal type, designed for military operations and for defensive purposes, and
often as bare of ornament as of comfort, were passing away. The manor houses which
sprang up were developed on domestic rather than on military lines, as the fortified
stronghold gave way before the dwelling-house. With this change of purpose came a
desire for comfort and decoration, and so ornament, which had been the faithful
handmaid of ecclesiastical architecture, had a fresh chance of development in the
service of domestic architecture. Thus, the tendency of Tudor ornament was
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 511

ARAPETS, GARGOYLES, CRESTINGS s CROCKETS

PARAPETS comerth

(EARLY ENGLISH) Siam Cen a7

B
(Ney CATHEDRAL BEVERLEY MINSTER HECKINGTON : LINCS.

TOWER PARAPET f= Vuze S. JAMES : :

ORTH PETHERTON: SOMERSET |S MARY TAUNTON WESTERLEIGH
:SOMERSET
GARGOYLE CRESTINGS
| gp Fi Ay, : Pe, ge j

Sen, Be Ee) aloe sy

ICAL EARLY GARGOYLE| Fr’ a4 Wie Ens
SSAA SASE. |PATRINGTON : YORKS.
HY. VIS CHAPEL 7 TRUNCH:| Ca
WESTMINSTER

Ga Ges
si Sp iO SZ

gh \(R% a Ni} g SN
WY) Ga\fe
I Vers Kane
i, NY NAS Ch
: SS Sy)"
ib
CEE ‘ yy ~~ FW
\\ »\
) DECORATED)? *
| lez
ALISBURY er 4
aR) BLY
 512 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

P
CROSSES, et pees Be ET

S. GERMAIN’S:
CORNWALL _ WALSUALI
——eunWaALl

LINCOLN CATHE _ALTAR SCREEN: BEVERLEY CHAPTER H®: WELLS

(NORMAN) (E. Ce
iAESIED

HILPECK:TIES
RREEUA HEREFORD WESTMINSTER ABBEY BEVERLEY MINSTER” MAGOALEN COLL: on
asee & PENDANT.
M/ phe D IN
WML EK, -aeRig
Y YY iy We,

i ‘ Mess.
PRIOR'S DOORWAY ° wy OQ: ey Se
ELY CATHEDRAL S. ALBANS ABBEY MAYOR'S CHAPEL: BRISTOL Alt SAINTS: EVESt
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 513

largely governed by its incorporation in domestic building. This, together with the
influence of the incoming Renaissance, gives it a special character and associates it
intimately with the new English homes, which were then rising throughout the
country in place of old monastic establishments. Here then, again, we see that
ornament adds its peculiar attribute to each period.

REFERENCE BOOKS
ADDY,S. 0. The Evolution of the English House. London, 1933.
BATSFORD,H.,and FRY, C. The Cathedrals of England. London, 1936.
—. The Greater English Church. London, 1940.
BOND, F. Gothic Architecture in England. London, 1905.
—. Introduction to English Church Architecture. 2 vols. London, 1913.
—. Westminster Abbey. London, 1909.
BRANDON,R.,andJ. A. Analysis of Gothic Architecture. 1847. New ed., 2 vols. Edinburgh,
1903.
—. Open Timber Roofs of the Middle Ages. London, 1849.
—. Parish Churches. 2 vols. London, 1851.
BRAUN, H. The Enghsh Castle. 3rd ed., London, 1947-8.
BRITTON, J. Cathedral Antiquities. 13 vols. London, 1817-35.
—. Architectural Antiquities. 5 vols. London, 1807-26.
BROWN, G. BALDWIN. The Arts in Early England. 2 vols. London, 1903.
BROWN,R. ALLEN. English Medieval Castles. London, 1954.
CLAPHAM, A.W. English Romanesque Architecture. 2 vols. Oxford, 1930-4.
CLARK, G.T. Mediaeval Military Architecture in England. 2 vols. London, 1884.
CLARK, GRAHAME. Prehistoric England. 4th ed. London, 1948.
COOK, G.H. Mediaeval Chantries and Chantry Chapels. London, 1947.
cox,j.c. The Parish Churches of England. London, 1937.
—. (Editor) The English County Church Series. 12 vols. 1910-13.
—. English Church Fittings, etc. London, 1933.
CROSSLEY, F.H. English Church Monuments. A.D. 1150-1550. London, 1921.
—. The English Abbey. London, 1935.
—. English Church Craftsmanship. London, 1941.
—. Timber Building in England. London, 1951.
GARDNER, S. A Guide to English Gothic Architecture. Cambridge, 1922.
GARNER, T., and STRATTON, A. The Domestic Architecture of England during the Tudor
Period. 2 vols. London, 1929.
GODFREY, W.H. Story of Architecture in England. London, 1928.
GOTCH,J.A. The Growth of the English House. London, 1928.
GREEN, J.R. Short History of the English People. London, 1907.
HARVEY, J. H. ‘Education of Mediaeval Architects’, Journal R.I.B.A., June, 1945.
—. English Cathedrals. 2nd ed. London, 1956.
—. Gothic England. 2nd ed. London, 1948.
—. Henry Yevele. 2nd ed. London, 1946.
HAWKES, J., and Cc. Prehistoric Britain. Pelican books, 1949.
HOWARD, F.E., and CROSSLEY, F. H. English Church Woodwork. 2nd ed. London, 1927.
HOWARD,F.E. The Mediaeval Styles of the English Parish Church. London, 1936.
JACKSON, SIR T.G. Gothic Architecture in France, England and Italy. 2 vols. London, 1915.
JONES, S.R. English Village Homes. London, 1936.
KNOOP,D., and JONES, G. P. The Mediaeval Mason. Manchester, 1933.
LETHABY, W.R. Westminster Abbey and the King’s Craftsmen. London, 1906.
MOORMAN, J.P. Church Life in England in the 13th Century. Cambridge, 1945.
O’NEIL,B.H.ST. J. Castles. H.M.S.O., 1953.
PALMER, R.L. English Monasteries in the Middle Ages. London, 1930.
PARKER, J. H. Glossary of Terms in Grecian, Roman, Italian and Gothic Architecture.
3 vols. 11th ed. London, 1905.
R HOA.
514 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

POWER,C.E. English Mediaeval Architecture. 2nd ed., 3 vols. London, 1923.

PRIOR,E.S. A History of Gothic Art in England. London, 1900.
PUGIN, A., and A. W. Examples of Gothic Architecture. London, 1838.
PUGIN, A. Specimens of Gothic Architecture. 2 vols. London, 1821.
QUENNELL, M., and c. H. B. A History of Everyday Things in England, 1066-1499.
London, 1931.
—. Everyday Life in Anglo-Saxon, Viking, and Norman Times. London, 1926.
RICHMOND,I.A. Roman Britain. Pelican books, 1955.
RICKMAN,T. Gothic Architecture. Oxford and London, 1881.
ROSENBERG, G. “The Functional Aspect of the Gothic Style’, R.I.B.A. Journal, Jan. and
Feb., 1936.
SALZMAN,L. F. Building in England down to 1540. Oxford, 1952.
—. English Life in the Middle Ages. Oxford, 1927.
—. England in Tudor Times. London, 1926.
SCOTT, SIRG. GILBERT. Lectures on Mediaeval Architecture. 2 vols. London, 1879.
—. History of English Church Architecture. London, 1881.
SHARPE, E. Seven Periods of English Architecture. London, 1888.
—. Architectural Parallels. London, 1848.
—. Mouldings of the Six Periods of British Architecture. London, 1871-4.
—. Rise and Progress of decorated Window Tracery in England. 2 vols. London, 1849.
—. Churches of the Nene Valley, Northants. 1880.
SMITH, J. T. ‘Medieval Aisled Halls and their Derivatives’, Archaeological Fournal, vol.
cxii, 1956.
STATHAM, H. H. (Editor). Cathedrals of England and Wales (The ‘Builder’ Series.) 1898,
with series of plans to a large scale.
SWARTWOUT,R.E. The Monastic Craftsman. Cambridge, 1932.
THOMPSON, A. HAMILTON. Military Architecture in England. London, 1912.
—. The Ground Plan of the English Parish Church. Cambridge, 1911.
—. Historical Growth of the English Parish Church. Cambridge, 1913.
—. English Monasteries. Cambridge, 1913.
TIPPING, H. A. English Homes. Period I, 1066-1485; Period II, 1485-1558. 3 vols.
London, 1921-37.
TOY, SYDNEY. Castles of Great Britain. 2nd ed. London, 1954.
TURNER, T. H., and PARKER, J. H. Some Account of the Domestic Architecture in England
during the Middle Ages. 3 vols. Oxford, 1859-77.
VALLANCE, AYMER. The Old Colleges of Oxford. London, 1912.
—. English Church Screens. London, 1936.
—. Old Crosses and Lychgates. London, 1933.
WEBB, GEOFFREY. Architecture in Britain—The Middle Ages. Pelican History of Art,
1956.
WICKES, C. Spires and Towers of the Mediaeval Churches of England. 3 vols. London
1853-9.
WILLIS, R. ‘Vaults of the Middle Ages’, Trans. R.I.B.A., 1842.
—. Architectural History of Canterbury Cathedral. London, 1845.
WONNACOTT,E. W.M. History and Development of Vaulting in England. London, 1891.
WOOD, MARGARET E. ‘Thirteenth Century Domestic Architecture in England’, Archaeo-
logical Fournal, vol. cx, Supplement, 1950.
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 515

= ——S Se

i
i ayy Hie
UUuy« ICS) EISEN) PR)
Moy ool is) Ne

sil
eae
ih zis Cat a
Th] es
= EARLY Sse (DEC) i
IML \eNGLish)
x ae Ve warcatmu:
ica
a a a

a8 ei ©an! ae
Whi
iw

FONT LACKFORD FONT OFFLEY,HERTS. FONT ‘CLYMPINGSUSSEX

SU
ibe bee
ie

ISCINA :CROWMARSH
OXFORDSHIRE

Is else
7)
“EARLY
| \ENGLISH
Wate?

<== |=O
s
= i Ol
———

“ABERNACLE: WARMINGTON SEDILIA : S.MARY LEICESTER TABERNAC

NORTHANTS. ; . CATHEDRAL.
wi] A

EARLY
ENGLISH =

M) SEDILIA: MERTON COLLEGE: OXFORD

i | eR
SEDILIA :RUSHDEN,NORTHANTS.
 516 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

i + ROOD LOFTS

eee
aes
PARCLOSE. SCREEN|rant
pGEDDINGTON:NORTHANTS!

HANDRAIL © ROOD LOFT

\\r?REMOVED MERE: WILTS.
i Bis
J

DOORWAY
BLOCKED UP

93"-------2
--
ae MULLIONS
CORNICE ccé&
T

DETAILS
ROOD ap OF FIG. ies

COVEHITHE

—-
=x;

=
‘1S,
a:
=n
SS
: Ri——4|
=j="
1
"SS

@
ee
ThessHANDBOROUGH: OXON eae SUF F OLK OOD: KENN: S DEVON
 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 517

MEDIEVAL CHIRCH FITTINGS

————

(A) KNIGHTS
OF THE BATH
(b) ESQUIRES

a
Se
eee
eee
ee
Sp

On (Das ’

BENCH-END STALLS “BISHOPS HRONE. STALLS venay wn cusp. (STALL

BLYTHBURGH YORK MINSTER EXET ER WESTMINSTER BEVERLEY MINSTER
MISERICORDS
& ("4

H (eeay KG sn

3 JUDGMENT OF SOLOMON
HENRY VII CHAPEL
WESTMINSTER

rit
FOTHERINGAY MAGDALEN COLL. OX ARUNDEL: SUSSEX BANWELL SOMERS!
 518 ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

$e
an ore A a
e iA
| srl lh ; Z
SKETCH OF GRILLE
it!
i

ON TOMB
Bax=~
| fSNS
| YZ

: ON
fl \UpkB A Wess}
: ww===
in pS SS
SS = t
| Vf, 4]

]
|
|

BRASS LECTERN
UPWELL S. PETER =
NORFOLK 5. 5

EAS re. aaa

BRA ANCT
ESCUTCHEONS RING HANDLE. COBHAM: KENT > RNOCKER” WESTMING
N.PETHERTON ASHBY S.LECER, — 5! 8 BRAVBROoK.1405 DURHAM ABBEY
~
~

ENGLISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 519

Aipete 6 ae BINS, ------—4=

SE cco | (Rent GFE SCscen

A\ CORONATION CHAIR
WESTMINSTER ABBEY
“(BVORY TRIPTYCH
BRITISH MUSEUM ‘
PANS Rae

Fo 32° 1475
LIVERY CUPBOARD
& CES; ‘

@ 14 CENT
UTTOFT:LINCS BLYTHBURGH FYFIELD:BERKS
SUFFOLK

JS.
;
ee
wok
edi
wae
eth
es
ROS- \ . Saw
—L—~

alee
=

FIRE PLACE
OrROCHESTER
Cc. A. 150Q FIRE PLACE

CASTLE OAK GOTHIC CUPBOARD cONISBOROUGH CASTLE

 520 SCOTTISH AND IRISH ARCHITECTURE

MODERNG

KEEP COURT YARD 9°

== 78.0" ——
MODERN ADDITIONS

PLAN OF FIRST FLOOR

SCHOOL ROOMSY. —

Loweae ss GEORGE HERIOT'S HOSPITAL

PLANS EDINBURGH : FROM S.W
 Land over 500 feet
re) Miles 50
_———

Ireland and Scotland, sixth-seventeenth centuries

XIII. SCOTTISH AND IRISH

ARCHITECTURE

SCOTTISH ARCHITECTURE
(twelfth-seventeenth century)
ANTECEDENTS of Scottish architecture include: mesolithic cave-dwellings; neo-
lithic ‘long’ barrows (‘horned cairns’) and round barrows of successive epochs; late
neolithic houses, of which there are substantial remains at Skara Brae, in the
Orkneys, comprising eight rectangular, round-cornered beach-cobble dwellings of
c. 1800 B.C., linked by stone-slate-covered passages and fitted with a central square
stone hearth and two stone-enclosed box beds on opposite walls; Celtic ‘beehive’
huts such as those of Lewis in the Outer Hebrides (p. 2D); lake dwellings of the
later type, not raised on piles but built upon artificial islands or ‘crannogs’, which
in Scotland are not earlier than Roman times and which in some cases continued in
use until the seventeenth century; forts or ‘duns’ of which a lofty, circular special
type known as ‘brochs’, of dry-stone walling and between 40-70 ft diameter, were
built in the two centuries following 100 B.c. From about the eighth century A.D. to
1150, when Scottish Mediaeval architecture began to follow English lines, some
oratories, small churches and round towers were built showing an affinity with
Irish Celtic architecture.
Mediaeval architecture in Scotland followed on much the same lines as in
England until the fifteenth century, when it assumed a more definitely national
character. Inspiration was largely drawn from France, with which country there
was close political connection. This resulted in a picturesque and interesting
 522 SCOTTISH AND IRISH ARCHITECTURE

development on French lines, especially after Robert Bruce (1306-29) secured the
independence of Scotland. In Melrose Abbey (1450-1505) (p. 524C) are seen
French influences, while Rosslyn Chapel (1447) (p. 524A, B) bears a strong
resemblance to the Portuguese church of Belem, near Lisbon (p. 644), though the
latter is some fifty years later. Lancet windows either singly or in groups were used
long after they had been discontinued in England; while the Flamboyant tracery of
French Gothic was preferred to the Perpendicular style of English Gothic.
Glasgow Cathedral (1181-1508) (p. 413D) is the best preserved Gothic edifice
in Scotland, and, although of different dates, is very uniform in appearance. It has
an internal length of 283 ft, with nave and aisles, choir and aisles, eastern aisle with
chapels beyond, and chapter house and sacristy. The fine vaulted crypt (1233-58)
(p. 523B), fashioned in the fall of the ground, encloses the shrine of S. Mungo.
Other important cathedrals are those of Edinburgh, S. Andrews (1160-1318),
Kirkwall(1138-1550), Dunblane (1238-60, with Romanesque tower), one of the
finest Mediaeval buildings in Scotland, Aberdeen (c. 1357-1522) and Elgin.
S. Giles, Edinburgh (mainly 1385-1416) (p. 523A) has a crown-like spire (-1495),
while the abbeys of Kelso (1128—), Melrose, Dunfermline (nave, 1125-30), Holy-
rood (late thirteenth century) and Dryburgh are well known. Dalmeny Church
(c. 1175) and Leuchars Church (p. 523c) are amongst the most notable of many
parish churches.
Castles and mansions in Scotland from the twelfth to the seventeenth century
have a national character. Of about eight hundred instances of the castle or private
stronghold, the Anglo-Norman type of earthwork of the twelfth century was some
fifty years later than in England. While the orthodox motte-and-bailey arrangement
was common, more frequently the motte and bailey were undivided by a ditch and
together stood elevated on a great mound. On the motte was a wooden tower
within a palisade; in the bailey, itself surrounded by palisaded ramparts, were other
timber buildings forming chapel, kitchen, bakehouse, stables and storehouses and
the like.
In the thirteenth century, the bailey type of defended residence took firmer
shape, yet still in 1300 most castles were wholly of timber, and the smaller ones in
diminishing numbers afterwards; only the most important had acquired stone walls.
These major exceptions, of the latter part of the period, included Dirleton Castle, East
Lothian, Bothwell, Lanarkshire and Caerlaverock, Lanarkshire, in their initial form.
Of fourteenth century instances, Rothesay Castle, Bute (1312-34) (p. 520A, B)
is less advanced than the castles last named but representative in its girdle of high,
towered walls (the gatehouse and chapel are later), though baileys were not usually
so regular and variously were triangular, rectangular or polygonal, according to site
circumstances. Sometimes there was nothing but a stone-walled enclosure;
ordinarily, there were projecting round towers, and one, occasionally rectangular,
was larger than the rest and thus reminiscent of the original motte with its special
tower. The towers served for residential chambers and other uses, but most of the
living and ancillary accommodation was still provided in separate buildings,
irregularly dispersed in the bailey, the more important, such as the chapel and hall,
increasingly tending to appear as stone structures as the century proceeded. The
hall then almost invariably was raised on an undercroft, often vaulted. The defended
homes of the lesser gentry, sporadically changing to stone late in the period, were
more compact, a single tower or ‘fortalice’ sufficing, this having a restricted court or
‘barmkin’ at its foot, demarcated by a wall about 9-12 ft high, and a ditch beyond.
The first modest stone ‘peles’ of the border country belong to the same time and
class.
Fifteenth century prosperity produced a spate of building. Military traditions
 SCOTTISH AND IRISH ARCHITECTURE 523

B. Glasgow Cathedral: crypt (1233-58). c. Leuchars Church from N.E.

See p. 522 (1172-85). See p. 522
524 SCOTTISH AND IRISH ARCHITECTURE

A. Exterior from S.W. B. Interior Master’s pillar

Rosslyn Chapel (c. 1447). See p. 522

Cc . Melrose Abbey from E. (1450- 1505) . See p. 522

 SCOTTISH AND IRISH ARCHITECTURE 525

weakened. In the great houses the first-storey hall block, as much as Ioo ft long,
now assumed higher importance than the great tower, and the two were often
conjoined to form a frontispiece to the bailey or court behind. In this block the
‘long gallery’ made its appearance under direct French influence, as at Falkland
Castle, Fife, in 1461, long before such a feature appeared in England (p. 882).
Crenellated and corbelled parapets already were normal, but machicolated parapets,
with apertures between the corbels, are limited almost precisely to this century in
the Scottish castle. The angle turret or ‘bartizan’ was another French borrowing
which contributes to the special character of the national style. Doune Castle,
Perthshire (early fifteenth century) (p. 520E, F) illustrates these points and the
equally typical pitched roofs with their ‘corbie’ or ‘crow-stepped’ gables. Quite
often, such roofs were carried on pointed barrel vaults; and the lowest floor of
castles, under the main floor, too was usually vaulted, as well as intermediate floors
in some cases. Of numerous tower houses (fortalices), Borthwick Castle, Mid-
lothian (1430-) is a simple rectangular block with two shallow wings on one flank.
Sixteenth and seventeenth century major castles and mansions tended to become
more elaborate; the number of storeys increased at times and wings thrown out behind
the frontal block might enclose the entire court to form such a regular plan as that of
George Heriot’s Hospital, Edinburgh (c. early seventeenth century) (p. 520L,
M, N), a fine building in the early Renaissance style of which the quality of detail is
especially marked in the entrance gateway. Drum Castle, Aberdeen (p. 5200, D),
shows a partial step in the same direction. The dwellings of simpler fashion
persisted in their Mediaeval form with little consistent change, save that barmkins
and parapets often were dispensed with, and angle turrets or bartizans, round or
square, were roofed over. In general in the lesser dwellings, fortalice or border pele,
the first-floor hall was a principal element just as in the mansions, and to provide
minor rooms without impeding natural light, wings were often thrown out from the
angles of the main block, giving plans approximating to L, Z, T or E forms, as at
Cowane’s Hospital or Guildhall, Stirling (1639) (p. 520J, K), or Glamis Castle,
Angus (c. 1606) (p. §20G, H), which has a Z plan produced from an original L
arrangement by low-wing extensions made later in the century.
The plans and sketches of these different types of building given on p. 520
illustrate the national character of Scottish secular architecture.

IRISH ARCHITECTURE*
(sixth—sixteenth century)

THE architecture of Ireland can be divided into three main periods—Celtic,

Mediaeval, and Renaissance—and in each there are a number of interesting build-
ings of distinctive character.
Celtic Architecture. Early Christian buildings in Ireland are archaic, and existing
an
remains indicate that the building monks largely followed types of pre-Christi
chief interest lies in Celtic architectur e from the sixth century to the
times. The
n of the
English Conquest, 1169-72. The Celtic or ‘Runic’ cross is a modificatio
and is often capped with a sloping roof to throw off the rain, as in the
Latin cross
panels con-
crosses of Durrow and Monasterboice (923). They are divided into
and much
taining carved representations of Biblical episodes, the unending knot,
timber, thatched
other symbolism. The majority of the earliest churches were of
are extremely
with reeds, and have disappeared. The surviving stone churches
for priests, with small
small and appear to have been principally used as oratories
* See ‘Prehistoric Architecture,’ p. I.
526 SCOTTISH AND IRISH ARCHITECTURE

B. ‘S. Kevin’s Kitchen’, Glendalough; church with adjoining house

and bell-tower (c. 850). See p. 527
 SCOTTISH AND IRISH ARCHITECTURE 527
square chancels attached. The naves have barrel vaults surmounted by an ‘over-
croft’ covered by a steep roof of stone, as at Cormac’s Chapel, Cashel (1127-34)
(p. 528), probably the finest in Ireland, and the much earlier S. Kevin’s Kitchen
Glendalough (c. 850) (p. §26B). Windows appear to have been unglazed in these
primitive churches. There were also monastic establishments, and there is a group
of seven small churches at Clonmacnoise similar to some in Asia Minor. The monas-
tic cells at the Skelligs are of beehive form, with domed stone roofs in horizontal
courses, as in the Treasury of Atreus, Mycenae (p. 100a). Of similar dry-stone
technique is the remarkable Oratory of Gallerus, Dingle (sixth or seventh century)
(p. 526A). It is rectangular, 22 ftx18 ft 6 in externally, with a pointed section
contrived by corbelled courses. Round towers, which are generally detached from
the churches, were built between 890 and 1238. They were used as treasure-houses
refuges, or bell towers, and for displaying lamps at night. The entrance doorway
was several feet from the ground, and the towers, which taper slightly towards the
summit, are crowned, as in the Tower, Devenish (p. 528G), with a conical roof, or
as at the Tower, Kilree (p. 528J), with a battlemented parapet. :
Mediaeval Architecture. Within the English domain in Ireland the influence of
Continental art was felt during the Middle Ages, but few monuments of importance
were erected. The cathedrals of Dublin (p. 413A), Kildare, and Cashel are the
most important. The absence of parish churches is remarkable, while those of
monasteries and friaries (principally Franciscan) are small and usually have a nave
and choir—probably once divided by a wooden screen—transept and southern
aisle, cloisters, and a tower, often added in the fifteenth century. The best known
are those at Cashel, Kilconnel, and Muckross.
The earlier castles of the Irish chieftains are an interesting study, and the
Anglo-Norman overlordship after 1171 has left its military traces (p. 441A); but
owing to the disturbances in Elizabethan times there is little domestic architecture
left of this period. Irish architecture of the Renaissance period is included with
English architecture of that period.

REFERENCE BOOKS
BILLINGS, R. W. Baronial and Ecclesiastical Antiquities of Scotland. 4 vols. Edinburgh
and London, 1848.
CHAMPNEYS,A.C. Irish Ecclesiastical Architecture. London, 1910.
CHILDE, V. G. Prehistory of Scotland. London, 1935.
DUNRAVEN, EARL OF. Notes on Irish Architecture. 2 vols. London, 1875-7.
Edinburgh Architectural Association, Sketch Book. 1878-94.
GILLESPIE, J. Details of Scottish Domestic Architecture. 1922.
Glasgow Architectural Association, Sketch Book. 3 vols. 1885.
HENRY, F. Irish Art. 1940.
HILL, A. Ardfert Cathedral, Co. Kerry. Cork, 1870.
LEASK, H. G. Irish Castles and Castellated Houses. 1942.
LINDSAY, 1I.G. The Cathedrals of Scotland. 1926.
MACGIBBON, D., and ROSS, T. Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland. 5 vols.
Edinburgh, 1887.
—. Ecclesiastical Architecture of Scotland. 3 vols. Edinburgh, 1896.
MACKENZIE, H. G. The Mediaeval Castle in Scotland. 1927.
MUNRO,R. Ancient Scottish Lake Dwellings. 1882.
National Art Survey of Scotland. Scottish Architecture, 12th-17th Cents. 4 vols. 1921-33.
PETRIE, G. Ecclesiastical Architecture of Ireland. Dublin, 1845.
PINCHES, F. The Abbey Church of Melrose. London, 1879.
PLUNKETT, COUNT. Early Christian Churches in Ireland.
SCOTT-MONCRIEFF,G. (ed.) The Stones of Scotland. 1938.
STOKES, M. Early Christian Architecture in Ireland. London, 1878.
 528 SCOTTISH AND IRISH ARCHITECTURE

[nay
Via
CROFT
OVER
SANCTUARY}

SSS

|
ame | af)
(C)PLAN OF CROFT
S
S 0 10 20 30 40FEET
iar Td T T T I T ae Sea a T
0 z 4 6 8 10 12 MET®

CROFT OVER |
NAVE ~— |G
CROFT OVER
SANCTUARY

YYy
Uy

i ~
=. Su
< eer
tee, in
ni

——- ie jj

H VIEW OF NORTH PORCH Ml

7a
retin
Ansell

poll
ee eee CORMACS CHAP:CASHEL a)
\G )TOWER: DEVENISH TOWER:
Waihi aD tndae
KILREE
etal

KILKENNY
 Land over 1,500 Feet ee
; & Lille
oO Mules joo
eel beanie .Arras

Dieppe 2 Amiens
AY)
S caudebec ao — Noyo Anh
a, “&S ° Beayvai sooissons
Cuz, e —Louvierss Les Andelys OQ °Rheims
c ‘ ie Senlis~

eS e Dreuxe’
Dinane “Dol Mortree 5 scaresSeinl
BRITTANY ROS ‘Chotsalidun, Teuns
JosSelin

P Ort 70
° Poitiers

France in the fourteenth century

XIV. FRENCH GOTHIC

(twelfth-sixteenth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. France, on the western confines of Europe, may be considered,
from an architectural standpoint, as divided into two parts by the River Loire.
With the Franks on the north and the Romance races on the south, architecture was
influenced not only by geographical position, but also by racial differences. The
buildings of old Roman settlers in Provence and along the fertile Rhéne valley not
only determined the character of Romanesque in this district (p. 335), but also
exercised an influence over the Gothic which followed. In the well-defined valley of
the Garonne, which had been a trade-route from Marseilles to Bordeaux for
merchants from the East, it is natural that there should be traces of Byzantine
traditions, even as late as the Gothic period. Moorish Spain made its contribution
too. The north of France, on the other hand, had been exposed to incursions of
530 FRENCH GOTHIC

Northmen, and this element left an impression on Gothic architecture there. The
‘Tle de France’ or Royal Domain—an old district forming a kind of island bounded
by the Seine, the Marne, and other rivers, with Paris as its capital, became, as the
headquarters of the kings of France, the district where, after the introduction of
the pointed arch through the Muslims during the early Crusades, the great French
Gothic cathedrals were first built in rapid succession, as at Paris and Bourges and in
neighbouring provinces at Chartres, Laon, Le Mans, Amiens, and Rheims.
GEOLOGICAL. The excellent building stone of France continued as abundant as
in the Romanesque period (p. 336), and that found near Caen aided in the develop-
ment of the northern Gothic style. In the mountainous districts of Auvergne the
use of volcanic stone gave a rich chromatic appearance to the buildings; while in the
extreme south good local stone helped to continue the Classical traditions handed
down through the Romanesque period (p. 340), but are in contrast with the fine
marble of Italy.
CLIMATIC. This influence remained the same as during the previous period
(p. 336), and all that it is necessary to note here is that the comparatively dull
climate of the north permitted, and even invited, the extension of large traceried
windows to light the vast interiors.
RELIGIOUS. The religious zeal of the thirteenth century, when Christianity was
united against the Muslims, was especially manifested in France in the Third
Crusade (1189) under Philip Augustus, and the Eighth and Ninth Crusades (1249,
1270) under S. Louis, and was marked by the erection of many grand cathedrals
which were the work of the laity and the free communes, in contrast with the
monastic church-building of the Romanesque period, such as that of Abbé Suger,
minister of Louis VII (1137-80). The clergy, as a corporate body, had reached the
summit of their power, largely due to their championship of justice and their
adhesion to the royal cause. The papacy, in spite of vicissitudes, was undoubtedly
powerful in France during the seventy years (1307-77) of the residence of the
Popes in their fortress-palace at Avignon. The religious spirit of the age found an
outlet in the inauguration of cults of special saints in different localities, and this
brought fame to certain shrines which thus acquired wealth and importance as
pilgrimage centres, and this is reflected in the beautiful architecture and decoration
of the churches. The active zeal with which urban populations set about building
cathedrals produced almost miraculously rapid results, and so much did this
outburst of building activity transform the face of France, that it has been compared
by Viollet-le-Duc to the commercial movement which, in later times, covered
Europe with railways. A crusade against the heretical Albigenses (see below) of
Albi, Toulouse, and Carcassonne was preached by the Cistercians in 1204, and
relentless war was waged during the thirteenth century, under papal orders, by the
king of France and the nobles of the north against the south, and ended in the
destruction of the famous culture of Provence, the humiliation of the princes of the
south, and the ultimate extermination of the heresy.
SocIAL. Before the establishment of the kingdom of France, when Hugh Capet
became ‘King of the French’ (987), the country had been peopled by races differing
in origin who were at war with one another and who perpetuated differences in
government, customs, and language. The consequent diversity of influences was
not without its effect both on Romanesque (p. 336) and on Gothic architecture.
The period during which Gothic architecture in France had its growth was marked
by all the restlessness that characterizes the style, which is instinct with the intellec-
tual and spiritual aspirations of that age. The feudal system was the root from which
sprang the tyranny of the lords over the common people as well as the revolt of the
same lords against the kingly power; when kings were strong, the nobles were kept
 FRENCH GOTHIC 531

NOTRE DAME : PARIS

Boe we
SS. (BUTTRESSES &
a btseifosrcrr tae

EXTERIOR FRO PINNACLES: CHEVET

AVE BAYS

0 0 75 _moFEET GPLAN
‘
532 FRENCH GOTHIC

A. West facade B. Nave looking E.

c. Exterior (model) from S.W.

(transept facade 1250-70: chapels between buttresses 1296-1325).

Notre Dame, Paris (1163-c. 1250). See p. 534

 FRENCH GOTHIC 533
in check and the people prospered, and thus kings and people naturally fostered the
communes against the nobles. The twelfth century was remarkable for the continu-
ous struggle of the communes to assert their freedom. During the reign of Philip IV
(1285-1314) the Parlement de Paris became the principal law court, and the
constitutional power of the central authority grew at the expense of feudal and
ecclesiastical powers. Vast stretches of fertile country were brought under cultiva-
tion for corn, vine, and olive, and these and other industries were carried on by a
thrifty, sturdy population which worked, much as in England, for the feudal lord of
chateau or manoir. Though the Black Death (1347-49) swept off a large part of the
population and inevitably retarded progress in architecture, the richness of the soil
still continued to supply the prosperity which, on the secular side, built the world-
famous chateaux of France and the hdtels de ville of the manufacturing towns, such
as Arras and Rouen, while on the ecclesiastical side a powerful and religious laity
erected, with their own funds, and often with their own hands, that wonderful
series of cathedrals which are at once the marvel and the glory of France.
HISTORICAL. Philip Augustus (1180-1223), after declaring King John of
England to have forfeited all the fiefs he held of the French crown, proceeded to
conquer Normandy and the other English possessions, with the exception of
Aquitaine. Philip next defeated the combined English, German, and Flemish forces
at Bovines (1214), and it was in the reign of this strong monarch that a number of
French cathedrals were commenced. The power of France was so predominant that
the English barons were induced to offer the crown of England to Philip’s eldest
son, Louis. Louis IX (S. Louis) (1226-70) further increased the power of the
crown, but died at Tunis, when setting out on the ninth or last Crusade. The
overthrow of the independent counts of Toulouse by Louis IX, during the religious
wars against the Albigenses, so extended the kingdom of France that it obtained
a triple sea-board on the Mediterranean, the Atlantic, and the English Channel, and
this consolidation of the French Kingdom, by which the different nationalities were
gradually absorbed under one king, corresponds with the great cathedral-building
epoch of the thirteenth century.
Philip VI (1328-50) defeated the Flemings at Cassel, in 1328. In 1337, the
Hundred Years’ War with England (p. 386), began because of claims which arose
from the marriage of Isabella of France with Edward II of England, and in 1346 the
Battle of Crecy was won by the English. The French were again defeated by the
English at Poitiers in 1356. Henry V of England defeated the French at Agincourt
(1415) and entered Paris (1420). During the reign of Charles VII (1422-61) there
was a great outburst of national sentiment when Joan of Arc raised the siege of
Orleans (1429) and was burnt at Rouen as a witch by the English. In 1453 the
English were expelled from the whole of France except Calais. So ended the
Hundred Years’ War. Louis XI (1461-83) inaugurated reforms, strengthened the
central power, and worked for the unity of France by annexing Burgundy, Artois,
and Provence. Charles VIII (1483-98), by his marriage with Anne of Brittany,
united that province to the French crown. Thus the close of the Mediaeval period
marks a united France, free from foreign invasion.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The character and principles of Gothic architecture generally must be borne in
mind in considering its developments in any particular country (p. 367). The main
idea or prevailing principle of Gothic architecture in northern France was the same
as in other parts of Europe, while in the south the strong Roman traditions influ-
enced the new style, which in fact had not the same scope as in the north, owing to
534 FRENCH GOTHIC
the great building activity of the previous Romanesque period. The vertical and
aspiring tendency was accentuated in the north by lofty vaults with high-pitched
roofs, western towers, tapering spires, pinnacles, flying buttresses, and tall traceried
windows, and all these features show the experimental treatment of thrust and
counterthrust described in detail in Chapter XI, Gothic architecture in Europe
(pp. 368-71). It should be noted that the style started some half-century earlier in
France than in England.
The Gothic style or ‘Style ogivale’, as it is called in France, lasted approximately
from 1150 to 1500, and is divided by M. de Caumont into: (1) Primaire (twelfth
century) or ‘Gothique 4 Lancettes’, a period distinguished by pointed arches and
geometric traceried windows, and the transition from the Romanesque began first
in the Ile de France at S. Denis (1137-44) (p. 344), Sens (1143), Senlis (1150), and
Noyon (1145) (p. §41). (2) Secondaire (thirteenth century) or “Rayonnant’, a period
characterized by circular windows with wheel tracery, as at Rheims, Amiens, and
Bourges. (3) Tertiaire (fourteenth, fifteenth, and part sixteenth century) or ‘Flam-
boyant’, from the flame-like or free-flowing window tracery, as at S. Quen, Rouen,
S. Jacques, Dieppe, Albi, and Caudebec (p. 564D).

EXAMPLES

CATHEDRALS AND CHURCHES

The unique position occupied by cathedrals in the general social and civic life of
Mediaeval times, which is nowhere more pronounced than in France, has been
described in the chapter on Gothic architecture in Europe (p. 372). It is important
here to remember that the original use and intention of these national monuments
was so different from their modern function, which has become purely religious and
ecclesiastical, that it is impossible for the reader to appreciate their meaning and
value without bearing in mind this wider aspect of old French cathedrals at the time
of their building, when there were practically no other public meeting-places.
French cathedrals, about one hundred and fifty in number, were erected in the
first half of the thirteenth century out of funds provided chiefly by the laity, and
since commonly they did not originate as part of monastic establishments they
differ considerably from most English cathedrals in purpose and consequently in
plan and design (p. 559). The situation and surroundings of the cathedrals of France
also form a marked contrast with those of England; for French cathedrals were a
part of the life of the townspeople and jostled their houses shoulder to shoulder, and
were not, as they generally were in England, set apart in a secluded close (p. 376).
Furthermore, these national churches, by means of the painted glass of the
interior and the statuary of the exterior, served the citizens as an illustrated Bible
when few could read, as has been already described in Chapter XI, Gothic architec-
ture in Europe (p. 372).
Notre Dame, Paris (1163-c. 1250) (pp. 374A; 531, 532, 563C, E, F), one of the
oldest of French Gothic cathedrals, was begun by Bishop Maurice de Sully. The
plan, which either by accident or intention is on a bent axial line, is typical, with
wide nave and double aisles, transepts of small projection practically in line with
the aisles, and a notable chevet, with double aisles and surrounding chapels (of
later date) between the buttresses. The choir, transepts, and all but two bays of the
nave were completed by 1196; the latter bays and the main part of the western front
by 1220; the upper stage of the west front, containing the rose window, by 1225 and
the western towers by about 1250. Considerable modifications then were made to
the fully completed building. Between 1250-70 the transepts were extended by the
 FRENCH GOTHIC 535

B. Exterior from S.E.

c. Interior looking E. pb. South choir aisle, looking west

Amiens Cathedral (1220-88). See p. §41
536 FRENCH GOTHIC

A. Interior looking E. B. West facade

Laon Cathedral (1160-1225). See opposite page

c. Le Mans Cathedral from S.E.

(Nave 12th cent.; S. transept 14th cent.; choir 1217-). See opposite page
 FRENCH GOTHIC 537
depth of their original buttresses, and chapels afterwards thrown out between the
buttresses of the nave, while the former circular upper triforium windows and the
clear-story windows were together replaced by taller clear-story windows: those
nearest the crossing were reinstated by Viollet-le-Duc (p. 531A). The radiating
chapels between the buttresses of the choir were constructed from 1296-1325. The
impressive but sombre interior has a nave arcade with cylindrical columns and
Corinthianesque capitals carrying pointed arches and shafts to support the ribs of
the lofty sexpartite vaulting. The wide-spreading western facade (p. 532A) is prob-
ably the finest and most characteristic in France, and served as a model for many
later churches. It has three deeply recessed portals with successive encircling tiers
of statued niches, and the central doorway is divided by a pillar with a statue of
Christ, while above and across this stretches a band of statues of the kings of
France. This is surmounted by a central wheel window of great beauty, 42 ft in
diameter, flanked by high coupled windows, over which again a pierced arcaded
screen stretches across the facade in front of the nave roof and connecting the two
western towers, which have high pointed louvred openings. It is a facade of dis-
tinctly harmonious composition and peculiarly suitable to the flat island site from
which it rises alone in its impressiveness, without aid from surroundings and
position; although it has lost some dignity by the removal of the flight of steps
which formed a base. The lateral facades (p. 532C) are unimposing, as chapels are
wedged in between the buttresses (1296), which obscure the original design. The
east end, however, presents a fairylike appearance with slender flying buttresses
and chevet chapels which, with the gabled transepts and delicate fléche soaring
300 ft above the ground, backed by the western towers, form one of the most
striking of cathedral groups (p. 531B).
Laon ‘Cathedral’ (1160-1225) (p. 536A, B)—still so-called, though not actually
the seat of a bishop since 1789—a Latin cross in plan, is in the early French Gothic
style. The nave has an arcade of circular columns with varied Corinthianesque
capitals and square abaci to carry pointed arches and shafts to support the ribs of
the sexpartite vaulting. The triforium gallery has a high, slightly pointed enclosing
arch over two smaller pointed arches resting on a central column; above this and
under the clear-story windows is a second triforium gallery, as at Noyon, thus
dividing the nave into four storeys instead of the usual three. The boldly projecting
transepts have later two-storeyed chapels, outside the original plan (p. 563G). The
sanctuary is unusual in having a square end as in England, instead of apsidal, due to
the influence of an English bishop who held the see in the twelfth century. The west
facade (p. 536B), imitated later at Rheims and certain German cathedrals, is an
architectural masterpiece, with three boldly projecting porches, emphasized by
gables and turrets and a central rose window surmounted by blind arcading. Two
open traceried towers, square below and octagonal above, are adorned with figures of
the so-called miraculous oxen, said to have carted the building stone up the rocky
rampart on which stands the great cathedral, which reflects in its style the indepen-
dent spirit of the citizens. If completed, it would have been a still more striking
composition, with two western towers, two towers over each transept, and a central
tower—a seven-towered building.
Soissons Cathedral (1180-1225), the church of a royal abbey of monks and
nuns, is fully-developed early Gothic. The south transept, with clustered columns,
narrow pointed arches and shafts which support the vaulting ribs, is unusual in that
it is apsidal. The choir, completed in 1212, imitates Chartres, and the interior has
the four-storey arrangement with additional triforium.
Le Mans Cathedral is remarkable for an austere nave in the Romanesque style
(twelfth century), and for the vast choir (1217-54), which is said to be larger than
538 FRENCH GOTHIC

the whole Cathedral of Soissons. It has nave, double aisles, and a notable chevet,
with thirteen chapels of unusual projection, of which there is an excellent view
from a neighbouring open space (p. 536C).
Bourges Cathedral (1192-1275) (pp. 539, 548A, 561A), ultra-French in type, is
remarkable for absence of transepts and shortness in proportion to width, and it has
a general resemblance in plan to Notre Dame, Paris; while the nave has triforium,
clear-story, and sexpartite vault, 125 ft high (p. 539C). The double aisles, in
different heights, are unique in France, resembling Milan Cathedral (pp. 6018,
602D). The exterior presents an imposing appearance owing to its uniform width,
unbroken by transeptal projections, while the west facade, 180 ft wide, flanked by
towers, has five portals approached by a fine flight of steps. The principal portal
(p. 539B) has double semicircular-headed doorways, with deeply recessed jambs and
trefoil wall arcading, surmounted by richly canopied niches, and those on the right
side still contain statues. A wide-spreading pointed arch spans the whole, in six
rings, each filled with saints in canopied niches, and the tympanum has an elabor-
ately sculptured Last Judgment—all surmounted by a steep gable enclosing a
wheel window and niches. The exterior from the east end reveals a picturesque
confusion of innumerable double flying buttresses over the aisles, with pinnacles
and other features (p. 539A); while the thirteenth-century stained-glass windows
are amongst the finest in France.
Chartres Cathedral (rebuilt 1194-1260) (pp. 374E; 540, 561E, 563B, 564B, G, 566D,
E, 567A, D, E, G), dominating the town, has an extensive crypt, a remnant of the Rom-
anesque earlier church, still used for pilgrimages to the shrine of the Vierge Noire.
The plan has a short nave, strongly marked aisled transepts, each provided with two
towers, which, with the two western and two contemplated eastern towers and a cen-
tral tower, would have made a magnificent pile of nine important towers. The un-
usual chevet is built above the crypt of the older church, while the spire (1507-14) of
the north tower is one of the most beautiful in Europe, and forms a contrast with the
earlier one on the south (1145-70). The interior (p. 540B, C) has a fine nave arcade
of circular piers with four shafts, low arcaded triforium surmounted by a clear-
story of two-light pointed windows, all crowned with a quadripartite vault, 120 ft
high, in oblong bays—probably the first example in which the square bay was
abandoned. The cathedral is remarkable, even in France, for the wonderful
thirteenth-century stained glass of its one hundred and sixty windows, and for the
profusion of fine sculptured figures in the doorways of the west front and in the
triple porches of the north (p. 566D, E) and south transepts. These famous figures,
though somewhat archaic and stiff, are more ambitious than any previous French
statuary. The flying buttresses are in three arches one above another, the two lower
of which are connected by radiating balusters resembling the spokes of a wheel
(p. 564B).
Rheims Cathedral (1211-90) (pp. 543, 544) Owes its arrangement to its purpose
as the coronation church of the kings of France; for the nave and aisles of the
western arm are broadened out in the eastern arm (finished 1241) into a nave and
double aisles, so as to include the projecting transepts and thus give space for
coronation ceremonies; while the chevet has a ring of five chapels (p. 544A, C, G),
similar to Westminster Abbey, the design of which was largely inspired by this
building (p. 424D). The names of successive mason-architects are known. The
western facade (c. 1255-90), by Bernard de Soissons, more ornate than that of
Notre Dame, Paris, has the usual recessed portals exquisitely carved with some
five hundred statues; the tympana are occupied by rose windows instead of sculp-
ture, and each is framed in by five rings of statues and enclosed by richly orna-
mented gables, of which the central one contains the group of the Coronation of the
 FRENCH GOTHIC 539

B. West doorway c. Interior looking E.

Bourges Cathedral (1192-1275). See opposite page
540 FRENCH GOTHIC

A. Cathedral from N.W.

B. Interior looking E. c. Interior looking W.

Chartres Cathedral (1194-1260 and later North Spire). See p. 538

 FRENCH GOTHIC 541
Virgin (p. 543). Above the central portal is the magnificent rose window, 4o ft in
diameter, flanked by high traceried openings; while in the upper stage, instead of
the open arcade of Notre Dame, is a band of tabernacled statues of the kings of
France, above which rise the two western towers (1305-1427), 267 ft high, with
angle turrets and incomplete spires. The interior (p. 5448) gives one an impression
of vast space, and is grand in the extreme, with its nave arcade of clustered piers
(Pp. 544J) supporting pointed arches, surmounted by shallow triforium, lofty clear-
story (p. 544D), and fine intersecting vault, 125 ft above the floor, while in the
distance is seen the chevet with its columns. Flying buttresses, over single aisles in
the nave (p. 544£) and over double aisles at the east end (p. 369E), show how the
thrust of the vault is transmitted by arches to piers weighted by pinnacles and
statuary. This great cathedral, which was the shrine of religion, the pride of France
and a treasure house of art, was much damaged in the 1914-18 war, but has been
skilfully restored.
Amiens Cathedral (1220-88) (pp. 374C, 535, 560B, 563A, 564C, H, 566H) was
begun with the nave, an unusual procedure, designed by Robert de Luzarches and
completed in 1236. The choir was next (1236-70), in the charge successively of
Thomas and Regnault de Cormont, father and son, and afterwards the transepts.
The upper part of the west front and the western towers followed after an interval
(1366-1420). The cathedral is typically French, 450 ft long and 150 ft wide, with
transepts only slightly projecting, and a sweeping chevet of seven chapels. The
buttress chapels are later additions. The noble interior, spacious in its soaring
height, seems but to enclose and not exclude the sky above, and the stone vault,
140 ft high, is upheld by cylindrical columns with four attached smaller columns
(p. 369F). The great glory of this cathedral—the ‘Bible of Amiens’—is the wonder of
its carved woodwork in the choir stalls, which breaks away from studied lines and
soars above like the branches of living trees. Other cathedrals are glorious without
in sculptured stone, but Amiens is also lovely within, in carved wood. The western
facade is one of the noblest among the wonderful fagades in France (p. 535A), and
with its serried ranks of statues resembles Notre Dame and Rheims. The central
western doors are separated by one of the noblest of sculptured figures in the world,
the ‘Beau Dieu d’Amiens’. The ridge of the external wooden roof is over 200 ft
above the ground. The upper flying buttresses have only one aisle to span (p. 369D).
The slender timber fléche (p. 564C, H), rising 180 ft above the roof, forms the
crowning feature of this beautiful church (p. 535B).
Bayeux Cathedral (thirteenth-fifteenth century) (p. 548B), built on to the
remains of a church of c. 1077, had its Romanesque nave transformed in the early
thirteenth century, a new choir constructed after 1230 and a central tower added in
the fifteenth century. It is remarkable for its twenty-two chapels and immense
Romanesque crypt under the sanctuary.
Noyon Cathedral (1145-1228), an early Gothic building combining the
German triapsal plan and the French chevet, has a large vaulted triforium.
Coutances Cathedral (1218-91) (p. 548D), on its dominating hill site, is famous
for the two western towers and spires, and the beautiful octagonal lantern over the
crossing of nave and transepts.
Rouen Cathedral (1202-30 and later) (pp. 374B, 561C) has a double-storeyed
nave arcade and three beautiful towers: the spire of that over the crossing
was rebuilt in cast-iron, 1823-76. The building was seriously war-damaged in
1944.
Evreux Cathedral (1119-1531) (pp. 374D, 561B), Troyes Cathedral (1208-
1429) (p. §48c), grand and wide, with five aisles, ancient choir, chevet and decorated
west facade, and Dol Cathedral (1204-sixteenth century), a massive pile with
542 FRENCH GOTHIC

square east end, are other interesting examples. S. Urbain, Troyes (1262) (p. 564E),
exquisite with triple porches; S. Pierre, Caen, (1308-1521) (p. 794) with its bold
turreted tower, of which the spire was destroyed in 1944; and S. Pierre, Lisieux
(1170-1235), raised high on its approaching steps, are some among the crowd of
wonderful churches which make the church fame of Normandy.
La Sainte Chapelle, Paris (1243-8) (p. 546A, B), built by Pierre de Montreuil,
one of the greatest architects of the thirteenth century, with the space between the
buttresses occupied by windows, 15 ft wide and 50 ft high, is often quoted as a
typical Gothic structure. The plan (p. 560D) was in size similar to that of S. Stephen,
Westminster (p. 560C), which was ruined by fire, and demolished for the rebuilding
of Westminster Palace. It has a richly vaulted crypt, and such characteristic French
features as the apsidal termination and high stone-vaulted roof.
Beauvais Cathedral (1247-1568) (pp. 374F; 545) was never completed westward
of the choir and transepts (p. 545G), and the site of the proposed nave is partly
occupied by the Romanesque church of c. 997 known as the ‘Basse Giuvre’. The
roof fell (1284), and the choir was reconstructed and strengthened by additional
piers (1337-47), and in the sixteenth century the transepts were built. There was
an open-work spire, 500 ft high, over the crossing, which collapsed in 1573, partly
because there was no nave to buttress it on the west. The building is of extreme
height, 157 ft 6 in to the vault—the loftiest in Europe—and about three and a half
times its span. This soaring pile is perhaps the most daring achievement in Gothic
architecture, and has been regarded as one of the wonders of Mediaeval France.
The structure is held together internally only by a network of iron tie-rods, which
suggests that these ambitious builders had attempted more than they could properly
achieve, while flying buttresses (p. 545B, D), in three tiers and of immense thickness,
take the vault thrust. The polygonal chevet has seven encircling chapels (p. 545A, C),
and the rich stained-glass windows (p. 545E) are of the thirteenth, fourteenth, and
sixteenth centuries. The south transept facade (p. 545B), now denuded of statues, is
an ornate design in the Flamboyant style, even excelling the western fronts of many
cathedrals, and the carved wooden doors are masterpieces of Gothic and Renais-
sance workmanship.
S. Ouen, Rouen (1318-1515) (pp. 546D, 561D, 563H), of which the choir (13 18-
1339) is contemporary with Cologne; S. Maclou, Rouen (1432-1500), probably
the richest Flamboyant example in France with a fine pentagonal porch (badly
damaged, 1944); S. Jacques, Dieppe (1350-1440), and S. Vulfran, Abbeville
(1488-1534) (p. 546C), are later examples in the north of France, mostly in the
Flamboyant style.
Strasbourg Cathedral (1230-1365) (pp. 374G, 547) has a Gothic nave which
was added to the Romanesque choir and transepts (1179). The beautiful western
facade of 1276-1365 has a recessed portal (p. 547C), richly carved, as is usual in
France, surmounted by an open-work gable and tracery in two planes, above which
is a rose window, 42 ft in diameter, flanked with double traceried windows and two
western towers, one of which terminates in an open-work octagon and spire, 466 ft
high, erected 1399-1439. The north doorway (p. 547D) has a crown of triple gables,
and pierced parapets with intersecting mouldings. Like many an English cathedral
it is the outcome of centuries of work, and one generation succeeded another in
adding its part to this triumphal expression of devotional art, which ranks amongst
the finest religious monuments of France.
In the south of France there are fewer churches of the Middle Ages, partly
because of the number erected in the Romanesque period, and they differ from
northern churches in plan and design, owing to the proximity and influence of
Roman buildings.
 FRENCH GOTHIC 543

Rheims Cathedral from W. (1211-90 Bb) towers c. 1305-1427). See p. 538

 FRENCH GOTHIC

1 |

i lt
Fig
ar
ae
4H

dy
ae
+
y+ Sige
ee,
ee
Ua
[ae Se
AI
ai

L ~joy

H
ar
aHTH
=

ET CHAPEL ony
Yahi
SCALE FOR \
| SECTIONS ¥ Bul
|
ST Fi A 12
( “ss
1104 2 |
1001
tap

Los EXTERNAI
1 80} 7 WALKING
5 i WAY.
mid
T lal 3
T
1

SOS :
Cee , ps ee
l
1
=I
He
aa 5a 8
no
ese
an
| Ape
=|
24i
SN
—+- = —I00'.0°—-— | — - —

D) NAVE BAYS wn ( F \TRANSVERSE S

SCALE FOR PLAN
FT 1007-30 MTRS

UO
7 /
|
EXT=\WALKING WAY WALKING WAY:

“PIER: NAVE ne PIER: IER :NAVE

CLEARSTORY NAVE AR CADE TRIFORIUM aS
ARCHBISHOPS PALACE. IN AISLE ATA
 FRENCH GOTHIC 545

BEAUVAIS-CATHEDRAL Eg = \

AS ay

3%
ae'6'-----

==

157
+++ INTERIOR
------------------- LOOSING NE.

ECTION
: Oe Se

H 1 i ! a
enSehces So ia ean ee ene ee —— ©
ue I \ l ! I . *
| 1 \ AIS
PROJECTED |NAVE
A 1 | { Nie
: iNOT; BUILT |
Pome eee
meee cist
~~~ Xe ~~ = === x----* “K--- ==

i eens
L r f
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 : , S
a
P10 5
a 20.
10.215.
a 25. 30| S35 40 45 50 55
as60M™ ae) Ge y Gown
546 FRENCH GOTHIC

SSS
SASS
A. Exterior from N.E. B. Upper chapel looking E.
La Sainte Chapelle, Paris (1243-8). See p. 542

= nt 2 ie a
A
1
oe
Om gv mo
4
o>
Oo“~w =eBS oY06a a
005ob
ns Pw EO
(= oO
Cian
Lani
oo
o U1 gu aa
 FRENCH GOTHIC 547

P 5 na
Pe ay re)p Q a) ’
iy N ~“]v
lanl
aNOO\OSe
Lan! es 4 < .o) na° 2
ww GQ i =
CRN
N rey)° N Nn4

c. West doorway D. North doorway

Strasbourg Cathedral (1230-1318; spire 1439). See p. 542

 548 FRENCH GOTHIC

A. Bourges Cathedral: west facade B. Bayeux Cathedral from E.

(1192-1275). See p. 538 (13th-15th cents.; choir 1230—). See p. 541

c. Troyes Cathedral: west facade D. Coutances Cathedral: west facade

(1208-1429). See p. 541 (1218-91). See p. 541
 FRENCH GOTHIC 549
S. Sernin, Toulouse (1080-96), a five-aisled Romanesque church (p. 340), has a
Gothic tower and spire (p. 341A).
Albi Cathedral (1282-1390) (pp. 550B, C, 561F), a fortress-church, consists of a
large impressive vaulted hall (59 ft wide), which is the widest in France, with an
apsidal end, a series of flanking chapels separated by internal buttresses, and an
unrivalled rood screen of c. 1500. The richly ornate south porch of 1520-35
contrasts vigorously with the sheer mass of the church brickwork.
The Church of the Cordeliers, Toulouse (1350), partially destroyed in 1871,
was of this type, and has some similarity in plan with King’s College Chapel,
Cambridge (pp. 468, 470). Angers Cathedral (1149-1274) and Poitiers Cathedral
(1162-1379), with its square east end, are notable churches.

FORTIFIED TOWNS
France is rich in many types of secular Gothic buildings. There is a tendency to
think that Gothic architecture was confined to churches, but the style was employed
for all buildings alike, whether domestic, military, civil, or ecclesiastical, although
the purpose naturally influenced the design.
Carcassonne (p. 55IA, B) and Aigues Mortes are notable thirteenth century
fortified towns. The former has a double wall, of which the inner circuit is
partly sixth century; these, with their fifty towers and moat still give an idea of a
Mediaeval fortress-town, entered through two fortified gateways guarded by
machicolations, drawbridge, and portcullis.
Avignon (1349-68) (p. 551C), although without its moat, is still encircled by
machicolated walls and towers (p. 552B). The town contains the imposing palace
with its cliff-like walls (1316-64), which was the headquarters of the popes from
1309-77. The famous Pont d’Avignon, with its midway chapel (1177-85), was
thrown across the river by the Fréres Pontifes, or guild of bridge-builders, to connect
the town with Villeneuve.
Mont S. Michel (thirteenth century and later, restored by Viollet-le-Duc)
(p. 550A) was a fortified monastery rather than a town, but containing within its
walls secular buildings. The main element of the world-famous monastery is the
storeyed ‘Merveille’ (1203-28), with its cloisters and ‘Salle des Chevaliers’.

CASTLES
Castles were generally built on mounds above rivers to command valleys and had
thick walls and small windows to resist attack, thus presenting a very different
appearance from Gothic cathedrals, with their large traceried windows and forests
of flying buttresses. Many castles were adapted to make more convenient residences
in the Renaissance period, and there are many such castles along the historic
River Loire.
The Chateau Gaillard, Les Andelys (1196-8), built by Richard Coeur-de-Lion,
was a fine castle with a ‘donjon’, or keep, protected by three lines of outworks and
many towers, but little now remains.
The Chateau de Pierrefonds (1390-1400) (p. 552C), restored by Viollet-le-Duc,
gives an admirable idea of other castles of this period. It stands on a rocky height
above the village, and its cliff-like walls, 20 ft thick, rise sheer from the ground, and,
like the eight massive round towers, have machicolations and battlemented parapets
surrounding an irregular courtyard, while the entrance is guarded by a drawbridge
over the moat.
The Chateau d’Amboise (1434 and later) (p. 553A, B), like many other castles,
is picturesquely perched above the Loire to command the surrounding valleys and
has early Renaissance additions.
550 FRENCH GOTHIC

A. Mont S. Michel from S. Crowning church; Romanesque nave 1122-35;

Gothic choir 1450-1521. See p. 549

B. Exterior from E. c. Interior looking W.

Albi Cathedral (1282-1390; S. porch 1520-35). See p. 549
 FRENCH GOTHIC 551

fee us es 2 LeeoP 7 tap

f Cas,

B. Carcassonne: aerial view of old walled town from W.

13th cent. Restored by Viollet-le-Duc. See p. 549
Pont d’Avignon
L

$
ES. re

c. Avignon: aerial view from S. showing the Palace of the Popes

(1349-68). See p. 549
552 FRENCH GOTHIC

A. House of Jacques Coeur, Bourges: B. Avignon: town walls, showing

the courtyard (1442-53). See p. 559 machicolations (1349-68). See p. 549

lic . cry
—__S Wires;
Ki
Pe

c. Chateau de Pierrefonds (1390-1400). See p. 549

 FRENCH GOTHIC

ORE
saiieanntirs
ERIN
TY

A. Chateau d’Amboise from N. Drawing by J. A. du Cerceau in the 16th century.

(1434 and later). See p. 549

TOUR
HURTAULT

PS CHAPEL
ae OF
S. HUBERT

FEET 50 9 }.. TOUR DES MINIMES

OR DES FOURS
Sor or
METRESIO O JO 20 3 40 50 60

B. Chateau d’Amboise: plan in 1575

554 FRENCH GOTHIC

A. Hétel du Bourgtheroulde, Rouen B. Hotel de Ville, Arras (1510; rebuilt

(c. 14753 wing on left 1501-37). after 1919). See p. 555
See p. 559

c. Hotel de Ville, Compiégne D. Hétel de Ville, Dreux

(15th cent.). See p. 555 (1502-37). See p. 555
 FRENCH GOTHIC 555

HOTELS DE VILLE
These are few, as there was little municipal life under the feudal system, and in this
France differed from Flanders and Italy. Communal business was probably carried
on in the market-place or in churches and cloisters.
The Hotel de Ville, Arras (1510) (p. 554B), has an arcade under a large hall with
traceried windows, and a steep roof, containing three storeys of dormer windows;
while the giant belfry reached 250 ft above the ground; but all has been rebuilt
since the Great War of 1914-18.
The Hotel de Ville, Bourges (fifteenth century), is notable for a Flamboyant
tower (p. 558C) with tracery, crockets, sculptured figures, and windows, while
internally the chimney-piece is unusually fine, even for this period (p. 558F).
The Hotel de Ville, Dreux (1502-37) (p. 554D), resembles a square donjon with
pyramidal roof, and the H6tel de Ville, Compiégne (early fifteenth century)
(p. 554C), is a beautiful example of civic architecture, with mullioned windows,
traceried parapet, and central tower, which was also subjected to German bom-
bardment in the war of 1914-18.

PALAIS DE JUSTICE
These were originally the great halls in which kings and nobles dispensed justice to
their vassals, while ecclesiastical courts dealt with matrimonial cases and laws of
inheritance; but towns with charters eventually obtained their own magistrates.
The Palais de Justice, Rouen (1493-1508) (pp. 556B, 558B), severely damaged in
1944, was an exceedingly rich specimen of French municipal architecture and
eloquent of the importance of this old city of the Norman kings. The magnificent
hall (135 ft by 57 ft) (destroyed), rivalling the Guildhall, London, in size, occupied
one side of the building, and had a fine pointed timber roof; while from the centre
of the group rose the tower with traceried windows. The late Gothic fag¢ades were
crowned with a steep roof and dormer windows.

HOSPITALS
The ‘Maisons-Diew’ were attached to monasteries or provided in cities for the
treatment of the sick, and for distribution of alms to travellers and pilgrims. The
H6tel Dieu, Beaune (1443-51), still in use, has a spacious hall with beds along the
walls. There are old timber galleries round a courtyard for open-air treatment, thus
forecasting modern sanatoria. The gabled roofs, in coloured tiles, have dormer
windows with barge-boards and tall finials, while a stair-turret in the angle of the
court completes the quaint setting of this quiet enclosed space.

CouUNTRY HOUSES

On the introduction of gunpowder, and with the development of the new social
order in the fifteenth century, country houses took the place of fortified castles,
though they were still called ‘chateaux’. The Chateau d’O, Mortrée (p. 558A), and
the Chateau de Chateaudun (rebuilt 1441) are both stately mansions rather than
castles. The Chateau de Blois (east wing) (1498-1504) has a thirteenth century
Salle des Etats and gateway to the court, around which later buildings were added
(p. 770). The Gothic spiral staircase of Louis XII (p. 558£) was probably the
model for the marvellous staircase of Francis I of the early Renaissance period
(p. 771A, C). The Chateau de Josselin, Brittany (p. 556A), although dating from the
twelfth century, was rebuilt in the early sixteenth century, and with its circular towers,
556 FRENCH GOTHIC

A, Chateau de Josselin, Brittany (16th cent.). See p. 555

B. Palais de Justice, Rouen (1493-1508). See p. 555

 FRENCH GOTHIC 557

ee
aon

ey
ere
OE
RST
IP

s. Hétel de Cluny, Paris (1485). See p. 559

 558 FRENCH GOTHIC

ALECHATEAU DO //
MORTREE

SSS") STONE CHIMNEY-PIECE

‘CHAT BLOIS HOTEL vz VILLE: BOURGES

6 rte
olles
Beit
zl
aw=F
i:
ne |
ae .
FL eR

IMBER HOUSE: BEAUVAIS HOTEL DE CLUNY: PARIS HALF-TIMBER HOUSE:S.LO

 FRENCH GOTHIC 559
ogee door-heads, mullioned windows, traceried parapet, and steep roof with dormer
windows, forms a picturesque group typical of so many others scattered throughout
France.

TOWN HOUSES
The ‘maisons nobles’ began to rise in the fifteenth century when French nobles
ceased to be feudal lords in fortified castles, and erected houses, known to this day
as ‘hotels’, planned, as in the country, round a court and with an elaborate facade to
the street. The House of Jacques Coeur, Bourges (1442-53) (pp. 552A, 557A), is
undoubtedly the finest Mediaeval town residence in France. It was built by a
merchant prince, partly on the town ramparts, round a central court and has seven
turret stairs. The Hotel du Bourgtheroulde, Rouen (c. 1475) (p. 554A), exem-
plifies this type of house, with its enclosed court surrounded by facades somewhat
resembling the Palais de Justice in the same city. Juxtaposed in the court is an early
Renaissance building of 1501-37, on which the lower bas-relief panels depict the
meeting of Francis I and Henry VII of England on the ‘Field of the Cloth of Gold’
in 1520. The facades were severely damaged in 1944. The Hotel Chambellan,
Dijon (fifteenth century), was one of the great town houses of this period. The
central court contains an angle turret stair with newel branching into a richly
carved head; while the street facade has some fine figures carved in wood. The
H6tel de Cluny, Paris (1485-98) (p. 557B)—now a museum—retains its Mediaeval
character, and is a fine specimen of late Gothic. The chapel (p. §58H), as seen from
the court behind the museum, stands above an arcade which supports on its central
pier an oriel window of pleasing proportions with Flamboyant tracery, crockets, and
finials.
Smaller domestic buildings still exist, as in Cluny, where doors and windows are
of the later Romanesque type; while in S. L6 (p. §58J), Lisieux, Caen (p. 558D),
Chartres, Beauvais (p. 558G), and Rouen there are timber houses with carved
barge-boards and overhanging storeys; but a large number have succumbed to the
ravages of time and fire. They are not generally earlier than the fifteenth century.
Market halls, fortified farmhouses, and great timber barns all reveal the develop-
ment of country life in Old France.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
This comparative table contrasts the differences in the development of the Gothic
style in France and England.
FRENCH GOTHIC ENGLISH GOTHIC

PLANS. (pp. 560B, 561). Cathedrals are PLANS. (p. 560A). Cathedrals are long,
short, wide, and lofty. narrow, and low.
Length about four times the width. r Length about six times the width.
Cloisters rare, except in the south, owing Cloisters usual, owing to monastic origin
to the lay origin of French cathedrals. _ of many English cathedrals.
Transepts have slight projection, as at Paris Transepts have bold projection and secon-
(p. 531G) and Amiens (p. 560B), or they dary transepts are found, as at Salisbury
are absent, as at Bourges (p. 561A). (p. 560A), Lincoln (p. 410F), Canterbury
(p. 411B), and Rochester (p. 412H).
Lateral chapels numerous for the popular Lateral chapels rare in those cathedrals
worship of saints and the saying of which were designed for monks and not
masses (p. 563]). : for laity.
The apsidal east end developed into the The square east end replaced the apse,
‘chevet’ by addition of processional aisle while the ‘Chapel of the Nine Altars’,
and chapels (p. 560B). Laon, Dol, and Durham, forms an eastern transept.
Poitiers are exceptions. Westminster has the French “chevet’.
Aisles are sometimes double, as at Notre Aisles are single, both in sanctuary and
 560 FRENCH GOTHIC

5 | »~S; CHOIR|;
ct
he TRANS MONUMENTS ETC.
res
Ri P l >, 5 1 BOY BISHOP
= : ik A 2 2®EARL OF SALISBURY
3 SIR JOHN DE MONTACUTE
4 WALTER L? HUNGERFORD
5 SIR JOHN CHENEY
6 BISHOP BLYTHE
7 BP AUDLEY'S CHANTRY
8 BISHOP POORE
9 HUNGERFORD CHANTRY

CLOISTER 10 BISHOP WY OF YORK

GARTH 11 BISHOP BRIDPORT
12 SIR RICHARD MOMPESSON
13 ISTEARL OF SALISBURY
14 BISHOP DE LA WYLE
15 LORD STOURTON
3 16 ROBERT L? HUNGERFORD
ap 17 BISHOP BEAUCHAMP
| SALISBURY CATHEDRAL 1 BisHop RoGER
é 19 BISHOP JOCELIN
20 BISHOP HERMAN

FeANlwe ey ONS

.i
t=

t
;
trealf
©
1 10 20

! STEPHE WEST
 FRENCH GOTHIC 561

” im REFERENCE TABLE
GENT.
wt’ BN PaesQl l4”cenr. (ag (Be
6™ CENT.
— 13 CENT, C) movern

15™ CENT

®)atpi CATH.
Rae tes

) AS ALTERED VAS BUILT

(97 CENT) | ate
((6"CENT) ASS\ SAN \Y SCALE FOR ALL PLANS ee

OUEN:: ROUEN CHARTRES CATH, “Sremf-—_ 22820

562 FRENCH GOTHIC

FRENCH GOTHIC ENGLISH GOTHIC

Dame, Paris (p. 531G), Bourges (p. 561A), nave, with the exception of Chichester
and the choirs of Rheims (p. 544G), and (p. 412G) and Manchester (p. 412B),
Chartres (p. 561E). Albi (p. 56IF) has no where double aisles result from the in-
aisles. clusion of former lateral chapels.
Two western towers characteristic, as at A central tower the predominant feature, as
Paris (p. 532A), Rheims (p. 543), and at Gloucester (p. 408D), Hereford (p.
Amiens (p. 535A), and owing to the great 409F), Rochester (p. 409D), Salisbury
height of the nave a fléche, as at Amiens (with spire) (p. 407G), or combined with
(p. 564C, H) and Paris (p. 532C), was western towersas at Canterbury (p. 408G),
often substituted for the central tower, Durham (p. 408c), and York (p. 408B).
which was usual in England. Lichfield with three spires is unique
(Pp. 407E).
Central spires are common in Normandy, A single western steeple is usual in
as at Rouen (p. 374B) and Caen (p. 794B). churches, as at Heckington (p. 431A).
Towers are sometimes designed in groups; Towers never exceeded three, two western
there were to have been seven at Laon and one central, as at Canterbury (p.
(p. 537) and nine at Chartres (p. 538). 418A), Lincoln (p. 417A), Durham (p.
392A), and York (p. 408B).
Piers of nave arcades widely spaced. Piers of nave arcades closely spaced.
Chapter houses rectangular. Chapter houses often polygonal.
WALLS. Early buttresses were a develop- WALLS. Early buttresses project more than
ment from Romanesque pilaster strips or Norman and have gabled heads, as at
were semicircular, especially in apses. Salisbury, Westminster, and Southwell
Later buttresses of deep projection have (p. 497C). Later buttresses are strongly
chapels between them (p. 531G), and are marked with offsets and pinnacles orna-
weighted by statuary niches and pin- mented with niches and panelling (p.
nacles. 497]; K).
Buttresses often vertical without offsets (p. Buttresses usually in stages with offsets (p.
545D). Weatherings to offsets of but- 497). Weatherings to offsets of buttresses
tresses are flatter the higher they occur. are steeper the higher they occur.
Flying buttresses largely employed on ac- Flying buttresses are not so frequent, be-
count of height of naves and width of cause the nave with its clear-story is
double aisles (pp. 369D, E, F, 564A, B). comparatively low and there are no double
They were used with special effect round aisles or chevet; none were required for
the chevet (pp. 531B, C, 532C, 539A, 545B), the square east end.
and are often in two or more tiers.
Interiors owe their effect largely to great Interiors owe much to the elaboration of
height, otherwise they are less ornate than complex piers, triforium, variety of clear-
English interiors. stories, and ribbed vaulting.
Parapets have open tracery (pp. 563H, Parapets are battlemented (p. 51D, E, F).
564F).
The characteristic west front is that of The characteristic west front is that of
Notre Dame, Paris (p. 532A). Wells Cathedral (p. 4038).
OPENINGS. Arcades developed through OPENINGS. Arcades developed through
high pointed to three-centred arches in high pointed to four-centred arches in
the late period. the late period.
Doorways are elaborate (p. 564E, F), large, Doorways are usually placed laterally with-
and deeply recessed in the west facades in a protecting porch encrusted with
and framed in with statues of saints statuary in canopied niches, and are
round the arches in serried rows, as at either on the south, as at Canterbury (p.
Paris, Bourges (p. 539B), Rheims (p. 543), 418A) and Gloucester (p. 408D), or on the
Grand Andely (p. 5678), Chartres (p. north as at Salisbury (p. 415A, B) and
566D, E), and Troyes (p. 548C). Wells.
Windows have ‘plate’ tracery which de- Windows developed through ‘plate’ tracery
veloped, through geometric ‘bar’ tracery, to geometrical and curvilinear and the
into ‘flamboyant’, probably derived from final English treatment, known as per-
English curvilinear (p. 563D). pendicular tracery (p. 499).
There is an absence of cusps in late French Cusping became very elaborate in late Eng-
tracery. lish tracery.
Circular windows occur in west fronts, as Circular windows are not used for west
at Rheims (p. 543), Paris (p. 563E), fronts, but form special features in tran-
Troyes (p. 548C), and in transepts as at septs, as at Westminster (p. 4258),
Chartres (p. 540A) and S. Ouen, Rouen Durham, Lincoln (p. 408H), and else-
(p. 563H). where.
 FRENCH GOTHIC

A)S.W. TOWER S.W. SPIRE? CHARTRES W. TOWER

AMIENS CATH: pesessssamossrreoannannasanad NOTRE DAME: PARIS

>)winnow
. MARY
: DINAN
INDO
Ve (ae DAME: PARIS
etXH h
Ow SICO
LO
ANC a
5
ae
:
1
aire
OS
H hte \)

3 AT 4
: boy ) \@ Nt gees SS‘| |
=
an eas ( amn)) = ea Tt)
=! A nee Sees Rey | ee Ly DO Bi
LJ)
11—_
TSS
Z i Wal, i H bat TT | a |
i)03
aes
=
oe
ISLE
ice|a
HEE (o\ f;
 FRENCH GOTHIC

Mite.
I Gin.
my Ug
i,
i

- Yo47 ' ‘ 6
be AHO

jp WAN
el(a Wy i. aTAla
\ > ed 46 a
i Mlle J

YyaGg
Cid mph
|__ MMhips
ii
(es
7
Wea
4
Ml a ae i) a, Les =
aay as | hr
f

mifff
TTT

LYING BUTTRESSES
NOTRE DAME:LOUVIERS

NCE SECTION on && SHOWING VAULTIN

‘
| AIX)

ys v F180 Ne y,j
Pe ‘
Usa
PRAY ats Vl
yp Litt be NONY ©

AMIENS CATH EDRAL

SHOWING POSITION or
from S.W.
FLECHE
HUNG | (DD) PLAN: LADY CHAPE
eer |. 2 CAUDEBEC CHURCI
$ aN el
AML NADY | 4: ,
il Sp

ar =
° =i HOLT
\ 4: Gite
yy

Wetig
|
oe tls
Maly
A
a.
Saal
PORCH: S. URBAIN: TROYES Nleril iF ORCH?S. VINCENT: ROL
4.6 [GON CRS aSota a | k-Sideo I-5.9¢-4 6.10"
! { | 1

& i eds oS
1 ' ' )
| ' |

a re
Os OULOUSE K te
J ALBI VEZELAY

PIERS: SOUTHERN FRANC

 FRENCH GOTHIC 565
FRENCH GOTHIC ENGLISH GOTHIC
Roors. Always steep and finished with RooFs. Moderate in pitch, approaching
metal ridges and finials (p. 5318). flatness in later periods (p. 435).
Usually constructed with double timbers of Carpentry was more advanced, and so
a special type to surmount high vaults, single-framed timbers were used over
as at Rheims and Amiens. vaults.
Ornamental wooden roofs not much de- Ornamental wooden roofs, such as ‘ham-
veloped as part of internal design, be- mer-beam’, are elaborated as part of in-
cause of preference for vaults. ternal design.
Slates were used as roof coverings. . Lead was the usual roof covering.
Vaults were in general use both for cathe- Vaults were used in cathedrals and timber
drals and churches. Usually of great roofs in parish churches. Level ridge
height and domical, and provided with ribs, longitudinal, transverse, diagonal,
transverse and diagonal ribs and bosses tierceron, and lierne ribs resulted in
(p. 566a, C), they show little evolution complicated stellar vaulting (p. 399).
in design and treatment. Ridge, inter- Vaults sometimes of wood, as at York
mediate and lierne ribs were rare (pp. (p. 423). See Evolution of Vaulting (p.
532B, 539C). 39
The joints of the panels are laid in courses, The joints of panels are at right angles to a
parallel to the ridge lines (p. 373F). line bisecting the panels (p. 373F).
Pendant vaulting is frequent in the ‘Flam- Fan tracery vaulting (p. 399H), sometimes
boyant’ period (p. 564D). with pendants (p. 426B-F), was peculiar
to England.
COLUMNS. Plain cylindrical piers are COLUMNS. Clustered piers are special
characteristic, as at Paris (pp. 531F, 532B, features, as in Salisbury and Exeter (p.
564G), where the vaulting shafts start 503P, Q), and were preferred to cylin-
awkwardly above the square abaci of the drical piers. The adoption of attenuated
arcade columns (p. 567A, Cc). Square piers, shafts to continue the lines of the vault-
with attached threequarter columns, ow- ing ribs largely determined the form of
ing to Roman tradition (p. 564J), are piers and avoided the difficulty met with
found in the south. Piers are sometimes in France, and the characteristic evolu-
without capitals, as at Lisieux, when the tion of moulded piers in each period was
arch mouldings die into the cylindrical controlled by the increasing number of
piers, and the vaulting shafts rest on vaulting shafts (p. 503).
corbels.
Capitals with foliage of the Corinthianesque Capitals of a Classic type were employed
type lasted well into the style, and ‘stiff- in the Norman period, as in S. John’s
leaf’ foliage and the ‘crocket’ capital (p. Chapel, Tower of London, while Early
566]) were characteristic, crowned with English carved capitals have ‘stiff-leaf’
a square abacus. Moulded ‘bell’ capitals foliage (p. 504D-F). Moulded ‘bell’
without foliage are found in Normandy capitals are common to all periods and
with circular abaci, as in England. are crowned by round, octagonal, or
polygonal abaci (p. 503L, Q, U).
MOULDINGS. Large, less varied (p. 566F), MOULDINGS. Bold, rich, and of great
and not so_.ornate as in England and variety and applied to bases, capitals,
often at some distance from window and pier arches, as well as door and win-
openings. In the late or Flamboyant dow openings (pp. 503; 507). Mouldings
period mouldings were almost as deeply show gradual development from the pro-
undercut in stone as in wood and only nounced bowtells and deep hollows of
limited by the granular nature of the the early period to the flat bracket
material. moulding of the late period.
ORNAMENT. Decorative figure sculpture ORNAMENT. Decorative figure sculpture
reached its greatest perfection in the was not so freely used, or of such high
cavernous doorways of the west fronts of quality as in France, and was not con-
Paris (p. 532A), Amiens, Rheims (p. 543), fined to portals, but was spread over
and in the north and south porches of whole facades, as at Wells, Lichfield, and
Chartres (p. 566D, E), where numerous Exeter. The ‘dog-tooth’, ball-flower, and
tiers of statues in niches surround the Tudor rose enriched the hollow mould-
arches (pp. 539B, 567). ings (p. 508).
Carved tombs (p. 567F), fonts (p. 5666), Carving varies considerably in each period,
gargoyles (p. 566B), finials, crockets, and conventional in Early English, natural-
corbels are of fine workmanship, and istic in Decorated, and again partly con-
animals, birds, and grotesques were in- ventional in Perpendicular (pp. 504, 508,
troduced, especially in the south. SII, 512).
Stained glass was much developed, and at Stained glass was developed on similar
 566 FRENCH GOTHIC
,
eg
(Syms au
GARGOYLE
Mtg
;ILEoc FRANCE
Mon
}fimmy py

Nai)
iis Hi Sw“

I tt

ee
ea
ta so

BOSS:MONT. S.MICHE
ES

VAULTING BOSS:DIJON MUS"

| eau aay —|
Sas
Ny ‘i cf Nt KN ay Y jis
Re
i i

| no | 5a) rie 4

Se SON ies ie:

¢ spanned @tsicairee, gahatc Jeba reg
Uae
Ci aaah |! |) WOU
Sarasa vy
Hl m WA
CS Fm a
Gee.
Se
Fereateerrarrer
# MOUSE aly Grin
eCml
af j aan lo Te eee ; ii
Mi / i
SAEPOLS ef
By . ; .

is r an EC ILIL Ma
f a Ag =

Hi

: i i te it
mug a
UMMM
TTSm T
MTT
TNT —
Tn
wtCit ASE (UTC me ri
iio ic i LH we
Ry — r
li I
DOMAIN OT
ia
nyt t
meme th
t
Z
I PROMO TL ype’ 1)

J none teypn dee mnyyyiine

Suan
Ze aumg y_ oo of
——— -

us
NORTH PORCH:CHARTRES CATHEDRAL NORTH PORCH: CHARTRES FROM N.

Ke >

<n
"hy

DETAIL OF
CROCKET
AT @

DIAPERonPEDESTAL clears T
AMIENS CATHEDRAL CAPITAL SEMI
 FRENCH GOTHIC 567

i
|

‘)
re}
io}
i

ee

SCALE
FI 10-3 Nia

Ye
Sor
NS

ay
x IG > 3 LJ
‘IPy fl
=a
I

ce3]) (EEE=I
poe
EY ray
@,NK ASa aeA) % =
) WAN
AUANEN| fe
2

Ff aRY
DEQ aaNr
onADL ABi)ieCetfece EfIS
eeie
Bi]
eA
ST
Ik a
=)
i ei i) Laut
GY. IRAE S ; TT bs
@, al!
as

—(ie
eS
we
| 4)
is

id pl
va
(a[Dar 1=.Toe
|eres

(ae ’7 TYMPANUM es 4%
My ey

apres,
i) 88
—
doGig —
LEFT DOORWAY or WEST PORTAL:CHARTRES x;
Sara
SS
a
|aS
INS
SS
eats
Se

ES I
x=

SZ
SFC
Wve:
AZ
EES
NS

Al :
ew

its
p—

eaes
TS
wg
CU
ae
Hote
Ne
eS
oe.
F lil

Sy

i
|
\ da
!

TOMB or PHILIBERT te BEAU: BROU G PILASTER

>ORCH:CHARTRES
CHICHARTR PORCH: CHARTRES
568 FRENCH GOTHIC

FRENCH GOTHIC ENGLISH GOTHIC

Chartres a prevailing blue merging into lines as in France—earlier examples, as

violet gives an idea of the general effect at Canterbury, were in small heavily
which artists intended to produce in leaded pieces; whereas later windows
church interiors. Much of the best consist of large figures in simulated
stained glass has, however, been des- niches with crocketed canopies and other
troyed, notably at Rheims. architectural features.
Colour decoration in frescoes and applied Colour decoration of walls and sculpture
to sculpture seems to have been much was much employed. Painted timber
used, and hangings were imitated in roofs and rood screens are characteristic
diaper work (p. 566H) and wall decora- in the Perpendicular period.
tions.
REFERENCE BOOKS
AUBERT, M. L’ Architecture francaise al’ époque gothique. Paris, 1943.
—. Archives de la Commission des Monuments Historiques. § vols., Paris, 1898.
BAUDOT, A. DE, and PERRAULT-DABOT, A. Les cathédrales de France. 2 vols., Paris, 1905.
BURGES, W. Architectural Drawings. London, 1870.
DURAND, P. Monographie de Notre Dame de Chartres. 2 vols., fo. and 4to, Paris, 1881.
—. La Cathédrale d’ Amiens. Paris, 1901.
ENLART, C. Manuel d’archéologtie frangaise. 2 vols., Paris, 1902-4.
GAILHABAUD, J. L’ Architecture du Ve au XVIe siécle. t vol. fo. and 4 vols. 4to. Paris,
1869-72.
GARDNER, A. Introduction to French Church Architecture. Cambridge, 1938.
GONSE,L. L’ Art gothique. Paris, 1890.
JACKSON, SIRT. G. Gothic Architecture in France, England and Italy. 2 vols., London,
I9IS.
JOHNSON,R. J. Early French Architecture. Large fo. Newcastle, 1864.
LANDRIEUX, M. The Cathedral of Reims. Trans. E. E. Williams. 1920.
LASSUS,J.B.A. La Cathédrale de Chartres. Fo., and 4to. Paris, 1867-81.
—. et VIOLLET-LE-DUC, E. E. Monographie de Notre Dame de Paris. Folio. Paris, 186—?
LASTEYRIE,R. DE. L’ Architecture religieuse en France al’ époque gothique. Paris, 1926-7.
LAVEDAN, P. L’ Architecture frangaise. Paris, 1944. (English translation, French Archi-
tecture, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, 1956).
LENOIR, A.A. Architecture monastique. 2 vols. Paris, 1852-6.
MALE, E. L’ Art religieux du XIIIe siécle en France. Paris, 1902. English trans. by Dora
Nussey, 1913.
MARTIN, C. L’ Art gothique en France. Fo. Paris [19—].
MICHEL, A. Histoire del’art. Vol. 2 and Vol. 3 pt. 1. Paris, 1907-29.
MOORE, C.H. Gothic Architecture. New York, 1899.
MOREAU-NELATON,E. Les églises chez nous. 3 vols., Paris, 1914.
NESFIELD, E. Specimens of Mediaeval Architecture. London, 1862.
PORTER, A.K. Mediaeval Architecture. 2 vols., New York and London, rgo9.
PUGIN,A. Architectural Antiquities of Normandy, London, 1828.
ROSE, E. W. Cathedrals and Cloisters of Midland France. 2 vols., New York and London,
1907.
RUPRICH-ROBERT, V. M. C. L’ Architecture normande aux XTIe et XIle siécles. 2 vols., fo.,
Paris, 1889.
SHAW,R.NORMAN. Architectural Sketches from the Continent. London, 1858.
VERDIER, A., and CATTOIS, F. P. Architecture civile et domestique au Moyen Age, et de la
Renaissance. 2 vols., Paris, 1858.
VERRIER, A. and G. L’ Architecture frangaise. 1941.
VIOLLET-LE-DUG, E. E. Dictionnaire raisonné de l’architecture francaise. 10 vols., Paris,
1859. A translation of the article ‘Construction’ was issued under the title of
‘Rational Building’ by G. M. Huss, New York, 1895.
VITRY, P. La Cathédrale de Reims. 2 vols., fo., Paris [19—].
WEST, G.H. Gothic Architecture in England and France. London, 1927.
WILLIS, R. Facsimile of the Sketch-Book of Wilars de Honecourt (eighteenth-century archi-
tect). London, 1859.
 SJ * Franeker Groningen
AS *Bolsward.
9° Miles 50
(eet —————— pe ~~

rm)

Kampen
View) SAG dt pee
-2 2wolle
Unarlone® Amsterdam

= . Deventer
ae
Y Amersfoort e GUELD E RS
*Utrecht Zutfien
a aie? eat
&
° Rocce
& Dordrecht caBe.
C,

oe
e.

ZEALAND *s-Hertogenbosch
< e Breda
Middelburg ° Bergen-op-Zoom
~

grurnes aN Dv Ghent saa

-Malines
< L R Scheldt 2@ Npebey ee Cologne
, Louvain .
Ypres ° €car nnsenarde?s Reece Siéeu Maastricht
k Lys * Hal “Aix laChapelle

Tournait HAINAULT ae
as Qua,

A Mons jt Ve RY ‘

# Dinant rae G
Sf
+
e

-Bourllon py,

The Netherlands in the Middle Ages

XV. BELGIAN AND DUTCH GOTHIC

(twelfth—-sixteenth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. The Netherlands consists of the basins and delta lands of the
Rhine, Meuse (Maas) and Scheldt, the flat, low-lying coastal areas and the hills of
the Ardennes. The fertile land and the great navigable rivers created and main-
tained a number of Mediaeval states and prosperous cities, dependent culturally on
either France or Germany. To-day, the area is divided between the kingdoms of
Belgium and the Netherlands, the latter popularly called Holland.
570 BELGIAN AND DUTCH GOTHIC

GEOLOGICAL. Belgium has marbles, limestone, sandstone and granite, and these
were employed on the great churches of Brussels, Antwerp, Ghent, Liége and
Tournai, and in the later Middle Ages, for palaces, houses and town halls in the
prosperous cities. In Flanders, where clay is abundant, a characteristic and
beautiful brick architecture developed; from the forests of the Ardennes and
Fagnes came timber, not only for building, but also for wood-carving for which
Belgium is famous.
Holland being wholly without stone except around Maastricht, and without
forests too, had to import tufa, limestone and sandstone from Germany and
Belgium. This deficiency early caused the Dutch to make bricks from her clay soil,
and from them their buildings obtained a characteristic simplicity, texture and soft
colouring which is enhanced by the reflected light of the seldom-distant water.
CLIMATIC. The climate of the Netherlands is similar to that of south-eastern
England, but there are greater degrees of heat and cold. An often grey and rainy
climate gave rise to many and large windows in houses and to great traceried
windows in churches and town halls. Window-shutters against driving rain and
belts of trees as wind screens are common in Holland and Flanders, while in the
north-east, windows are fewer and smaller and buildings plainer, to withstand the
winds which sweep across the sea and the level land.
RELIGIOUS. Until the year 1558, the bishoprics of Utrecht and Li¢ge came
under the jurisdiction of Cologne, and there were further connections with
Minster; while Arras, Cambrai, Tournai and Thérouanne owed allegiance to
Rheims: through these affiliations came both German and French influences on
the architecture. Later, the Spanish rule left its mark on Belgian architecture in the
form of exuberant and florid decoration. Through the Benedictine, Cistercian and
Premonstratensian Orders, the early styles of Italy, France and Germany were
brought to the Netherlands and moulded to the local idiom. The Brabantine style,
of mainly French origin, became the major national style; the architecture of
Holland, while depending largely on Brabant and Flanders, developed other
regional styles by assimilation of Westphalian and Rhineland characteristics.
SOCIAL. Mediaeval architecture followed closely on the social progress of these
sturdy, brave and industrious peoples, and the independent towns rivalled each
other for power and in the arts, much as they did in Italy. Guild houses and town
halls of great magnificence, large in conception and rich in detail, reflect the pros-
perity and civic pride of such towns as Bruges, Antwerp, Louvain, Ghent, Ypres
and Courtrai in the south, and Middelburg, Veere and Gouda in the north. The
fame of these and many other cities is a record of the industry, of unending struggle
against the waters, of ventures on land and sea, of commercial acumen and manu-
facturing enterprise which made the Netherlands among the first in commerce and
sea power. The glory of Flemish weaving was immortalized by the establishment at
Bruges in 1430, by Philip the Good, of the ‘Order of the Golden Fleece’.
HISTORICAL. Celt and Roman, Frisian, Saxon and Frank made up the pattern
of ruler and ruled until, in the Middle Ages, the Netherlands comprised many
feudal states, such as the counties of Flanders, Holland and Guelders, the princi-
pality of Liége, the duchy of Brabant and the bishopric of Utrecht, all owing some
sort of allegiance to France or the Empire. Though not united politically, these
formed a growing cultural unity by the thirteenth century, dependent on the
common interests and ambitions of the towns rather than on their rulers.
Flanders passed to Burgundy in 1369, and under Charles the Bold (1433-77)
formed, with most of the rest of the Netherlands, an almost national state. In 1482,
through the marriage of Maximilian of Austria with Mary of Burgundy, the
Netherlands became a Hapsburg domain. Charles V (1500-58), born at Ghent and
 BELGIAN AND DUTCH GOTHIC

“fiM S. GUDULE
571

8 INTERIOR LOOKING E.
rz

hos Ky

=i ; 7
ee Se Road
5 E n Hitt
= ot

—™ EXT’ BAY INT= BAYS OF

— OFAPSE CHANCEL

7 ~

SCALE FOR PLAN

50
(e) 10
 572 BELGIAN AND DUTCH GOTHIC

AN

&
AL,
7
yp

en
IWViE
FT
\ (
NA
[) 4

——
or
Seas
—— =<
ZT

‘
i i | RS

fi

ee
feast SS
Sal
a) Uy

ee
INTERIOR LOOKING =

SECTION a- a
SSS
SSS

Eee SoS
care
|
ss
0
Lx
ne

Sree
SS

cise
tae
Ly
s EF
EEE EEE]
EEEE) CH)

EXTERIOR rrom N.W

 BELGIAN AND DUTCH GOTHIC 573

a prince of the Netherlands, became king of Spain in 1516. Against the Spanish
rule and against Philip II (1555-98), a movement of revolt began in which William,
Prince of Orange and Count of Nassau, took a leading part; the outcome was
partition in 1581 with Holland and Protestantism supreme in the north, and Spain
and Catholicism retaining the south.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The Carolingian chapels of the Valkhof.at Nijmegen, the eleventh and twelfth-
century churches at Nivelles, Soignies and Liége in Belgium, and Utrecht and
Maastricht in Holland and, above all, the great triapsal and five-towered cathedral
at Tournai, established the Romanesque in the Netherlands. The best surviving
examples of this period are the nave and towers of Tournai Cathedral (p. 580B), the
westblocks (see Glossary) of S. Denis and of S. Barthélémy at Liége, the churches of
Jur Lady and S. Servaas at Maastricht and S. Peter at Utrecht.
Gothic architecture of the Netherlands was governed by the same principles as
applied to the rest of Europe (p. 367), but owing to Rhenish conservatism, reached
there only after 1220 through Hainault, Brabant and Flanders. Thus French
cathedral Gothic of Sens, Senlis, Noyon, and Laon formed its basis, and from this
grew the Brabantine style which spread north in its pure form as far as ’s-Hertogen-
bosch and Utrecht. From another direction, through Cologne, the Gothic of
Rheims and Amiens was the inspiration for the cathedral of Utrecht in the mid-
thirteenth century, while the older traditions and the manners of Westphalia and
the Rhineland were continued in the eastern and northern parts of Belgium and
Holland. These latter include the long, narrow and low-set sanctuary windows and,
later, the ‘hall’ churches, in which nave and aisles were approximately of equal
height. In Flanders, a national variant adapted to brick, developed and spread
northward along the coast of Zealand, Holland and Friesland, and far beyond to
Scandinavia and the Baltic. Adaptation to brick entailed simplification of detail and
ornament, most evident in the Dutch churches; many of these lack vaults or the
vaults are of timber, though sometimes the reason is instability of the ground.
Nonetheless, few Dutch or Flemish churches are without an immense, high and
ornate tower, the product of civic rivalry in wealth and splendour.
Not only did the rich towns build vast churches and elaborate town halls,
guildhalls and trade halls, but also, merchants built houses and warehouses, with
stepped gables and many regular windows. Compared with the intricate elaboration
of the town halls at Louvain, Audenarde and Alost, those of Gouda, Kuilenburg
and Haarlem are simple.

EXAMPLES
ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE

S. Gudule, Brussels (1220-1475) (p. 571), has a choir which is the earliest example
of Gothic in the Netherlands, deriving from the north-eastern French style but
with a triforium arcade still suggesting Romanesque. It expresses a mixture of
influences which include those from Tournai, Valenciennes, Burgundy and
Champagne, all of which go to create the Gothic of Brabant. Typical of the
Netherlands is the plan, which lacks aisles to the transepts and a full chevet of
chapels but includes wide chapels flanking the choir. The nave was added in 1425-75,
still with the cylindrical piers and Brabantine foliage capitals, but with a blind tri-
forium united to the clear-story windows by tracery panelling. The western facade
seems strangely English, flat and with a central window, though it is probably of
German derivation.
574 BELGIAN AND DUTCH GOTHIC

Tournai Cathedral (1066-1340) is of three periods, and is built largely of black

Tournai marble. The nave is Romanesque, the apsidal transepts (p. 580B) and the
five towers Transitional (mid-twelfth century), while the choir, with a complete
chevet, is of French Gothic design (1242-). The influence of Tournai was widely
felt in Flanders and beyond. The Chapel of S. Piat (p. 581G) is in the florid
fifteenth-century style.
Notre-Dame de Pamele, Audenarde (1235 and after), of blue-black Tournai
limestone, is partly in the local Scheldt Gothic, the style which soon afterwards
established itself in Zealand.
Notre-Dame, Bruges (1239-97) with its tall plain tower, and S. Bavon, Ghent
(choir, 1274-1300), are characteristic of early Flemish Gothic adapting itself to
brickwork.
Antwerp Cathedral (1352-1411) (pp. 374H, 572), by Jean Amel de Boulogne, is
in the mature Belgian style, with further outside influences. It is remarkable for i *
great width—a nave flanked by triple aisles—yet the transepts are aisleless and the
spread of chapels each side of the choir is typical of the Netherlands. Tracery wall
panelling, many slender pier shafts, often without capitals, and huge clear-story
windows mark the period. The west front was undertaken between 1422-74, but
only the dominating north-west tower by R. Keldermans and D. van Waghemakere
was completed (1519); it is 400 ft high and capped by a three-stage lantern with
pinnacle buttresses.
Malines Cathedral (begun 1341) has an unfinished tower (1461-1533) designed
by Andries Keldermans, the finest in Belgium—324 ft high—with strongly stressed
verticals and stone detailing like lace.
The Chapelle du Saint-Sang, Bruges, is a reliquary shrine, its lower parts
mid-twelfth century and the upper, fifteenth century, with a Flamboyant doorway
and brick spiral-staircase.
S. Jacques, Liége (1513-38) (p. 580C), represents the extreme Brabantine
Flamboyant; it was perhaps influenced by Spain.
Utrecht Cathedral (1254-fourteenth century and later) (p. 575A) is the major
example of French cathedral-Gothic in Holland, deriving from Amiens through
Cologne; changing detail from the apse westward through the choir to the transepts
is noticeable, especially in the omission of capitals. The nave collapsed in the
seventeenth century and the western axial tower is isolated. Built between 1321-82
by Jan van Henegouwen (i.e. Hainault), it was an important Dutch prototype.
S. John, ’s-Hertogenbosch (1370-1559) (pp. 575B, 582) is a rare example of pure
and rich Brabantine in Holland, comparable with S. Peter, Louvain, and S. Waldru,
Mons. The rectilinear wall-panelling resembles English Perpendicular; it is pro-
fusely decorated, with much sculpture by Alard van Hameel (1478-1529). The
Great Churches of Dordrecht (1339-sixteenth century) and Haarlem (1400-90)
are more typically Dutch, being of brick and stone, spacious and plain. Both are
simplified Brabantine, with Haarlem belonging to the local style of Aerschot, called
Demer Gothic. Dordrecht has brick vaulting, but that of Haarlem nave is timber.
In Zealand the churches of Middelburg, Goes, Hulst, Veere and others followed
the Scheldt and coastal Flemish-Brabantine traditions. S. Michael, Zwolle (c.
1350-1450) is a hall church deriving from Germany; these are common in east and
central Holland but rare in Belgium—Damme, in west Flanders, is an exception.
The ruined Abbey Church of Villers (Belgian Luxemburg) (1216-67) and the
Dominican Church, Maastricht (after 1260), represent early Maas (Meuse)
Gothic with blind triforium arcades and typical leaf capitals, while Meersen
(fourteenth century) is later and richer. This Maas style includes tall, narrow apse
windows reaching to within a few feet of the ground.
 BELGIAN AND DUTCH GOTHIC 575

4. Utrecht Cathedral: choir (1254-67). B. S. John, ’s-Hertogenbosch: choir

See opposite page (1370-1415). See opposite page

c. Castle of Muiden, near Amsterdam (13th century). See p. 577

576 BELGIAN AND DUTCH GOTHIC

Renaissance, 1595-1622) (Gothic, 1515-28)

A. Town Hall, Ghent. See opposite page

(1202-1304) Hotel de Ville (1575-1621)

B. Cloth Hall, Ypres (rebuilt since the 1914-18 War). See opposite page
 BELGIAN AND DUTCH GOTHIC 577

In the north-east of Holland at Bolsward, Franeker and Groningen there are

churches in provincial variants of the main styles. Here the parish churches in
villages are of brick and very simple, with high domed vaults and much wall
arcading—very different from those of other parts; examples are Stedum and
Zuidbroek.

SECULAR ARCHITECTURE
At Kampen, three fifteenth-century gateways, white and capped by steep conical
roofs, give an idea of a Dutch Mediaeval walled town, and at Ghent, the Rabot
Fort (1488) remains of the fortifications together with the Chateau des Comtes
(twelfth century); while at Bouillon is a castle more typical of the countryside. In
Holland the Castle of Muiden (thirteenth century) (p. 575c), near Amsterdam,
relied largely on water for its defence, and the Binnenhof, seat of the Counts of
Holland at The Hague, hasa knight’s hall of 1250 with a typical largearch-braced roof.
The Hospital, the Byloke, Ghent (thirteenth century and later) and the
Béguinage there, are examples of precinct planning and grouping. A Béguinage
(Dutch Begijnhof) is an open Order for women, founded in Brabant in the thir-
teenth century, and peculiar to the Netherlands; the work of the Sisters is amongst
the poor, and they live in houses grouped around a court containing a chapel. The
establishments at Bruges, Courtrai and Breda are still in use, but not that at
Amsterdam—few have much Mediaeval building left.
Belgium, and to a lesser extent Holland, are rich in Mediaeval town halls
symptomatic of the wealth of her cities. Bruges (1376-) (p. 579F), Louvain (1448-
1463) (p. 579G) by Mathieu de Layens, Ghent (1515-28 and later) (p. 576A) by
D. de Waghemakere, Audenarde (1525-30) (p. 579A) by Jan van Pede and
Brussels (1402-) (p. 579E) by Jakob van Thienen, with a tower (1448-63) by Jan
van Ruysbroeck (1448-63), are magnificent and ornate; simpler is Damme
(sixteenth century), near Bruges. Dutch examples in the Flemish-Brabantine style
are Middelburg (1412-1599), by the Keldermans of Malines (rebuilt after 1945),
and Veere (1474-1599). Weighhouses are also typical of Holland; the one at
Deventer, of brick and stone, is late Gothic.
The greatest of the Cloth Halls was at Ypres (1202-1304) (p. 576B), outstanding
not only because of its size (440 ft long), but also because of its majestic simplicity.
It was destroyed in 1915, and the present one is a replica. That at Bruges (Halles,
Pp. 579C) has a tower 400 ft high (1280 with later lantern), and is typical of Flemish
brick and stone civic architecture. The Guild Houses in the Grand’ Place, Antwerp,
(p. 829A) though sixteenth century, have only a little classical ornament, but those of
Brussels (p. 829B) belong to the early Renaissance. The Skipper’s House, Ghent
(1531) (p. 579B) and the Vieille Boucherie, Antwerp (1501) are further examples
of Guild Houses.
The Maison Havart, Liége (1594) and S. Peter’s House, Middelburg
(sixteenth century) are among the few surviving timber-framed houses; patrician
and merchants’ houses in stone such as some at Malines (p. 579D) and others in
brick are more numerous. The Zoudenbalch House, Utrecht (1467) and Het
Lammetje, Veere (House of the Scottish Merchants) (mid-sixteenth century)
are stone houses of very different types. Typical brick houses are found at
Furnes and Goes in the Flemish style, and in eastern Holland at Zutfen in another
style.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. Church plans were generally short, in proportion to their width, a feature
most marked in Antwerp Cathedral, where the seven aisles give an extraordinary
T H.O.A.
578 BELGIAN AND DUTCH GOTHIC

width (p. 572A). The French ritual choir with full chevet of chapels is sometimes
found, but often, and especially in Holland, the radiating chapels are partly or even
wholly omitted. Large chapels sometimes flank the choir aisles, as at S. Gudule,
Brussels (p. 571F) and Dordrecht (one only)—the north-east chapel was usually
the Lady chapel. A fléche is used over the crossing, though lantern towers occur
too, for example at ’s-Hertogenbosch (p. 582). Both twin western towers and a
single axial tower are found in Belgium, but in Holland the latter is ubiquitous,
probably through German influence.
WALLS. Blind arcading was a feature of both early Maas and Scheldt Gothic,
and became an important feature of brick Gothic, especially in Friesland and
Groningen, where walls depend almost wholly on arcading for decoration. Flying
buttresses, later with cusping and even figures on their copings, are more common in
Belgium, but are found also in Holland; it is however characteristic of Dutch churches
to do without flying buttresses and even to have very slight wall-buttresses. By the
fifteenth century, particularly in the south and in secular buildings, a very regular
rhythm of bays and windows is noticeable (p. 579G), usually decorated with thin,
wirelike tracery, pinnacles and statuary (p. 579F).
OPENINGS. Arches developed from the lancet type to the three- and four-
centred types, or occasionally even to the Moorish cusped arch, and in the Flam-
boyant period cusping was generally popular (pp. 580c, 581G). Where single
western towers occur, the entrance may be through the tower or by a further
projecting porch; other entrances often have marked importance, one of the best
instances being the south transept portal at ’s-Hertogenbosch. Whereas window
tracery became rich and intricate in Belgium, due to the use of brick in Holland it
tended there to remain comparatively simple, yet the tall nave and transept end
windows, such as those at Leiden and Alkmaar, have a dramatic effect of their own.
Rooks. As in most northern countries the steep roof is common, its gable end
stepped or with pinnacles and tracery being the chief national characteristic
Vaulting is usually of the simple quadripartite type (p. 571B), but ‘net’ vaulting
was common in late Gothic and where German influences prevailed. On later
secular buildings in Belgium, numerous turrets, gabled dormers and ornate
chimneys appear.
COLUMNS. The cylindrical pier remained normal until the mid-thirteenth
century (p. §71B), and was used until the end in several parts of Holland, but the
shafted pier, later without capitals, generally replaced it (p. 572B). The crocket
capital was succeeded by a foliage capital in Brabant, with two rows of staggered
and spaced foliage.
MOULDINGS. In Belgium a profusion of mouldings was used, often heavier and
coarser than in France, perhaps due to the evolution of brick detailing in Flanders.
The more general use of brick in Holland led to considerable simplification of
mouldings, which in turn influenced those in stone.
ORNAMENT. From the end of the fourteenth century the Netherlands, par-
ticularly Flanders, rose to be a leading art centre in northern Europe, a position held
for over two centuries. The Burgundian court—which patronized the sculptor
Claus Sluter (working at Dijon 1380-1400)—the Emperor Maximilian and, above
all, the citizens and the great cities—none outside Italy was richer than Antwerp—
promoted and encouraged the interests of the artists. Hence Belgium is especially
well favoured with paintings and sculpture in wood and stone, with which her
architecture is richly adorned, as well as with altars (p. 581C), shrines (p. 581D),
triptychs, screens, tombs (p. §81G), stalls and chimney pieces. The position of
Holland was, by comparison, less fortunate and many Dutch artists were attracted to
the great opportunities available in the south, so it was not until after the Mediaeval
 BELGIAN AND DUTCH GOTHIC 579

apo

; ste iia aal

Aa a) iq i
lace ifAlisadial
i ernAnnae
]

eS
WA . Aye ae oN
WN NABe 2=
N y = 7 a) | :
ml Ia aS SSA
j Re NT
aoe
= ale— a, rs ORANGE if
© CLOTH HALL ¢ BELFRY: BRUGES (Diop HOUSES 1
4 +
MALINES

4© cE =/
Hh
=
=

aex

Bea
rs ee.

\reebaern
ANr

=TOWN HALL: BRUSSELS (Frown HALL :BRUGES Grown HALL: LOUVAIN

 BELGIAN AND DUTCH GOTHIC

eS—
=

i=

=
SSS Z
BS
ByNGee
eNace
grin
a8
==

==]
===
sa
SSS Cc

AIS

ll
fie
J
iil: __
—-
il

a Pena

P
at

| aiO,ee e
aan
a] ae aramer pikeke
" i PC mF) eee er aD, |
| ZS
ff

alelie
fis.| ts {ea CABG

ees
CHIMNEY-PIECE: TOWNHALL : AUDENARI

rYEA
| Zz
dy 5 ene
ee
Y =
=
Wai
ff ; ie, AY

intAr
WAS
=
PO
ee SS
if) (il f

RCADE ¢VAULTING:tHeBOURSE :ANTWERP SCREEN :AERSCHOT

 BELGIAN AND DUTCH GOTHIC

TABERNAC LE TOA ks ALTAR: S. WAUDRU : MONS

LOUVAIN
S. PETER:
al ll.
; a e: My,
A UysU,(p>.
<O>

DALE TIR
Pee toe
582 BELGIAN AND DUTCH GOTHIC

S. John’s, ’s-Hertogenbosch (1370-1415). See p. 574

period that the tide turned in her favour. The rood screens at Lierre (1535)
(p. 581E), Dixmude (1540) and Aerschot (p. 580G) are among the richest; in Holland
the stone screen at Amersfoort and the brick screen at Franeker are among the best.
Sacrament houses, where the consecrated Host was kept, great towering and
pinnacled structures in stone, were a feature of the Netherlands as they were of
Germany; they survive at S. Peter, Louvain (1450) (p. 581A), which is 50 ft high,
and at Meersen (c. 1500). The choir stalls of Notre-Dame, Bruges, of Breda and
’s-Hertogenbosch are good examples. The tomb of Mary of Burgundy (1495) in
Notre-Dame, Bruges, is typical of late sepulchral work, with a fine recumbent
figure in chased and gilded copper on a marble sarcophagus with armorial bearings.
The shrine of S. Ursula at the Hospital, Bruges (1489) (p. 581D), is a reliquary
formed as a miniature Gothic chapel combining the arts of the architect and sculp-
tor, and painted by Memlinc. Good chimney pieces are found in the town halls
at Audenarde, Courtrai (p. 580D, E) and Bergen-op-Zoom, the latter by R.
Keldermans (1512). In addition to paintings and altar pieces, the most famous is
the van Eycks’ polyptych at S. Bavon, Ghent. The walls and vaults of the churches
were painted too. These frescoes survived best in Holland where, due to Puritanism,
they were covered in whitewash; many are now visible again, for example at the
church of Our Lady, Breda, at the cathedral and S. Peter, Utrecht and especially
at S. Martin, Groningen; also in Belgium at S. Jacques, Liége. The font, Hal
(p. §81B), is an elaborate piece of craftsmanship, while the well-head, Antwerp
(p. §81F), by Quinten Matsys, show Flemish excellence in ironwork. The art of the
Flemish weavers created tapestries which enriched the interiors of town halls,
guild houses and the houses of the nobility and patricians.

REFERENCE BOOKS
DESSART, CHAS. Editor. Images de Belgique. 7 vols.
Edition des Deux Mondes. Pierres flamandes. Paris.
FOKEMA, ANDREAE, TER KUILE and OZINGA. Duizend Jaar Bouwen in Nederland. Vol. 1,
Amsterdam, 1948.
LAURENT, M. L’ Architecture et la sculpture en Belgique. Paris and Brussels, 1928.
LUYKX, THEO. Atlas culturel et historique de Belgique. 1954.
Ministry of Education, Arts and Science, The Hague. Guide to Dutch Art. 1953.
VRIEND, J. J. De Bouwkunst van ons Land. 3 vols. Amsterdam, 1942.
YSENDYCK, J. J. VAN. Documents classés de l’art dans les Pays-Bas. 5 vols. Antwerp,
1880-9.
 “Land over 1,500 feet
o Miles t00

BRAJNDEN BURG
; i “Berti
Hildeshe im Brunswick SG
tae Magdeburg
why “Halberstadt
re Naumburg 5Meissen

fe N Siang GAS
“<= Mainz Bay ae g
SFreves “Orrin
y Urier) rk
as Rothenburg

Germany in the fifteenth century

XVI. GERMAN GOTHIC

(thirteenth-sixteenth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. The country in Central Europe, formerly a collection of states
which became the German Empire, was, by its geographical position, in contact
with the architecture of neighbouring countries. The chief influence on German
Gothic architecture came from France and is conspicuous in the Rhine Provinces
and Westphalia, notably in Cologne Cathedral and other churches, castles, town
halls, and domestic buildings along the Rhine, which was always an important
highway of commerce. Elsewhere in Germany geographical influence was of less
consequence in the Gothic period.
GEOLOGICAL. We have dealt with geological influence under Romanesque
architecture (p. 354), and this influence obviously remains fairly constant in this
period. The northern plains of Germany provide little building material but brick,
which gives a special character to the architecture of the north, particularly in the
districts of the Oder and Elbe. In the centre and south and along the Rhine,
excellent stone was found; while timber from the great forests in these regions gives
an individuality to domestic buildings, as in wooded districts of England.
CLIMATIC. The climate, referred to in considering Romanesque architecture
(p. 354), is without the fierce sun of the south, and therefore admitted of large
traceried windows, as in England and France, but the snows of severe winters
rendered steep roofs a necessary and special characteristic.
584 GERMAN GOTHIC

RELIGIOUS. The most salient feature, apart from monastic establishments, in

the religious life of Mediaeval Germany before the Reformation, was the exercise of
civil power by prince-bishops, who included in their ranks Electors of the Holy
Roman Empire, and whose principalities were only finally swept away by the
European upheaval during the French Revolution. The activities of these powerful
prelates are evidenced in numerous churches, and costly tombs erected by them or
in their honour. Papal abuses and disputes led inevitably to the revolt against the
authority of Rome, until in 1517 Luther nailed to the church door at Wittenberg
his famous theses against indulgences. The Reformation divided Germany into the
Protestant north and Catholic south, but churches were not damaged, as in Puritan
times in England.
SOCIAL. For a right understanding of the types of architecture peculiar to
different districts it must be remembered that Germany was not one, but many
states, among which were the provinces under the Houses of Luxemburg, Wittels-
bach, and Hapsburg; ecclesiastical states, such as Miinster; Imperial cities like
Strasbourg and Ulm, while the ‘Hanseatic League’, an alliance of the great com-
mercial towns of north Germany, such as Liibeck and Hamburg, exercised con-
siderable influence on the peaceful arts, and in the fourteenth century the power of
the League secured to the larger towns comparative independence, which neces-
sitated the erection of municipal buildings. Then there was the Rhineland on the
French frontier, across which came the Gothic architecture which in castle, convent,
and church played its part in the folklore of the Rhine. Thus the style of architecture
varies with the locality, just as does the constitution of the various states and cities.
Trade guilds during this period acquired great importance and built elaborate halls,
while Freemasons have been credited with much influence in the design and work-
ing out of the Gothic style (p. 305). The feudal system in Germany was so compli-
cated by the existence of the many principalities of differing degrees of importance
and independence that by the beginning of the sixteenth century any real relation
between nobles and vassals had become merely nominal.
HISTORICAL. The tangled skein of German history in the Mediaeval period is
complicated by the successive rise and fall of imperial and royal dynasties, by the
intrigues of princely and ducal houses of the various states to secure kingly power,
and by the secular ambition of prince-bishops who combined the intolerance of
ecclesiastical with the arrogance of secular tyrants. In the twelfth and thirteenth
centuries Germany was the centre of the Western Empire, and under the Hohen-
staufen emperors long wars were carried on with the Lombard league of the north
Italian towns (p. 316). After the fall of the Hohenstaufen dynasty on the death of
Conrad IV, the following years (1254-73), known as the ‘Great Interregnum’, were
times of confusion and lawlessness, not conducive to progress in architecture. The
house of Hapsburg came into power in 1273, and the general adoption of Gothic
architecture from France coincides with that event and lasted till the reign of
Maximilian I (1486-1519), which marks the end of the Middle Ages and the
commencement of the Renaissance movement (p. 807).

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
Gothic architecture in Germany was similar in general character to that in other
parts of Europe (p. 367), and may be considered to have lasted from 1250-1550.
The style, however, came direct from France and was not evolved from German
Romanesque, and this method of its introduction may be due to the extent to which
Romanesque building had been developed in Germany, where a preference for the
ponderous Romanesque style had resulted in the adaptation of vaulting to new
 GERMAN GOTHIC 585

A. S. Gereon, Cologne: nave (1219-27), B. Freiburg Cathedral from S.

looking E. See p. 587 (1250-1360). See p. 588

Yi

c. Regensburg Cathedral: nave D. S. Ulrich, Augsburg: nave (1467).

(1275-1534). See p. 588 See p. 594
 GERMAN GOTHIC

B. Nave
Cologne Cathedral (1284 onwards; completed 1824-80). See opposite page

c. Regensburg Cathedral D. Ulm Cathedral (1377-1492; upper part

(1275-1534). See p. 588 of tower 19th cent.). See p. 588
 GERMAN GOTHIC 587

needs without resorting to the pointed arch and other Gothic features. The Gothic
style was therefore only reluctantly adopted in the middle of the thirteenth century
when it was near its zenith in France, but Romanesque precedents were long followed,
and although the pointed arch appears in 1140 in Paderborn Cathedral, it was long
before it supplanted the round arch of the Romanesque. In northern Germany and
in the valley of the Elbe the architecture was carried out in brick, and at Liibeck even
window mullions and tracery were of brick, and this brick architecture, although
more meagre in design than that of Lombardy, has the character due to the material.
The ‘hall’ churches (dreischiffige Kirche) are a special characteristic of German
Gothic, more particularly in the north, and in these the nave and aisles are approxi-
mately the same height, with the consequent absence of triforium and clear-story
(p. 590A). The only English cathedral of this unusual type is Bristol, although it
occurs in the Temple Church, London (p. 393), and in some parish churches (p.
394). Another marked feature is a single western tower or western apse in place of
the wide, sculptured doorways of French cathedrals, thus giving a totally different
external appearance (p. 586D). It has been suggested (p. 357) that this apse at the
west end may have been derived from a detached baptistery; or it may have been
for the use of the laity in cases where the eastern apse was devoted to conventual use.

EXAMPLES

ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE
S. Gereon, Cologne (pp. 265, 360A, C, 585A), on the site of a tomb, 126 ft in
diameter, possibly erected by Helena, mother of Constantine, has an unusual
grouping, recalling the tomb at Aix-la-Chapelle. The straight-sided choir with its
sacristy dates from the Romanesque period (1075—). The eastern apse and towers
were added in 1160, while the ten-sided nave, 66 ft by 55 ft, oval on plan, was built
(1219-27) in the Gothic style with pointed windows, eaves gallery, and a pyramidal
roof. The church was partly ruined in the 1939-45 war.
Limburg Cathedral (1213-42) (p. 362 E-G, K), isafine Transitional church, and
with its seven towers forms an imposing group above the River Lahn.
The Liebfrauenkirche, Tréves (Trier) (1242-53) (pp. 364, 589A, B), severely
damaged in the 1939-45 war, forms part of the cathedral group (p. 358), and is a
copy of Braisne Abbey Church, near Soissons. It is a Transitional building with
both round and pointed arches; the cruciform upper part has clear-story windows
and a fine vault, and there is an elaborately sculptured western doorway.
S. Elizabeth, Marburg (c. 1257-83) (p-. 590), is the typical ‘hall’ church in
which nave and aisles are of equal height, and thus there is no triforium or clear-
story. The plan has nave and aisles, western entrance between two towers, and
apses at the ends of the transepts and sanctuary. The exterior is peculiar in having a
continuous external walking way at the level of each stage of windows, carried right
through the buttresses. Flying buttresses were unnecessary, and the interior has the
appearance of a large columned hall (p. 590A).
Cologne Cathedral (1248 onwards) (pp. 374K, 586A, B), the largest Gothic
church of Northern Europe, covering about 91,000 square ft, is a conspicuous
instance of the adoption of the details of a style, without having assimilated the
spirit that created it. The huge plan has a width out of all proportion to its length,
468 ft long by 275 ft wide, and the nave (1388), with a clear width of 41 ft 6 in, is
150 ft high, almost as high as Beauvais; while the double aisles are equal in width to
the nave and there are two enormous towers at the west end. The aisled transepts,
with entrances, project one bay more than at Amiens, and the eastern half of the
church, which is a reproduction of Amiens in plan and dimensions, has an apsidal
588 GERMAN GOTHIC
end and processional aisle and chevet of seven chapels. The building, which was
only finished, according to the original design, between the years 1824-80, displays
a lack of proportion and an absence of judicious disposition of parts; for the nave
with its double aisles is disproportionately short for the width, the aisles are low in
proportion to the height of the nave, while the twin western towers, overpowering
in bulk at the base and monotonous in repetition of lace-like detail above, altogether
dwarf the main building. In matters of the delicate adjustment of proportions,
which test the greatness of a creation, German architects fall short of French
masters. Cologne Cathedral nevertheless makes an imposing monument, as, with
its great twin-towers 500 ft high, it stands on the level plain of the wide Rhine valley.
The Frauenkirche, Nuremberg (1354-61) (p. 589C, D), completely ruined
in the 1939-45 war, was a ‘hall’ church in the market-place. Its immense roof
covered nave and aisles, while its two-storeyed western porch was surmounted
by a curious old clock with central figure of Charles IV and moving figures of the
seven Electors, which appeared at noon. The interior (p. 589D) showed the equal
heights of nave and aisles, separated by cylindrical piers with foliated capitals,
encircled with figures, behind which sprang the vaulting ribs.
S. Lambert, Hildesheim, S. Stephen, Mainz (1257-1328), and S. Quentin,
Mainz (1450), are also ‘hall’ churches, while Munich Cathedral (1468-88), S.
Barbara, Kuttenberg, and S. Martin, Landshut (1404), with a fine tower, 436 ft
high, are further instances of similar type.
Freiburg Cathedral (c. 1250-1360) (p. 585B) has Romanesque transepts and
side towers and a remarkable single western tower and spire 385 ft high, dating
from 1310-50, similar to those of Cologne. The tower is square at the base, which
contains the porch, octagonal in its second stage, and terminates in a lace-like spire
(p. 585B), which completes a pleasing group.
Regensburg (Ratisbon) Cathedral (1275-1534) (pp. 585C, 586c) is regular in
plan with three eastern apses without ambulatory, in the German manner. The
west front flanked by towers and open-work crocketed spires, added in 1859-69,
has a beautiful little triangular porch in the centre (1482). The cloisters (p. 597)
show a mingling of Gothic and Renaissance details.
Ulm Cathedral (1377-1492) (p. 586D), spacious and lofty, is an instance, not
uncommon in Germany, of excellence in masonry and poverty in design, for the
smallness of the ratio of the supports to the area produces an unpleasing interior.
The polygonal eastern apse is without ambulatory. The exterior has an arcaded
eaves gallery, due to Romanesque traditions, and a great western tower and spire,
529 ft in height, the upper part of which was completed only in the nineteenth
century, though to the original designs.
S. Stephen, Vienna (c. 1300-1510) (pp. 374], 591), is a characteristic ‘hall’
church in Austria, without clear-story or triforium, for the three aisles are nearly
equal in width and height, and the great roof covers the church in one span. The
transepts serve as entrance porches, one of which is carried up as a tower terminated
by a splendid spire, less open than usual in Germany. The vaults are traceried and
the windows still contain some original stained glass.
Liibeck Cathedral (1173-1335) (p. 358) and the Marienkirche, Liibeck
(1251-1310), much damaged in the 1939-45 war, express the possibilities of design
in brickwork, so usual in north Germany.

SECULAR ARCHITECTURE
Castles were erected in goodly numbers, as at Marienburg (1280-), and Meissen,
Saxony (1471-), and the old fortified town of Rothenburg still retains its Mediaeval
walls, with defensive towers (p. 592B).
 GERMAN GOTHIC 589

A. Exterior from S.E. B. Interior

Liebfrauenkirche, Tréves (Trier) (1242-53). See p. 587

c. Exterior from S.W. D. Interior looking E,

Frauenkirche, Nuremberg (1354-61). See p. 588
 590 GERMAN GOTHIC

S. ELIZABETH : MARBURG
aN if wens
a
ah? ‘| we
tee Fy v

z] C je J
HN i
et eo Be | We pore
= GZ Fel F | i I Py,

W i I t : | Set,
ny =)
fe) E / YY l i I Stee
y)) = Lf . ZA =

“Wal = ‘ E || |i
A = a ai 5
; 2 = it
4 =

St faa

OTe < == oes

EEN eee =

A INTERIOR LOOKIN GE: ERIOR FROM S.W.

tH
|
|

| |
|
|

Ms
nal

HH

\ pe ip

e
Y
\S

PLAN o BIER ata Set Be NE LAN WS PIERS thec

 GERMAN GOTHIC

S. STEPHEN} :oe
591

*,

——
=e
—S———
SSS
Se
eS

ee
=e S|
SSS
es —=
————

= —————
—————

gee
= ble

~_
|
° Op oo
A

6
|P=:co
So ip
8
ee
8 =

ee
eee
= =
D_—_
==

|
| ftnadADK : NG
==|
ra
(ois IC
)
\7A } Wan =
os

_— Ht
if fe

AAI HH ee
rd Hi

ain |f His
a i |

—ai =
terry " #
a TRANSVERSE. SECTION THRO’ TRANSEPTS
SCALE dee? PLAN NAVE BAY
90
eet 10°50 0 yo SCALE FOR SECTIONS &ELEVATION
METRES io 20 30 aD | FEET 25 7
awe ( ‘4 ak METRES 5" Gi is ee
A [aguas + “0 mene BEN!
“e

er
i
i S CENTRE
cS. *- x.
he=MeeLINE
—>
100°
—ABT.
—
esi,P NAVE
& AISLE VAULTS: PLAN? NAVE PIER
ig
 592 GERMAN GOTHIC

Dg

re

oA
Ts

Precept
iPro OC a
eee
IN AAA
ee
ua CDE Pn
s ce =a

. RATHHAUS all
Gem REGENSBURG —
WINDOW: FURSTENBURG FyHAPEL nc ones
PALACE : INNSBRUCK OLD RATHHAUS: PRAGU
 GERMAN GOTHIC 593
The Town Halls (Rathaus) at Brunswick, Hildesheim, Cologne, Halberstadt,
Minster, Regensburg (Ratisbon) (p. 592G), Ulm, and Liibeck, are prominent and
impressive buildings in these semi-independent German towns, and, with the town
gates in the Baltic provinces, are evidences of the prosperity of those times.
The Custom House, Nuremberg (1498) (p. 592E), used as a warehouse, is
remarkable, with three storeys in the walls and no less than six storeys in its high
roof, finished with a fine traceried gable.
The Old Houses, Brunswick (p. 592A) and Nuremberg (p. 592D), and the
Kaiserworth, Goslar (p. 592C), are characteristic examples of the secular architec-
ture of the period, while timber houses, in which a lower storey of masonry
supports a timber upper part, were frequent, as at Erfurt (p. 595A), Hildesheim
(p. 595C), and elsewhere.
Domestic Architecture was marked by lofty roofs which frequently had more
storeys than the walls, and were provided with dormer windows to make a through
current of air for their use as a ‘drying ground’ for the large monthly wash. The
planning of the roof-ridge, either parallel with or at right angles to the street,
considerably influenced design; thus in Nuremberg, where the ridge is generally
parallel with the street, dormer windows are plentiful and party walls are finished
off at the roof level with artistic treatment, while at Landshut and elsewhere the
ridge at right angles to the street results in gables of great variety of design, often
with a hoist in the top gable to raise goods from the ground level.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. Church plans are of varied types, and the larger number were derived
from German Romanesque churches with apsidal ends, usually semi-octagonal.
Apses are found both east and west, as at Naumburg, and also at ends of transepts,
when they are known as triapsal plans, as in S. Elizabeth, Marburg :(p. 590H).
Another type of plan is the result of French influence, and has the chevet, as at
Cologne, Magdeburg, Liibeck, Freiburg, and Prague. Twin western towers, as at
Regensburg Cathedral (p. 586c), and single western towers, as at Ulm, are found
(p. 586D); while in later buildings a central tower crowns the crossing, as in some
English cathedrals. Entrances are often small and insignificant, and are on the north
and south instead of at the west, and are formed in transepts and dignified with
towers, as in S. Stephen, Vienna (p. 591A; G).
WALLS. Apsidal galleries of the Romanesque style were reproduced over wall
surfaces without reference to their origin and purpose. Tracery was employed on
both outer and inner wall surfaces, and wall tracery was often carried up in front
of inner traceried windows and across gables, as seen in many churches. Towers
with spires were much used, but the junction of spire and tower was often so little
marked as to render the outline, though ornamented, somewhat confused and
unsatisfactory (p. 586c). Open tracery spires (p. 586D), complicated alike in design
and construction, are favourite features and were probably suggested by the
numerous turrets with many openings used in Romanesque buildings. The typical
examples are Freiburg (p. 5858), Regensburg (p. 586c), Cologne (p. 586), and
Vienna Cathedrals (p. 591A).
OPENINGS. Nave arcades in ‘hall’ churches were necessarily lofty, owing to the
height of the aisles, such as those in S. Stephen and S. Quentin, Mainz, the
Frauenkirche, Nuremberg (p. 589D), S. Elizabeth, Marburg (p. 590A, E), and
S. Stephen, Vienna (p. 591B, D). Doorways, though often unimportant, as at
Marburg (p. 595H), are sometimes elaborated with sculpture (p. 595F),
especially under French influence, as at Cologne (p. 586A) and Erfurt (p. 595G).
594 GERMAN GOTHIC
Traceried windows, like the nave arcading in ‘hall’ churches, are of excessive
height, as in the choir, Erfurt (p. 595J), but sometimes in the lofty aisles they are in
two tiers, as at Marburg (p. 590C, D). Clear-story windows, when employed, start
almost immediately above the nave arcade so as to provide a great expanse of
stained glass. Tracery was much elaborated and double-traceried windows are not
uncommon. Rose windows of intricate design were popular, as in the Lorenzkirche,
Nuremberg; while oriel windows to give an additional outlook are much used in
domestic architecture, as in the Kaiserworth, Goslar (p. 592C), S. Sebald’s Parson-
age, Nuremberg, and the Rathaus Chapel, Prague (p. 592H).
Roos. Vaulting, which was usually employed for churches, was excellent both
in proportion and construction. One square nave vaulting bay frequently corres-
ponds with two in the aisle, but vaulting in oblong bays afterwards became general,
as at Freiburg, Regensburg (p. 585c), Cologne (p. 586B), Oppenheim, and else-
where. The special German feature is the immense roof of the ‘hall’ church which,
in one span, covers the nave and lofty aisles (pp. 589C, 591C). The retention of the
quaint tower roofs of the Romanesque period was often another distinctive feature
in an otherwise Gothic exterior, and as at Innsbruck (p. §92F).
CoLuMNS. Nave piers, with or without caps, as at Augsburg (p. 585D), were
used in preference to columns of French Gothic type, and owing to the height of
the aisles they assumed the appearance of lofty posts (pp. 589B, D, 590A) supporting
the spreading vault. Capitals are frequently carved (p. 596A, B, D, E) and exhibit
skill in technique rather than design.
MOULDINGS. The mouldings, particularly of the later period, indicate a desire
for intricacy rather than simplicity, and this found expression, as also to some
extent in England and France, in the complicated system of ‘interpenetration’ of
different sets of mouldings, which, appearing and disappearing in the same stone,
required great skill in stone-cutting for their effective execution (p. 596). The
search after effect further led to exaggerating the size of distant features, such as
the roof pinnacles at Cologne: thus scale was sacrificed to detail, whereas in
England and France the size of features was subordinated to the general proportions
of the building.
ORNAMENT (pp. 595; 596). Sculpture was carried out much as in France, and the
triangular porch of Regensburg Cathedral, with its saints on columns beneath
traceried canopies, is an instance of the richness of detail occasionally lavished on
church porches (p. 586c). The carving is better in execution than design, and there
was a tendency towards the exact reproduction of natural foliage, such as interlaced
boughs and branches of trees, which appealed to the craftsmen, who were adepts at
executing interpenetrating mouldings. This idea was even carried into the ‘branch-
tracery’ of later Gothic windows, where, again, technical skill is more evident than
artistic creation and grace of outline. The enforced use of brick in the north elimi-
nated sculpture, and moulded and coloured brick took its place in decoration.
Tabernacles or sacrament houses, dating from the time when the placing of the
consecrated Host above the altar was discontinued in Germany, gave ample scope
for German decorative art. They are lofty, spire-like structures, tapering up in
many stages of carved wood or stone with traceried openings, pinnacles, statues,
and canopies, to contain the eucharistic pyx. Some are very lofty, as at Regens-
burg (52 ft), the Lorenzkirche, Nuremberg (1493) (64 ft) and Ulm (90 ft).
Stained glass is often excellent, as in S. Sebald, Nuremberg, while the delicate
and intricate ironwork of Germany, as seen in the fountains of Nuremberg, is
famous throughout the world. The choir stalls at Halberstadt (p. 595E) and Liibeck
(p. 596H), the screens at Oberwesel (p. 595B), the pulpit, Nuremberg (p. 596]), the
altar and canopy, Regensburg (p. 596L), the stall-end, Erfurt (p. 596F), the tomb at
 GERMAN GOTHIC

Ze
SE
‘Oad]

=
G

:
q
'

. 7
ei'
CAS Pin anes
N
\
Neei
' ‘ |
t
oN '
: 7
. ? 1
Sat'
é------6 H
1

N
N. “ Ne

:
Ses] Eee

cKETCH:P
IMBER HOUSE:ERFURT. STONE SCREEN: OBERWESEL. HOUSE HILDESHEIM.

te :
\qest3
~ |)ee
le
=

S
Cot
———
SS SS

Ss
= ee
EIN
ae ay)

Va

ae
— =

=
NS

t
_

CHOIR : HALBERSTADT CATHEDRAL. SOUTH PORCH

S.LAWRENCE ,NUREMBERG.

W. PORTAL : S.ELIZABETH, MARBURG. C HOIR : ERFURT CATH.

 GERMAN GOTHIC

HL
<a
; Na ii
(Bde W. DOORWA)
as
=

Berks » MARBURG (C) TRIPTYCH: NUREMBERG FREIBURG

\ FP6q
ae
\ allGe 1) |4

Mees
ie,
ORUe
rea
‘(Gr
Ka)
TE
Nees) Pe
EV LION
ee WES Ny
aay, ea)
Saas

POGUE
Oe
ECUAO et gece ala
ae Wie glo A oe

SARA S.SEBALD’S SHRINE: NUREMBER G

(F))STALL END: ERFURT
a HI) \|
Wt

cyl
Wien ||

Y, 4 f oo 2) iT .\ gee AM)

(oo)
1
I
i
1

|
1
i}
i]
i)
i
.|
|
_———
\
ie
“oOULPIT: NUREMBERG TOMB orLANDCRAVE HENRI:MABURG ALTAR
&CANOPY: REGENSE
Miele

GERMAN GOTHIC 597

Marburg (p. 596K), the holy well at Regensburg (p. 595D), and the triptych,
Nuremberg (p. 596c), are representative specimens of the Mediaeval art of Ger-
many. S. Sebald’s shrine, Nuremberg (1508-19) (p. 596G), by Peter Vischer,
Bed
ok.
£2ee
ee
ee
exemplifies the craze for over-elaboration which characterized German craftsmen.
Here twelve snails support the columns and bronze statues of the twelve Apostles
who stand under their intricate fretwork canopies, guarding and enclosing the silver
sarcophagus of the saint.
REFERENCE BOOKS
BERGNER;, H. Kirchliche Kunstaltertumer in Deutschland. 1905.
BOISSEREE, S. Histoire et description de la cathedrale de Cologne. 4to and folio. Munich,
1843.
DEHIO, G., and BEZOLD, G. V. Die kirchliche Baukunst des Abendlandes. Folio. Stuttgart,
1884, etc.
HARTEL, A. Architektonische Detaile und Ornamente der kirchlichen Baukunst. 2 vols.,
folio. Berlin, 1891.
KING, T. H. Study-book of Mediaeval Architecture and Art. 4 vols. London, 1858-68.
LUBKE, W. Ecclesiastical Art in Germany during the Middle Ages. Edinburgh, 1873.
—. Geschichte der deutschen Kunst. 1880.
MOLLER, G. Denkmaeler der deutschen Baukunst. Folio. Leipzig, 1852.
PUTTRICH, L. Denkmaeler der Baukunst der Mittelalters in Sachsen. 4 vols., folio. Leipzig,
1836-50.
SCHAEFER, C., and STIEHL, 0. Die Kirchbauten des Mittelalters in Deutschland. Folio.
I9OI.
STURGIS, R., and FROTHINGHAM, A. L. A History of Architecture. Vols. II, IV. New
York, 1915.
WHEWELL, W. Architectural Notes on German Churches. Cambridge, 1842.

Regensburg Cathedral: cloisters (c. 1534). See p. 588

598 ITALIAN GOTHIC

B. Milan Cathedral: east end c. Milan Cathedral: fléche

 : Monza ergamo;
Milan, Chiaravalle
LOMBARDY
Pavia’o~, eCremona
PlacenadAram None
*Ferrara

ance<a,orp istoia
Pisa, @Arnef lorence:*
TUS CNY
Voltetra® “San
meimignaio,

Italy in the Mediaeval Period

XVII. ITALIAN GOTHIC

(twelfth-sixteenth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. Geographical influence in Italy varied considerably in the
north, centre, and south of this long, narrow peninsula. North Italy includes the
great Lombard plains and the islands of the Venetian Republic, and was brought
into intercourse with Germany through Milan and Verona by the S. Gothard and
Brenner Passes across the natural barrier of the Alps; while the Venetian state on
the coast of the Adriatic was, through her overseas trade, in constant contact with
the Byzantine sphere and the East. Thus seas and mountains, often regarded as
nature’s barriers, were turned, by an expanding civilization, into high-roads of art
600 ITALIAN GOTHIC

and commerce, especially on that coast ‘where Venice sat in state, throned on her
hundred isles’. Central Italy, although dominated by the enduring tradition of
Old Rome, yet produced, in the districts to the north and farther from Rome,
magnificent Gothic churches of a type peculiar to this district, as at Florence, Siena,
and Assisi. South Italy and Sicily, exposed in the past to Greek and Byzantine
influences on the east, Roman on the north, and Muslim on the south, was a
veritable battlefield of art, and these conflicting influences produced a peculiar
blend of Mediaeval architecture, further emphasized by Norman rule.
GEOLOGICAL. North Italy is especially remarkable for the abundance of clay
in the alluvial Lombard plains, from which were made the beautiful red bricks and
terra-cotta used for many buildings, both ecclesiastical and secular, such as the
Frari Church, Venice, the Certosa, Pavia, and the Ospedale Maggiore, Milan;
while lustrous white and coloured marbles from the mountains to the north were
also employed, as at Milan, Genoa, and Verona. Central Italy is characterized by
the extensive use of coloured marbles, frequently in zebra stripes or framed panels,
which are wrought into the fabric as colour decoration, as at Florence, Siena
(p. 619C), Orvieto, and Lucca. South Italy and Sicily are so rich in coloured marbles
that the term ‘Sicilian marble’ has become a household word, and the architectural
decoration of Palermo Cathedral is achieved by the deft mingling of marble in two
colours. Thus did the geological formation supply materials for the development of
unusually pronounced styles.
CLIMATIC. North Italy has a climate similar to the temperate region of Central
Europe, and this contributed to the development of those essentially Gothic
features, such as large traceried windows, with the consequent necessity for
buttresses instead of walls, as seen in Milan Cathedral and to a less extent in the
buildings of Padua, Verona, and Venice. In central and south Italy, the sunny
climate and brilliant atmosphere naturally demanded small windows and thick
walls to exclude the glare and heat of the sun. The preference, moreover, for
opaque wall decoration, whether in mosaic, fresco, or marble, handed down from
the ancient Romans through the Romanesque period, counteracted any tendency
to supersede opaque walls of stone by transparent walls of glass, and thus there was
little chance for the development of window tracery.
RELIGIOUS. The power of the pope, as head of the Western Church, waned
after the death of Boniface VIII (1303), for succeeding popes were under the
influence of the kings of France, and for almost seventy years (1309-77), a period
known as the ‘Babylonish captivity’, they resided at Avignon, losing authority and
influence during their absence from Rome, in which city it is significant that there
should be only one Gothic church. After the return of Gregory XI to Rome and his
death in 1378, Western Christendom was plunged by rival popes into the religious:
turmoil of the ‘Great Schism of the West’ (1378-1417), which was only terminated
by the Council of Constance and the accession of Martin V. It is not surprising that
this period of confusion was unfavourable to the building of churches in Italy.
S. Francis of Assisi (1182-1226) founded the Order of Franciscans or Grey Friars,
which fired the religious imagination of the time and revolutionized religious life;
for, as Dante says, ‘he rose like a sun and illumined everything with his rays’. The
movement he had started gained strength, so that by the eighteenth century there
were 9,000 convents of this Order in Europe.
SOcIAL. Italy had no national unity at this period, but was cut up into princi-
palities and commonwealths, such as the republics of Venice, Florence, and
Genoa, the duchy of Milan, the kingdom of Naples, and the Papal States. This
absence of national unity is mirrored in the varied architectural treatment in differ-
ent parts of the peninsula. Political life was full of rivalry and activity, and small
ITALIAN GOTHIC 601

aayet

4 cise mama
1kSSS

X a eee B|

Br TERIOR LOOKING E.
602 ITALIAN GOTHIC

MILAN CATHEDRAL

ee
Ca
nF
4 le
ex |?
a
oe
a

Sg
ts
atewe.
fo
Bs

re
OY

Wate
ONG

rete:
spate
ire

CAN
a
68
6
oe
77) eH
ate
ot WwWwWWl

x Wee
j (|

amc
2
wi Wh |

zt
tw]
~

Sj
GaSe

jo}
yj
LH4 METRES-O

ge
4914
eleS

2)
a
bene h

:
\
t H mi.
ny AN
WK
i HMA
yi i Biel ;FM i
|

fees ea
tl Binus :
i HADI A t ih
weg Hs)

Litas
&
NE. APSIDAL WINDOW ¢
 ITALIAN GOTHIC 603

wars were of constant occurrence. The erection of the cathedrals of Siena, Orvieto,
Florence, Milan, and Lucca was largely due to the vigorous civic pride of rival
cities; while during the struggles between popes and emperors and their respective
factions, the Guelphs and Ghibellines, both sides had to reckon with the increasing
power of the townsmen who erected those numerous town halls which attest the
growth of municipal institutions. Thus architecture was used more freely in the
service of the people. The unsettled condition of the times may be gathered both
from the contemporary chronicles of Giovanni Villani and from the later poet
Tasso, who says that the citizens on each holiday blew trumpets and proceeded to
sack the neighbouring town. Italian was tentatively used as a written language
about 1200. Dante (1265-1321) presents a vivid picture of the age in his Divina
Commedia, and this poem, which standardized the Italian language in literature,
also coincided with the development of Italian Gothic architecture.
HISTORICAL. In spite of internal turmoil, Italy led the way in Europe in arts,
learning, and commerce, and the revival of learning, known as the Renaissance,
took place there nearly a century in advance of northern Europe, and effectually
arrested the further evolution of the Gothic style in Italy. The Latin conquest of
Constantinople (Istanbul) (1204) during the fourth crusade, in which the republic
of Venice played such a prominent part, and the subsequent years of the Latin
occupation of the city (1204-61), were partly responsible for the immigration, in
the thirteenth century, of Graeco-Byzantine artists into Italy. These skilled crafts-
men, trained in Classical traditions, settled in Genoa, Venice, Pisa, Florence, Siena,
and many another town, and gave an impetus to the creative arts which enriched
Italy, and then spread their influence throughout Europe. The rise of Venice was
marked by the defeat of the Genoese off the Sardinian coast in 1353, and of the
Turkish fleet in 1416. These victories fired the Venetians with a desire to make the
Doge’s Palace a fit symbol of their success, and it was completed when Venice
reached the zenith of her power and prosperity.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The general character of Gothic architecture in Europe has already been dealt with
(p. 367). The style in Italy dates approximately from the twelfth to the sixteenth
century, but the influence of Roman tradition remained so strong that the conspicu-
ous verticality of northern Gothic is generally neutralized in Italy by horizontal
cornices and string courses. Churches are marked externally by the following
features: flatness of roofs (pp. 598, 615A), the screen wall of the west facade which
masks the aisle roofs (pp. 601A, 617A), the circular window of the west front
(p. 628A, G), an absence of pinnacles and of flying buttresses (p. 615A), stripes of
coloured marbles instead of mouldings, occasional frescoes and mosaics in panels,
and small windows without tracery (p. 615A). The projecting entrance porches with
columns, often resting on the backs of lion-like beasts (p. 629E), are in striking
contrast to the cavernous porches of Northern Europe.
The sculpture and carving (pp. 630, 631), executed in the fine-grained marble of
Italy, continued to be as refined as in the Classical period, and the influence of Old
Rome is seen in modified Corinthian capitals with their acanthus leaves. The
sculpture, although superior in technique to that of Northern Europe, is not such
an essential part of a style which, as we shall see, never developed, as in France and
England, into the highest form of Gothic. The brickwork and plastic terra-cotta of
the Lombard plains resulted in a smallness of detail and intricacy of ornament
natural to this material, as in the Frari Church, Venice (p. 628G), the Certosa,
Pavia (p. 617F), and Chiaravalle (p. 629D), and many civic buildings. Colour effect
604 ITALIAN GOTHIC

and delicate detail were relied on, rather than depth of shadow and boldness of
design; thus was the material allowed to give full expression to its own capabilities
without forcing it beyond its limitations. The variety of influences in south Italy,
and more especially in Sicily, produced a type of architecture which owes its beauty
to the combination of Greek inspiration, Roman construction, and Byzantine
decoration (p. 301).
EXAMPLES

NorTH ITALY
Milan Cathedral (c. 1385-1485) (pp. 374L, 598, 601, 602), initiated by the
populace and clergy of the city and sponsored by Giovanni Galeazzo Visconti, duke of
Milan, is, with the exception of Seville, the largest Mediaeval cathedral, and is
somewhat German in character, as among the fifty or so architects who had a part
in it were consultants from north of the Alps. The choir and transepts were finished
about 1450, and the nave and aisles were commenced in 1452. In plan (p. 602C) it
consists of a nave, 55 ft wide between the piers, lofty double aisles and transepts
terminated with a circlet of columns in the French manner, but enclosed in a
German polygonal apse, while there is an absence of lateral chapels. The interior
(pp. 601B, 602D) is vast, lofty, and imposing, with fine perspective views, rendered
all the more impressive by the dimness and mystery which result from lack of light.
It has huge piers, 60 ft high, surrounded by engaged shafts and surmounted by
enormous capitals, 20 ft in height, containing canopied niches with statues, from
which spring the nave arches supporting the vault 148 ft above the ground. It
resembles S. Petronio, Bologna, and owing to the excessive height of the aisles there
is no triforium and the clear-story is small, in striking contrast with French and
English Gothic cathedrals. The exterior is a gleaming mass of white marble with
lofty traceried windows, panelled buttresses, flying buttresses, and pinnacles
crowned with statues (pp. 598, 601A), all wrought into a soaring design of lace-like
intricacy. The three magnificent traceried windows of the apse, 68 ft by 28 ft, are
the finest of their type in Italy (p. 598B). The flat-pitched roofs are constructed of
massive marble slabs laid on the vaulting (p. 598c), and over the crossing is a
domical vault, 215 ft above the ground, designed by Amadeo and Dolcebuono in a
competition in 1490, finishing in a lantern to which in 1750 an open-work spire was
added, rising 350 ft above the ground (pp. 598c, 602A). The later facade (p. 601A),
which has the widespreading gable lines of Romanesque churches, such as S.
Michele, Pavia (p. 322F), remained long unfinished, and was partly built from the
designs of Carlo Buzzi after 1653, but only completed by Napoleon at the beginning
of the nineteenth century.
The Certosa, Pavia (1396-1497) (p. 617D-F), a famous Carthusian monastery,
was commenced by Giovanni Galeazzo Visconti, and forms a splendid memorial of
the Milan dynasties. The monastic buildings were nearly completed at his death in
1492. The church was in progress by 1453. In plan (p. 617D) it is a Latin cross and
similar to many German churches in the triapsal terminations to sanctuary and
transepts, but the nave is in square, and the aisles in oblong bays, in the Italian
manner. On the south are the two cloisters, richly wrought in terra-cotta. The
exterior (p. 617F) is a fascinating instance of Lombard transitional Gothic-Renais-
sance style with arcading and terra-cotta ornament; while the monumental facade
(1473-c. I501) is wholly of Renaissance character (pp. 684, 686A).
S. Antonio, Padua (1232-1307) (p. 605), is a seven-domed pilgrimage church
resembling S. Mark, Venice (p. 289), in general conception. The nave is in square
bays covered with domes on pendentives, which are also placed over the crossing,
transepts, and choir, beyond which is an apse and chevet with nine radiating
ITALIAN¥GOTHIC 605

B. S. Antonio, Padua: nave

606 ITALIAN GOTHIC

A. SS. Giovanni e Paolo, Venice, from W. (1260-1385; facade 1430—unfinished 5

dome of later date). See opposite page

B. S. Francesco, Assisi: upper church c. SS. Giovanni e Paolo, Venice:

(1228-53). See p. 623 interior
 ITALIAN GOTHIC 607
chapels similar to contemporary churches in France. The interior also was obviously
influenced by the Venetian church, but falls far short of the original, as it lacks the
glamour of coloured mosaic decoration. The exterior has an arcade of pointed
arches and an upper arcaded gallery, like the Romanesque churches of Lombardy,
while the domes, heightened in 1424, and minaret-like turrets give it a curious
Byzantine aspect.
SS. Giovanni e Paolo, Venice (1260-1385) (p. 606), a Dominican church of
imposing proportions and of historic importance, contains the tombs of the Doges.
The Latin cross of the plan is elaborated by pronounced transepts with eastern
chapels, and by a polygonal apse to the choir. The interior is essentially Italian in
the wide spacing of piers, the square bays of the nave vaulting, and the oblong bays
of the aisles, and internal wooden ties take the place of external flying buttresses.
The exterior is of beautiful brickwork with pointed windows and moulded cornices,
and the clear-story is loftier than usual in Italy, while a dome of later date crowns
the crossing.
S. Maria Gloriosa dei Frari, Venice (1250-1338) (p. 628E, F, G), is a Franciscan
church, designed by Niccolo Pisano, in which there are six eastern transept chapels.
The interior (p. 628F) has lofty stone cylindrical piers tied together by wooden
beams, supporting an arcade of pointed arches and brick vaulting in square bays
with massive ribs resting on shafts rising from the pier capitals. The exterior
(p. 628G) is in fine coloured brickwork, the plain west facade is set off by the sculp-
tured central doorway and circular window above, and by small lateral windows,
while along the aisles are pointed windows. The square campanile has vertical
panels and a belfry of open arches, and is crowned with an octagonal lantern. The
apse (p. 628E), with its double tiers of pointed tracery windows, flanked by the
eastern transept chapels, is the great glory of the church.
S. Anastasia, Verona (1261-) (p. 610A), with its delightful portal and brick
campanile, is a beautiful expression of Italian Gothic, and S. Andrea, Vercelli
(1219-), has a character of its own derived from its two western towers and English
type of plan.
S. Petronio, Bologna (1390-1437) (p. 609A, B), was designed for this famous
university city by Antonio di Vincenzo to eclipse the cathedral at Florence. It was
to have consisted of nave, aisles, outer chapels, transepts, chancel, and chevet, and
if completed would have been one of the largest churches in Italy, but the eastern
part was never built. The interior resembles Milan in having nave and aisles in
diminishing heights, and the nave, with little ornamental detail, has widely spaced
piers, resembling those of Florence. The chief feature of the entrance facade is the
great doorway with its sculptured ornament designed in 1425 by Jacopo della
Quercia. The exterior was never finished, although a competition was held about 1535
in which Palladio, Vignola, and others took part, and fifty designs are still preserved.
There are churches at Bologna, Vicenza, Padua, Cremona, and Venice which are
examples of the influence of brick and terra-cotta material on architectural
treatment.
The Doge’s Palace, Venice (pp. 611, 731), the facades of which date from
1309-1424, and are from designs by Giov. and Bart. Buon, is the grandest effort in
civic architecture of the period, and is material evidence of the proud position of
Venice as a great trading community, whose commerce was protected by the
supremacy of her navy. The palace, started in the ninth century, several times
rebuilt, and completed in the Renaissance period (p. 731), forms part of that great
scheme of town-planning which was carried out through successive centuries
(p. 611D). The facades, with a total length of nearly 500 ft, have open arcades in the
two lower storeys, and the third storey was rebuilt after a fire in the sixteenth
608 ITALIAN GOTHIC

century, so as to extend over the arcades (p. 611B). This upper storey is faced with
white and rose-coloured marble walls, resembling patterned brickwork, pierced by
a few large and ornate windows (p. 628B) and finished with a lace-like parapet of
oriental cresting. The arcade columns (p. 611E), which originally stood on a stylo-
bate of three steps, now rise from the ground without bases, and the sturdy
continuous tracery of the second tier of arcades lends an appearance of strength to
the open arches, so heavily loaded by the solid walls above. The capitals of the
columns, particularly the angle capital (p. 631J) eulogized by Ruskin in The Stones
of Venice, are celebrated for the delicate carving in low relief, which was made
possible by the use of fine-grained marble. The whole scheme of columned and
pointed arcades, with its combination of carved capitals and long horizontal lines of
open tracery, is of that unique design which can only be termed Venetian Gothic.
The ‘Porta della Carta’ gives entrance to the Cortile (p. 731).
The Palazzo Pubblico, Cremona (1206-45), the Palazzo Pubblico, Piacenza
(1281), and the Mercanzia, Bologna (1382-4) (p. 629G), are similar with pointed
arcades and an upper storey, often with a projecting ringhiera or tribune, and there
are the familiar forked battlements.
The Broletto, Monza (thirteenth century), possesses, like many another town
hall, a ringhiera or balcony (p. 330D) on a level with the floor of the great hall, from
which the magistrates were wont to address the citizens.
The Ca d’Oro, Venice (1424-36) (p. 612C), is another fine design by the archi-
tects of the Doge’s Palace for one of those palatial homes of merchant princes with
which the sea-city abounds. The windows are grouped together in the usual
Venetian manner to form a centre for the facade which, however, in this instance
seems to lack one wing. The arcaded entrance of five arches, lighting the deep
central hall, is surmounted by an arcade divided into six openings, filled with
characteristically Venetian tracery, and flanked by wider arches with projecting
balconies, above which is another storey lighter in treatment, and there is a curious
roof cresting of Saracenic design. The finished wing of the facade is of solid
masonry, which sets off the intricate tracery of the centre.
The Palazzi Foscari (fifteenth century), Contarini-Fasan (fourteenth century),
Cavalli (fifteenth century), and Pisani (fifteenth century) (p. 612B) are famous
Gothic palaces on the Grand Canal. They display the concentration of traceried
openings in the centre to light the hall, and have solid unbroken wings, which
produce a reposeful reflection in the water below.
The Ponte di Castel Vecchio or Scaligero, Verona (1335), wholly destroyed
in the 1939-45 war, was one of many bridges which were of such importance as means
of intercommunication that they were considered sacred. It was a fortified bridge
across the Adige, with a tower on either bank, and had segmental arches, a low
octagonal tower at every pier, and forked Ghibelline battlements along its whole
length (p. 632B).
The Torre del Commune, Verona (1172) (p. 628D), is one of those communal
towers which sprang up as a result of Mediaeval civic life; for they served as bell
towers to summon the citizens and as watch towers against fire and enemies. The
square shaft of striped stone and brickwork has a belfry of three lights on each face;
the crowning octagonal turret, in two stages, rises to a height of 272 ft, and was
added after 1404, when the city lost its independence to Venice.
The Torrazzo, Cremona (1261-84), the highest (nearly 4oo ft) in Italy, and the
celebrated Campanile of S. Mark, Venice (pp. 323, 611A), rebuilt since its
collapse in 1902 in the form it had possessed since the early sixteenth century, add
to the world-fame of Italian towers.
The Ospedale Maggiore, Milan (1457-c. 1624) (p. 698F—-H), is unusual in that
 ITALIAN GOTHIC 609

eaten

B. S. Petronio, Bologna: nave c. Or San Michele, Florence

looking E. (1337-1404). See p. 614
u H.O.A.
610 ITALIAN GOTHIC

A. S. Anastasia, Verona (1261-). B. Arena Chapel, Padua

See p. 607 (c. 1300-1305). See p. 633

c. Palazzo Vecchio (1298-1314) and Piazza della Signoria, Florence

with the Loggia dei Lanzi (right) (1376-82). See p. 623
 ITALIAN GOTHIC 611

{THE DOCE'S PALACE

Hy VENICE

+.

Sa
| ae of
aie | fips

Li eae|

a cole
ailal MW
ny
ee UA | e 2:|
Yyy
lai
La
eres

1Z
7aNs
ULIYA

Tt—

2070 20 40 60 BOM? a j= =
ae LAGOON
PLAN or PIAZZA JTHE LOWER ARCADE
 612 ITALIAN GOTHIC

raced

i Bee

Ser

(A)
THE BIGALLO: FLORENCE | 2 (B)PALAZz0 PISANI: VENICE
<— PROJECTED, a :
EXTENSION

sr
oH IO LONE GlOROI Hoo
L AAA OVA :

v
r=
Zs ay a

See GE TY
coOa
De ob =

PAL. DEI PRIORI: VOLTERRA

 ITALIAN GOTHIC 613
it was begun in transitional Renaissance style by Antonio Filarete of Florence
(p. 684), but continued from 1465 in late Gothic. It is built of brick and terra-
cotta, the use of which has resulted in delicacy of modelling in the broad frieze be-
tween the storeys and in the ornamental bands round the windows. It was the first
lay hospital. The interior was severely damaged in the 1939-45 war.

CENTRAL ITALY
Florence Cathedral (1296-1462) (pp. 615A, B, 616), also known as S. Maria del
Fiore, was designed by Arnolfo di Cambio, and is essentially Italian in character
without the vertical features of northern Gothic. It was built around the old church
of S. Reparata when, in 1296, the city council decided to erect a new cathedral
worthy of the prosperity of the citizens. If forms the centre of the group which
emphasizes the importance of Florence and the ambition of her sons during the
Middle Ages. On Arnolfo’s death either in 1302 or 1310 the building was stopped
till 1334, when Giotto was appointed master of the works, and he was followed by
Andrea Pisano and Francesco Talenti, who in 1357 enlarged Arnolfo’s scheme,
while in 1365 a commission of architects laid out the choir and transepts. The
three apses were completed in 1421, the dome was added by Brunelleschi (1420-34)
as the result of a competition (p. 677), and the lantern was placed over it in 1462 by
Giuliano da Maiano, after Brunelleschi’s death in 1446. The plan (p. 616F) is a
peculiar type of Latin cross, and remarkable for the large central nave, 270 ft long,
and wide spacing of nave arcades, for there are only four square bays of 60 ft (p. 615B).
This vast nave forms an impressive though sombre approach to the majestic octagon
(p. 616G), 138 ft 6 in in diameter, off which are the three immense apses with
fifteen radiating chapels. The piers have attached pilasters and unmoulded pointed
arches; there is no triforium, but a small clear-story of circular windows below the
vaulted roof. The exterior (pp. 615A, 616A) is notable for its coloured marble
panelling, small traceried windows, absence of buttresses and pinnacles, and for the
horizontal lines of the design, the unique semi-octagonal apses, and the pointed
dome. The marble facing of the west facade, partially completed under Arnolfo di
Cambio (p. 616£) but destroyed in 1588, was recommenced in 1875 (p. 616A), with
its panels of coloured marble, sculptures, and mosaics, and finished in 1887.
The Campanile, Florence (1334-59) (pp. 615A, 616A), on the site of an earlier
tower (888), is 45 ft square and 275 ft high, and was designed by Giotto on tradi-
tional Italian lines. Only the lowest stage was finished in Giotto’s time, and the
design was twice changed as it proceeded, first by Andrea Pisano and finally by
Francesco Talenti. It rises sheer from the pavement without supporting buttresses,
and all its four sides are panelled in coloured marble and embellished with sculp-
tured friezes and marble inlay. It is divided into four principal stages, of which the
topmost is the belfry, crowned by an arched corbel table, instead of the spire
intended by Giotto.
The Baptistery, Florence (p. 615A), thought to have started as a fifth-
century church, converted into a baptistery in the middle of the eleventh century,
received various minor adornments during the thirteenth century and, standing to
the west of the Cathedral, forms part of this world-famous group. The octagon is
90 ft in diameter, covered with an internal dome, 103 ft high, probably modelled on
that of the Pantheon. The facades are in three stages of dark green and white
marble, crowned with a low roof and lantern. The Baptistery is noted“for the
marvellous workmanship of its famous bronze doors, which were added in the
fourteenth (1330-6) and fifteenth (1403-24 and 1425-52) centuries by Andrea
Pisano and Lorenzo Ghiberti (p. 672). In 1514, in view of threatened collapse,
Michelangelo introduced an iron chain around the base of the dome.
614 ITALIAN GOTHIC

Siena Cathedral (c. 1226-1380) (pp. 617A—C, 619A, C), one of the most stupen-
dous undertakings since the building of Pisa Cathedral, was largely the outcome of
civic pride, and all the artists of Siena contributed their works to its building and
adornment. The plan is cruciform, with an unusual irregular hexagon at the cross-
ing, 58 ft in diameter (p. 617C), covered by a dome and lantern of 1259-64; while
the sanctuary, owing to the slope of the ground, is built over the Baptistery of
S. Giovanni, which thus forms a crypt, and is entered from the lower level. The
interior is striking in its combination of unusual features (pp. 617B, 619C). The
zebra marble striping on wall and pier, the squinch-arches of the strange hexagon,
and the incised marble floor (fourteenth-fifteenth century), by the famous pavement-
artists of Siena, form suitable surroundings for the famous sculptured pulpit by
Niccolo Pisano (1265-9). Between 1339-48 a grandiose project for adding a new
nave, to which the existing church would have formed transepts, was begun and
abandoned. The building stands on a stepped platform (p. 619A) which gives
dignity to the composition, and it has an elaborately sculptured western facade
(lower part 1284-1300, upper, 1377-80) which is merely a frontispiece faced with
white marble relieved with pieces of Siena red and Prato green marble and with
three highly ornate recessed doorways (p.619A). The shaft-like campanile, (thirteenth
century) in striped marble, has six stages of windows which increase in size, and,
rising from the south transept, it forms the central feature of the group.
The Campo Santo, Pisa (1278-83) (pp. 313A, 314B, 618A), by Giov. Pisano,
consists of an open rectangle surrounded by a cloister with round-arched openings,
filled with beautiful open tracery in 1463.
S. Maria della Spina, Pisa (1323) (p. 618B), is a miniature church on the banks
of the Arno with shrine-like fagade of crocketed gables and pinnacled canopies.
Orvieto Cathedral (1290-1330) (pp. 619B, 628C), of which the first architect
was probably Arnolfo di Cambio, stands on an eminence in this isolated hill-city.
Its plan is basilican with nave, aisles, and projecting semicircular chapels. The
interior (p. 619B) shows basilican influence, with its lofty cylindrical pillars in grey
and white marble, which support semicircular arches surmounted by a striped
clear-story and pointed windows, all crowned by a timber roof of basilican type.
The exterior also is of striped marble (basalt and travertine) carried round the aisle
chapels, the windows of which are partly filled with alabaster. The facade (1310-30,
not fully completed until 1580) resembles Siena with its three porches, gables, and
rose window, and is a glowing mass of symbolism carried out in coloured mosaic,
carving, and sculpture of great beauty, but is a mere frontispiece.
S. Maria Novella, Florence (1278-1350) (p. 632A), was designed by two
Dominican friars as a Latin cross of great size with transepts, chapels, and
beautiful cloisters. The nave has no triforium, but a low clear-story with circular
windows and a ribbed vault. The original design of the unfinished exterior is
indicated by some blind arcading on the entrance facade, which was completed
from designs by Alberti in the Renaissance period (p. 683).
S. Croce, Florence (1294-1442) (p. 622A), one of the largest churches in
Europe, was by Arnolfo di Cambio, and contains many monuments to celebrated
Italians; hence it has been called the Westminster Abbey of Italy. It is a Gothic
version of a basilican church, with widely spaced columns and open timber roof.
The western fagade, left unfinished, was completed 1857-63, and is similar in
charaeter to that of Siena Cathedral.
Or San Michele, Florence (1337-1404) (p. 609c), designed by Francesco
Talenti and others, was originally called ‘S. Michele in Orto’, from its orchard site.
It has a rectangular ground storey originally serving as a church of the trade guilds,
which has fine three-light windows with slender columns and elaborate tracery
 ITALIAN GOTHIC 615

se

Campanile (1334-59)

A. Florence Cathedral from S.E. (1296-1462). See p. 613

B. Florence Cathedral: nave c. Loggia dei Lanzi, Florence

looking E. (1376-82). See p. 623
 616 ITALIAN GOTHIC

S. MARI A DEL FIORE: $rhLOR ENCE

iN : SCALE For (B)é
en i J F? 2007.69 mi

fat ae -d |-50
TE PTT RR - === e
Fatal beeeeenlE tata Ale
Cat en a a ie Ni = Re
Ain.
ot NU
ai
ES) fanah
oe
LPL AN
AiG Rh M keg ney poe 1007-30
Pa go < Pei
a4 a
LO
i a =
——
whan Ming
if hi
a rt Nea
woe
nf Di oF PB
fifi B
mf x - \

ee ci Oi seers the oy Tae | i

EXTERIOR rrom NW, Sz" =

or DOME

NUE
Vial

Sa

fii

ae i

(Bnconpteten FA CADE F
Gnreror LOOKING =e.
 617

SIENA CATH! yj
ITALIAN GOTHIC

A fA

Ns
yee
%

WMATA
PEW)
te

TOSA: PAVIA
I aos Lop
PROPOSED NEW NAVE
NEVER COMPLETED

yn yh Y.
RRA}

it a
EXTERIOR FROM N.
618 ITALIAN GOTHIC

A Campo Santo, P 18a (1278-1463) . See p. 614

B. S. Maria della Spina, Pisa (1323). See p. 614

 ITALIAN GOTHIC

ta
- \

A. Siena Cathedral
.
exterior. a O ie O lao}‘=| vo Mo)i=]ian}= Ww N fea)fe) onlfaa)faa)(2)=>
Vvy ie) = nave
See p. 614 looking E. See p. 614

c. Siena Cathedral interior (1226-1380). See p. 614

620 ITALIAN GOTHIC

A. S. Francesco, Assisi: aerial view from W. showing Monastery

and Church (1228-53). See p. 623

B. S. Francesco, Assisi: lower church

 ITALIAN GOTHIC 621

B. S. Francesco, Assisi: Great Cloister showing W. end

622 ITALIAN GOTHIC

B. S. Maria Sopra Minerva, Rome: nave (1285). See opposite page

 ITALIAN GOTHIC 623

enclosed in semicircular arches. These arcade infillings were an afterthought,

dating from 1366-81. Externally, between the windows, are niches filled with
statues by celebrated sculptors, such as Donatello and Ghiberti, as offerings from
the twelve great trade guilds of Florence between 1428 and 1550. In the interior is a
beautiful tabernacle and high altar by Andrea Orcagna (1349-59). There are two
upper storeys over the church which have two-light windows; down to 1569 they
formed granaries and are now used for State archives.
S. Francesco, Assisi (1228-53) (pp. 606B, 620, 621), the great pilgrimage
church on the hill above the historic plain, owes much of its imposing character to
its lofty position, while the hill-slope facilitated the erection of an upper and lower
church. The vast monastic buildings on their massive masonry substructures
testify to the magnetic influence of the great Italian saint and founder. Both churches
are vaulted, and the dim mystery of the aisleless interiors, terminated by a polygonal
apse, gives a sense of solemnity to the brilliant frescoes of Cimabue and Giotto,
representing scenes from the life of S. Francis and incidents in the history of the
Franciscan Order. These frescoes form a complete and consistent scheme of
decoration, thoroughly in harmony with Italian tradition; they make one of the
most glowing church interiors in all Italy, and are a fitting memorial-shrine of one
who trod the path of self-abnegation. The pulpit (p. 630K) and the monuments
(p. 631G) are of great interest. The doorways of both upper and lower church, the
circular window of the nave, and the turret-shaped buttresses, with low flying
arches, are the main features of the exterior. A sturdy campanile, which retains the
Lombard Romanesque character, crowns this famous group.
S. Maria sopra Minerva, Rome (c. 1285) (p. 622B), designed by Fra Sisto and
Fra Ristoro, the two friars who were also the architects of S. Maria Novella,
Florence (p. 632A), is the only Gothic church in Rome—an evidence of the impreg-
nable fortress which the citadel of Classic Rome presented to the advance of Gothic
art—besides which the city had been supplied with many churches during the
early Christian period.
The Palazzo del Podesta or Bargello, Florence (1255-—), the Palazzo Vecchio,
Florence (1298-1314) (p. 610C), the Palazzo Pubblico, Siena (1289-1309) (p.
612D), the Palazzo del Municipio, Perugia (1281-—), and the Palazzo Pubblico,
Montepulciano (late fourteenth century) (p. 612H), represent the municipal life
and enterprise of these Mediaeval cities, and stand, grave and severe, amidst the
bustle of modern life, with their lofty watch towers and fortified facades, often
finished with machicolations and battlements.
The Palazzo dei Priori, Volterra (1208-57) (p. 612F), is in four storeys with
two-light windows, now irregularly placed. It is crowned with heavy battlements
and the square tower rising above the front wall is capped with a belfry.
The Castle, Volterra (1343), high on its rocky site, is a typical Mediaeval
stronghold of imposing outline with massive walls, small windows, central circular
keep, round towers, and machicolations (p. 625A).
The Bigallo, Florence (1352-58) (p. 612A), is a delicately arcaded little loggia,
designed to shelter foundlings who were there displayed by the Capitane of S.
Maria to appeal to the charity of the public.
The Loggia dei Lanzi, Florence (1376-82) (p. 615C), with its bold semi-
circular arches and compound piers, forms a part only of a great town-planning
scheme to surround the piazza which would have made it the most magnificent
arcaded square in Italy.
The Mediaeval House, Viterbo (p. 612G), with its arcaded ground storey and
traceried windows, is interesting among many such houses as evidence of a phase
of civilization which has passed away.
624 ITALIAN GOTHIC

San Gimignano (pp. 323, 625C) on its hill-top still retains thirteen towers built
by rival local families—adherents of the Ghibellines and Guelphs—which vividly
suggest the condition of the times when, as we are told, the municipality had to
make building regulations to limit the height of the towers of these fortress-houses,
mainly of the tenth and eleventh centuries, which still give a strangely mediaeval
aspect to this picturesque hill-city.
The Ponte Vecchio, Florence (1345) (p. 625B), by Taddeo Gaddi, the oldest
bridge in Florence, has a quaint character, with its three segmental arches springing
boldly from massive piers to withstand the waters of the Arno when swollen with
the melting snows of the Appenines, while along both sides of its roadway are the small
shops of the goldsmiths’ quarter. The corridor above the shops is by Vasari (1564).
SOUTHERN ITALY AND SICILY
Messina Cathedral (1092-1197), frequently altered after damage by fire and
earthquakes until it was practically destroyed by the earthquake of 1908, was
basilican in plan with timber roof in Muslim honeycomb work.
Palermo Cathedral (1170-85) (p. 626A) repeatedly altered, built on the site of
an earlier Muslim mosque, is also basilican in plan and was commenced by King
William the Good of Sicily. The open porch (c. 1480), with slender columns
supporting stilted pointed arches of Muslim type, is reminiscent of the Alhambra,
Granada; while the roof battlements recall those of the Doge’s Palace. At the west
end the Cathedral, which is Muslim in character, is connected across the street by
two pointed arches to the tower of the Archbishop’s Palace. Two slender minaret
towers on either side resemble those at the east end, and in its vigour of skyline the
whole group suggests Northern Gothic. The external decoration is in stone of two
colours, and the apses are particularly fine in treatment with polychrome interlaced
blind arcading. The dome is an addition of 1781-1801.
The Castello Nuovo, Naples (1279-83), built by Charles I of Anjou, is a lofty,
rectangular structure, with three machicolated round towers and curtain walls,
now pierced with Renaissance windows.
The Palazzo Stefano, Taormina (1330) (p. 626B)—one of many palaces in that
ancient precipice-city which have pointed two-light windows with trefoil heads
and crowning machicolated cornices—and the Archbishop’s Palace, Palermo,
designed with flamboyant tracery windows (15th cent.) (p. 626c)—now mostly
blocked up to keep out the southern sun—are typical secular buildings of the
Mediaeval period.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. The desire for a great central space, as at Florence (p. 616F) and Siena
(p. 617C), shows the influence of Roman models. Nave arcades are widely spaced,
the triforium usually omitted, as at Florence (p. 616G) and Milan (p. 602D), and the
clear-story reduced to vault spandrels pierced by small and generally circular
windows (p. 602F, 616B). These lofty arcades practically include the aisles and nave
in one composition and give the effect of a single hall (p. 6018). Nave vaulting is
frequently set out in square compartments, as in Florence Cathedral (p. 616F) and
the Certosa, Pavia (p. 617D); while the aisles have oblong compartments (p. 616F),
thus reversing the northern Gothic practice. Towers, usually isolated, are square
shafts without buttresses, continuing the Romanesque tradition, but often have
beautiful surface ornament, and they, unlike northern examples, develop no spire
growth. The best known are at Florence (p. 615A), Siena (p. 617A), Lucca, Verona
(p. 628D), Mantua, and Pistoia. The dome was the most imposing external feature,
as at Siena (p. 617A) and Florence (p. 615A). The central towers in diminishing
 ITALIAN GOTHIC 625

eg ee eer -

B. The Ponte Vecchio, Florence (1345). See opposite page

Marg ak OSS ik Pe
c. San Gimignano: view of the Towers (13th—14th cent.).
See pp. 323, 624
626 ITALIAN GOTHIC

Open porch (c. 1480) A. Palermo Cathedral from S.

(1170-85 :dome 1781-1801). See p. 624

B. Palazzo S. Stefano, c. Window in Palazzo Archivescovile,

Taormina (1330). See p. 624 Palermo (15th cent.). See p. 624
 ITALIAN GOTHIC 627
stages, as at Chiaravalle (p. 629D), and Milan (pp. 598c, 601A), are an advance on
the Romanesque lanterns at the crossing and may be compared with English
examples, especially the octagon at Ely.
WALLS. The absence of large windows obviated the necessity for projecting
buttresses, as the high walls were comparatively solid throughout their length and
were thus able to withstand the vault pressure (p. 615A). Use also was made of
tie-bars of wood or metal, particularly to stabilize arcades (pp. 601B, 615B, 622B).
Owing to the absence of vertical features with their shadows, flatness is the pre-
dominant characteristic of the walls. Fagades are treated independently as decorative
compositions, and often have no relation to the structure or roofs behind (p. 617A),
while the marble facing was often left unfinished on the score of expense. Marble
was used in bands of two colours at Siena (pp. 617A, B, 619A, C) and Orvieto (p. 619B),
and in decorative panels at Florence (p. 615A), while some facades of extraordinary
richness have three high gables (pp. 617A, 619A). This treatment, probably borrowed
from the Byzantines and Muslims, contrasts with northern methods, where the effect
is obtained by string courses, projecting buttresses, and soaring pinnacles.
OPENINGS. Arcades, as a protection from the sun, were as necessary as in
previous periods and generally consisted of slender columns with Corinthianesque
capitals, supporting slightly pointed arches held together by iron ties (p. 611).
Nave arcades have, for the most part, widely spaced and lofty columns (pp. 617E,
628c, F) or piers faced with pilasters, as at Florence (p. 6158). Doorways, although
sometimes richly moulded and flanked by half-columns in Orders, have not the
cavernous character of French Gothic; while the projecting portico of the Roman-
esque period was often retained in North Italy, as at Parma, Verona, and the three-
storeyed portico at Bergamo (p. 629E). Windows, which are comparatively small,
except occasionally in the north as at the interesting church of S. Agostino,
Bergamo (1444) (p. 629H), have semicircular or pointed arches and shafts with
square capitals of Corinthian type (p. 626c), instead of moulded mullions as in
northern Gothic. These slender shafts are sometimes twisted and even inlaid with
glass mosaic known as ‘cosmato’ work from craftsmen of that name; while the
capitals are richly sculptured (pp. 628B, 629F). The tracery of Venetian windows is
a special form of geometric combinations (p. 6118), finishing in a horizontal line
suitable to flat ceilings of secular buildings, and is often of great beauty (pp. 612B, C,
629C). Many of the circular traceried windows are of extreme delicacy, as at Carrara
(p. 628A). A moulded keystone is often provided to pointed arches, which are also
sometimes enclosed in a square frame; but circular-headed windows continued in
use throughout the Gothic period. At Venice many houses overlooking the canals
have beautiful window balconies (p. 612E), usually with tiny columns serving as
balusters, as the true baluster was not developed until the early Renaissance period:
alternatively the balustrades were carved panels, based on Byzantine models.
Rooes. The roofs are of low pitch, being scarcely visible from below (pp. 612,
615A, 621A, 628G). Sometimes a single gable covers the whole facade and indicates
the influence of the Roman temple pediment. The steep gables of the elaborate
facades were sometimes adopted from Northern Europe and hide the flat Italian
roofs (p. 617A). Iron or timber tie-beams were often used, in the place of buttresses,
to prevent the spread of the roof timbers, arcades, or vaults (usually quadripartite)
(pp. 616G, 628F), and it is believed that there are only seven buildings in Italy with
flying buttresses.
COLUMNS. The piers of arcades in churches are at times surprisingly clumsy,
four pilasters combined, back to back, being a common plan (p. 616B). Columns
with capitals and bases, recalling Roman work, were also used (p. 628C, F), but the
gradual evolution of pier design, so noticeable in England, where it was due to the
 628 ITALIAN GOTHIC

fe iia

g Filleai
li7 ae

|
:
matron
ity
Ali

|
ii]

ag ele =
cS ORVIETO CATHEDRAL
INTERIOR LOOKING E St eet
rare SM a
Deen "
PAL. DEL COMUNE: VERONA

INTERIOR LOOKING i S M GLORIOSA DEI FRARI: VENICE EXTERIOR RO

 ITALIAN GOTHIC 629

= a

ANGLE WINDOW : eos; a

VENICE Sof! ES
aN reddld <=
PORCH:S.
B ie
MMAGGIOR. E
BERGAMO

i |
nus
si

Ai
Mes A e
=}

oara

WIM?
=]
RRA

yy
x
N===
14ey
oe
5 11an NG
See
=
oN
) Ys
amY
ia
Sfs aN
ld
oe
ry
Hie
he
Y
=————
ae
liky
5)
7
q
TILA
SSSa53
memmringe
oc
(2:
ane
eee
|)"
Bu
serene
eee
pea

(FyPorce: THE DUOMO LOGGIA DEI MERCANTI (HYFACADE: S.AGOSTINO

FERRARA BOLOGNA BERGAMO
 630 ITALIAN GOTHIC

ORATORIO DEGLI = Shug |

AVVOCATI: VITERBO (Byrriouary S ANTONIO: PADUA
S.M. NOVELLA :FLORENCE

k|
|
|
|
|
|
|
!

|a Aa
{7
ene?
yah WA i : IN
OY ys SCULPTURE: PULPIT
CATHEDRAL: PISA

| (a
SNe
ee

SS) AWA S
oh 3 Cy =aaa
PUEPIT CAPE ara. PULPIT :BAPTISTERY :PISA

PULPIT :
S. FRANCESCO ‘ASSIS!
 ITALIAN GOTHIC 631

=>

SS
ai aay) RON
=

i f
-<\
=\

3
SD, ip
| i a
P)
: y ]

<aif \b | ! ia
5 NIRS fey ei |
N VW ————F
sie || : ma
RI |
Pal
=
cll
es

D BENCH
AL)m— WOODS.COR END “2c
ATO ae
S.CORATO
MOLFETTA MOLFETTA —_RIELEL EE
iain Qs
\MON"'o HADRIAN V. ©“ MARBLE
~)S.FRANCESCO\VITERBO CANDELABRUM — MON®»NICCOLO
BAPTISTERY:-FLORENCE —_S. FRANCESCO: SPECCHI
ASSISI

PAINTED REREDOS SCULPTURED REREDOS

H S.CROCE:FLORENCE DUCAL PALACE:VENICE S.EUSTORGIO: MILAN
632 ITALIAN GOTHIC

;:
:
‘.
4i

B. The Ponte di Castel Vecchio, or Ponte Scaligero, Verona (1335). See p. 608
 ITALIAN GOTHIC 633

exigencies of vaulting, is not observable. The lofty circular piers in Milan Cathedral,
with engaged shafts and high tabernacle capitals, produce the effect of a columnar
interior (p. 601B).
MOULDINGS. Mouldings are subordinated to surface decoration, and the most
interesting are those in the brickwork of north Italy. They are little changed from
the Roman style and the arch moulding is often identical with the jamb, although
there may be capitals at the impost (p. 630A).
ORNAMENT (pp. 630, 631). Opaque wall decoration in fresco and mosaic was
preferred to translucent stained glass, and the painting schools were developed.
The Arena Chapel, Padua (p. 610B), is a mere shell for internal frescoes (1300-05)
which take the place of architectural features. Giotto’s work here forms a mediaeval
anticipation of the Renaissance paintings of Raphael and Michelangelo in the
Sistine Chapel, Rome. Carving and sculpture (p. 630) inherited the refinement of
Classical times and contrast markedly with the grotesque element of northern art.
The carving, painting, and mosaics of sumptuous altars, canopy tombs (p. 631B, C, G),
pavements, choir stalls (p.631D,F),and aumbries (p.630H), in addition to the coloured
marble fagades, well display the decorative side of the style. The Tomb of Mastino II
of the Scaligers, Verona (1351) (p. 629B), is an instance of this rich decoration, and
many churches also at Rome have elaborate mosaic work of ‘cosmato’ design on
twisted column and arch. No country in Europe is as rich as Italy in architectural
accessories, including pulpits as at Pisa and Assisi (p. 630E, K), reredoses as at
Florence and Milan (p. 631H, K), carved screens as at the Frari Church, Venice
(p. 628F), cantoria as at Monza (p. 630]), tombs as at Padua (p. 630C), shrines as at
S. Eustorgio, Milan (p. 631A), fountains as at Viterbo (p. 629A), candelabra as at
Florence (p. 631E), and reliquaries as at S. Maria Novella, Florence (p. 630B).

REFERENCE BOOKS
BERTAUX;E. L’art dans I’Italie méridionale. 1904.
BROWNING, OSCAR. A Short History of Mediaeval Italy, 1250-1409. 1893.
CUMMINGS, C. A. A History of Architecture in Italy from the Time of Constantine to the
Dawn of the Renaissance. 2 vols., new ed. 1928.
ENLART, C. Origines francaises del’ architecture gothique en Italie. Paris, 1894.
FRANKLIN, J. W. The Cathedrals of Italy. 1958.
GRUNER, L. Terra-Cotta Architecture of North Italy. 1867.
HUBBARD, G. “The Cathedral Church of Cefalu, Sicily’, R.I.B.A. Fournal, April 4, 1908.
JACKSON, SIR T. G. Gothic Architecture in France, England and Italy. 2 vols. London,
1915.
KNIGHT, H. G. Ecclesiastical Architecture of Italy. 2 vols. London, 1842-4.
NESFIELD,E. Specimens of Mediaeval Architecture. London, 1862.
PORTER, A. K. Mediaeval Architecture. 2 vols. New York and London, 1909.
ROHAULT DE FLEURY, G. La Toscane au moyen age. 2 vols., folio. Paris, 1874.
RUSKIN, J. Stones of Venice. 3 vols. 1886.
SCHULZ, H. W. Denkmaeler der Kunst des Mittelalters in Unter-Italien. 2 vols., folio and
4to. Dresden, 1860.
STRACK, H. Ziegelbauwerke des Mittelalters und der Renaissance in Italien. Folio. Berlin,
1889. -
STREET, G.E. Brick and Marble in the Middle Ages. London, 1874.
TOESCA, P. Storia dell’ Arte Italiana: Il Medioevo. Vol. 2. Turin, 1927.
—. Storia dell’ Arte Italiana: Il Trecento. Turin, 1951.
WARING, J. B., and MACQUOID, T. R. Examples of Architectural Art in Italy and Spain.
London, 1850.
 634 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE
ne ne ie re == Sa = . = +

A. Salamanca: the Old Cathedral (1120-78) backed by the New Cathedral (1512-1733)
(see p. 640), with the Roman bridge (see p. 239)

Tower 7th cent.)

B. Toledo Cathedral from S.W. c. The Monastery, Batalha:

(1227-1493). See p. 643 Capellas Imperfeitas (14th cent.).
See p. 644
 Spain in the Mediaeval Period

XVIII. SPANISH MEDIAEVAL

ARCHITECTURE
(twelfth—-sixteenth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. Spain and Portugal occupy a peninsula, which is cut off from
rather than united to the rest of Europe to the north by the mountainous barrier of
the Pyrenees; from Africa to the south, however, access is easy across the narrow
Straits of Gibraltar. The peninsula is broken into distinct natural regions by
mountain ranges that cross it from east to west, enclosing high and bare tablelands
and forming in the Mediaeval period natural boundaries for rival races and king-
doms; Portugal is separated from Spain by the barren western limits of these table-
lands and by the steep gorges of four great rivers. There was French influence in
the north and Moorish influence in the south. The emirate of Granada, where the
Moors held out until 1492, centred on a very fertile plain encircled by high mountains.
GEOLOGICAL. ‘Rocky Spain’ is a short and graphic description of the geological
conditions which prevail throughout the Peninsula, which is itself a great massif
of rock, including the Sierras of Castile in the north, the mountains of Toledo in
the middle, and the Sierra Morena in the south. Thus there is granite, especially
in the north; limestone in the south and the basin of the Ebro; red sandstone in the
Pyrenees and Andalusia, and eruptive rock everywhere, while semi-marbles are
scattered throughout the country. Architecture is therefore naturally carried out in
636 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

these various sorts of stone, while eruptive rock served for the rubble walling with
brick bonding courses and quoins which was used under Moorish influence with
much success, as in the towers and gates of the city of Toledo; while in Valladolid
bricks of Roman character are laid in thick mortar beds. There are few forests in
Spain, and the conspicuous absence of timber suitable for building accentuates still
further the predominance of stone in architecture.
CLIMATIC. The climatic variations are as marked as geographical and as
different as geological conditions; but there are four chief varieties of climate. In
the provinces along the north and north-west sea-coast, the climate is mild, equable,
and rainy, with the greatest rainfall at Santiago de Compostela in the west. The
most marked variety of climate is that of the great central table-land and the basin
of the Ebro, with great extremes of temperature, as in Madrid and Burgos; while
the plains of Castile are swept by winds in winter and torrid in summer. The
middle climate along the Mediterranean is moderate and the southern in Andalusia
is sub-tropical like Africa, with the greatest heat in Cordova. The term ‘sun-burnt
Spain’ indicates the nature of the climate which influenced the architecture of the
Peninsula with its small windows and thick walls. Many large Gothic church
windows, derived from France, were indeed often blocked up with stone in after
years to keep out the scorching sun.
RELIGIOUS. The constant warfare waged against the Moors, which was religious
even more than racial, gave a certain unity to the Christian states in the Peninsula.
It has also always been characteristic of Spain to be united in allegiance to the
papacy, and the great church of Santiago de Compostela (p. 640) in western Spain
was a pilgrimage centre of national importance. Spain is one of the predominantly
Catholic countries of the world. Throughout the Mediaeval period the Catholic
Church was the strongest and most constant unifying force in the struggle against
the Moors, and it thus obtained great temporal power and possessions. This fact,
and the Spanish taste for dramatic ceremonial and ritual, determined the planning
of cathedrals and churches with their great sanctuaries and enormous chapels of the
Spanish grandees. The Muslim religion, introduced by the Moors in the Peninsula,
forbade the human figure in sculpture and decoration and encouraged geometrical
ornament, and the result of this ordinance is seen in the extreme richness and intri-
cacy of surface decoration, even in Christian churches, on which craftsmen trained in
Moorish traditions were employed. The establishment of the Spanish Inquisition
(1477) in Castile and later in other provinces was designed to bring about national
unity by first securing religious unity. This inquisitorial scheme resulted in the ex-
pulsion from Spain both of Jews and Muslims, who were valuable assets in commer-
cial and industrial life, and Spain was thus materially weakened by their departure.
SOcIAL. The Christian states of Castile, Leon, Navarre, Aragon, and Portugal
were growing up simultaneously, and gradually driving the Muslims into Andalusia.
After many intermittent successes, such as the capture of Toledo (1085), Tarragona
(probably in 1091), Saragossa (1118), and Lerida (1149), the battle of Tolosa (1212)
was the final turning-point of the decline of Muslim influence. Ferdinand III
(1217-52) united Castile and Leon, and won back Seville and Cordova from the
Moors. As a result of the exultation over the conquest of the Muslims, Gothic art
in this district, aided too by the plunder taken from the infidel, received a great
impetus. James I (1213-76), king of Aragon, advanced in the east of Spain until
the kingdom of Granada was the only portion left to the Muslims. As to general
social conditions in Spain there was a great gulf fixed between the grandee and the
common people, and an equally strongly marked dividing line between town folk
and country folk. In the eastern districts, where the feudal system was strong, class
distinctions were further accentuated, and only a small proportion of the population,
 [ee Mb(lh A es
aeme
Uy

Ny iS
i
Ha ;
ine
‘I
Lal T ii
HH}

ah : ;
——— If H
oan Seal
. ~s\\
aie
a ome
ae it
f

einai LDS ATP |

1

TRANSEPTS « CIMBORIO

SATYAM
3 |
gral
LN
Ee
a
a= —si-t eens
(QeXTERIOR PROMISES So

"6
Ys ae --S CLOISTERS |
Yo NTAIN
LY YM es
ARCHBISHOPS PALACE +s anand “4
WL Uy) Pile ee err ties ch Sheer

F150 50 100
PLAN was j i 20 30
 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

y\ MULE
a HN
all
I ees
Mi ys

L—_
Wap, <<a. |

\ fi] : ROY
. ep “Vig S y/

S775
(dD
=
i
I oesI !
mi
il Wy)

UNIT

IN 3
co Nl cco PMTCT
Smit PM an pO
= r SX
\ -sN ~

& “els 9

al “gy NL elle

ee lamlal
eN(||
\h

ft ae
i
i I,

ts i il soak.
——S
\
AT
|!WN
\\4 il Neat|
1
i
Yis
SETPERARIVS SEF |

eee
fen
OE
ee ——
ZS
REV|

ara
D
|
i |
"I L
ie
a
CLOISTER:S. JUAN DE LOS
DOORWAY ro CAPILLA
REYES: TOLEDO DE LOS REYES: GRANADA CATHED
 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 639
including citizens of chartered towns, were free; while under the system of land
tenure the peasants were oppressed throughout the Middle Ages, a condition which
produced the peasants’ revolt of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. During the
whole of the Mediaeval period, till 1492, Spain was cut up into different kingdoms
under the independent rule of Christian kings and Muslim caliphs and emirs.
From some of the internal dangers the country was delivered by Ferdinand (1479-
1516) and Isabella (1474-1504), the Catholic sovereigns, who arrogated to them-
selves supreme power. They made use of Church, nobles, and cities as instruments
of their government, established police against brigandage, annexed the power and
money of the military Orders, and enforced military service from the nobles. They
even reduced the Cortes to a money-granting machine and gradually crippled
commerce and industry through the control of officials and the imposition of excise
duties, and thus established an inquisition in commerce as well as in religion.
Social life in Spain was dominated by the grandees and the Catholic clergy, and
indeed churches and monasteries are the chief architectural monuments, while in
domestic architecture there is little of importance except the houses of the nobility.
HISTORICAL. The outstanding feature of Spanish history during this period is
the astonishing connection of Spain, not only with France, her near neighbour, but
also with England through royal marriages; with Italy through papal supervision
and the quarrels with the Angevins in Naples and Sicily, and with the Moors from
Africa; and all this, as we shall see, affected in varying degrees the architecture of
the Peninsula. After the Romans left Spain the Vandals and Visigoths took posses-
sion, and in 711-13 the country was invaded by the Moors from North Africa,
whose influence was continuous for 800 years (p. 1225). The evidence of this is
seen in the south in curious construction and exuberant detail, and occasionally also
in the north owing to the demand there for Moorish craftsmen with their superior
ability, for although Toledo was captured by the Christians in 1085, the Spanish
conquests were only gradual. King Peter II of Aragon (1196-1213) came in contact
with Italy, for he was crowned in Rome and as a prince of France died there in the
defence of the Albigenses, and these connections were not without influence on
Spanish architecture. From the death of James the Conqueror in 1276 to the death
of Martin I in 1410, the kings of Aragon were at war with the Angevin party in
Naples and Sicily, and this may have contributed to the introduction of certain
Muslim and other architectural features from those countries. The final expulsion
of the Moors did not take place till the fall of Granada in 1492, and so great was the
interest which this decisive event roused in all Christendom that a thanksgiving
service was held by order of Henry VII in old S. Paul’s Cathedral, London. Thus
were laid the foundations of a united Spain which then prepared to expand abroad.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The character of Gothic architecture in Europe, which gives the general principles
common to all countries, has already been given (p. 367). The salient aspect of
Spanish Mediaeval architecture, which in this chapter includes the Romanesque
and Gothic periods, dating from the twelfth to the sixteenth century, is the evident
influence of Moorish art, which spread from the south and more especially from the
Moorish capital, Toledo. The Gothic style followed the Romanesque, approximately
c. 1210, and was most highly developed in Catalonia where, though mainly on
French lines, the grand scale of the single-span vaulted interiors gives it, as at
Gerona (p. 649C), a specifically Spanish character, and the same may be said of
Leon Cathedral, which surpasses its French prototype at Amiens both in the
expanse of window openings and the tenuity of the piers (p. 652c). Moorish
640 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

influence made itself felt in such Muslim features as the horseshoe arch and pierced
stone tracery, and notably in rich surface decoration of intricate geometrical and
flowing patterns (pp. 650, 651), for which Muslim art is remarkable, as in the Sina-
goga del Transito, Toledo (1360-6), while the early Spanish churches seem to have
been the work of Moorish craftsmen. Church exteriors are flat in appearance, owing
to the chapels which are so frequently inserted between the buttresses (p. 649). Un-
like French Gothic, large wall surfaces and horizontal lines are conspicuous, and
generally there is excessive ornament, due to Moorish influence, without regard to
its constructive character (p. 641B). The cloisters of many cathedrals, as Barcelona
(p. 652A), Toledo, Segovia (pp. 638c, 650A), and Lerida, are very characteristic. In
the later period the grafting of Classical detail on Gothic forms produced most
picturesque features, transitional in style, but they come under Renaissance
(p. 845) rather than Gothic architecture. The Spanish Civil War (1936-9) resulted
in the destruction of many buildings here described.

EXAMPLES
ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE
Santiago de Compostela Cathedral (1075-1128) is Romanesque and one of the most
remarkable Mediaeval buildings in Spain; it owes its size and character to having
been a great pilgrimage centre. The plan resembles S. Sernin, Toulouse, but with
three instead of five aisles, and with similar transepts and chevet due to French
influence. The nave has a barrel vault and the aisles cross-vaults. The Portico de la
Gloria (1168-1211) extends across the whole width of the church and is undoubtedly
‘one of the greatest glories of Christian art’, with its statues of the apostles, major
prophets, twenty-four elders, and tympanum with the Last Judgment.
Avila Cathedral (1160-1211 and later), with its chevet built astride the city walls,
is one of the most interesting in the Peninsula. The chevet has double aisles and semi-
circular chapels in the thickness of the walls, whose slit windows indicate that it
was part of the city fortifications. The ‘coro’ or choir west of the transepts, the fine
cloisters, the widely spaced nave bays, twin western towers, and two unique
hammered-iron pulpits (pp. 651A, 653) are well-known features of this church.
Salamanca Old Cathedral (1120-78) forms, with the New Cathedral (1512-
1733) (pp. 634A, 652D),a fine group above the River Tormes. The Romanesque build-
ing, apparently influenced by the churches of Aquitaine and Anjou, is specially
famous for its dome, which is treated internally (p. 650D) with great originality. It has
plain pendentives, supporting a high drum pierced with two storeys of windows and
crowned with a stone ribbed cupola. The exterior (p. 650F) is effective, with high
drum, semicircular windows, angle turrets, and octagonal spire with an unusual
entasis.
S. Isidoro, Leon (1054-1149), only the narthex surviving of the original building
of 1054-67, is a cruciform church and bears some resemblance to Santiago de
Compostela Cathedral, with a barrel-vaulted nave and apsidal chapels (p. 650C) on
the eastern side of the transepts.
Burgos Cathedral (1221-1457) (pp. 637, 641A, 652B, 852) is irregular in plan and
the most poetic of all Spanish cathedrals. The two western towers, with open-work
spires (p. 637E), recall Cologne, and a richly treated central lantern or ‘cimborio’
(p. 852) is a feature of the exterior (p. 637C). The interior has elaborate triforium
tracery, massive piers rebuilt to support the high ‘cimborio’ which was added in
1539-67, and fine transeptal circular windows (p. 637B). The ‘coro’ is in the usual
Spanish position west of the crossing, which reduces the nave to a vestibule (p. 637D).
Among the side chapels, which are of extraordinary size, the octagonal Capilla del
 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 641

A. Burgos Cathedral: S. transept B. College of S. Gregorio,

(1243-60). See p. 640 Valladolid (facade, 1492-6). See p. 643

c. Seville Cathedral: nave p. S. Juan de los Reyes, Toledo:

looking E. (1402-1520). See p. 643 nave looking E. (1478-92). See p. 644

x ; H.O.A.
642 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

A. S. Vicente, Avila: principal doorway B. Toledo Cathedral: interior looking

(12th cent.). See p. 648 E. (1227-1493). See p. 643

c. S. Pablo, Valladolid: principal doorway (1486-92). See p. 643

 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 643
Condestable (1482-), over 50 ft in diameter, is specially remarkable for the beauty
and magnificence of its late Gothic detail (p. 637A), and the altar of S. Anna has an
altar-piece which is a miracle of richness (p. 651B).
Toledo Cathedral (1227-1493) (pp. 634B, 649D), with five aisles and a range of
side chapels, resembles Bourges Cathedral in general plan. It is about the same
length, but nearly 50 ft wider, with the choir enclosure, as usual in Spain, west of
the crossing (p. 642B). A singularly shallow sanctuary, with immense wooden
‘retablo’, flanked by tiers of arcaded statuary, is terminated by a chevet of double
aisles and chapels completing a most impressive interior. The exterior has a low
roof, usual in most Spanish churches, and has a fine ornamental north-west steeple.
The Chapel of Santiago (1435) (p. 638B), in the chevet, erected by Count de Luna
as a mortuary chapel on the site of a chapel dedicated to S. Thomas of Canterbury,
has doorways with elaborate screenwork and great frilled arches, supporting the
octagonal vault, all contributing their wealth of detail to this grandiose composition.
There are fine stained-glass windows, beautiful carved choir stalls, and a treasury,
rich even for Spain, containing the famous silver-gilt ‘Custodia’—the flower of
Spanish Gothic miniature art.
The College of S. Gregorio, Valladolid (1488-96) (p. 641B), now the town
hall, has a sculptured facade (1492-6) embellished with statues, heraldic devices,
and a genealogical tree of Ferdinand and Isabella, all framed round with canopied
niches and pinnacles, which show the influence of Moorish art in church ornament.
The court (p. 650H) has arcades of the later period, with three-centred arches,
twisted columns, and intricate Moorish-like carving (p. 650G).
S. Pablo, Valladolid (1276-1492), has a facade (1486-92) (p. 642C) and internal
doorways which, in intricacy of detail, also show Moorish influence.
Barcelona Cathedral (1298-1448) (pp. 649B, 652A) is remarkably fine, with nave
vaulted in square and aisles in oblong bays, in the Italian method, and with
characteristic ‘coro’ west of the crossing (p. 647). There is a fine western lantern on
pendentives (c. 1420-48), slightly projecting transepts surmounted by towers, as at
Exeter (p. 407D), and chevet of nine chapels. The thrust of the vault is counteracted
by the deep internal buttresses which enclose chapels along the aisles, as at Albi in
France (p. 549). The vault, as is usual in Spain, is exposed externally and roofed by
tiles (p.652A). The fine cloisters were completed about 1448, with twenty-two chapels.
Gerona Cathedral (1312-1598) (p. 649C) is another instance where buttresses
have internal chapels between them. There are no aisles, and the nave (1417-1598),
73 ft wide, in four compartments, has the widest Gothic vault in Europe, and this,
together with the length of 275 ft, produces a fine effect with the enclosed choir and
chevet (1312-1346) at the sanctuary end. The central hall of the Royal Courts of
Justice, London, although only 48 ft wide, gives an idea of this interior, which
resembles Albi (p. 549).
S. Maria del Mar, Barcelona (1328-83) (p. 649A), is a splendid town church,
characterized both internally and externally by severe simplicity, and the front to
the street is flanked by two octagonal pinnacles. The roof vaulting rests upon
widely spaced octagonal granite piers. The nave and aisles are of great height; there
is no triforium and only small clear-story windows in the vault spandrels.
SS. Justo y Pastor, Barcelona (1345), has an aisleless nave 45 ft wide, with
chapels between internal buttresses. The altar stands in an unusual position in front
of stalls ranged round the apse.
S. Maria del Pino, Barcelona (1453), similar in plan, has a fine heptagonal apse
and western circular window.
Seville Cathedral (1402-1520) (pp. 641C, 645A), the largest Mediaeval cathedral
in Europe, is, with the exception of S. Peter’s, Rome, the largest church in the world.
644 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

It owes its plan and size, with nave, double aisles and side chapels, to its erection on
the site of a mosque. This also controlled its rectangular outline, about 400 ft by
250 ft, and its square east end, unusual in Continental churches, to which is added
a small apse. The Cathedral is indeed enormous, as may be realized by comparison
with Westminster Abbey. The nave, about 45 ft wide in the clear, is nearly half as
wide again as Westminster nave; each of the four aisles is approximately equal in
width to the Abbey nave, and in addition there are surrounding chapels as wide as
the aisles, so that with the chapels, Seville Cathedral is about eight times the width
of Westminster nave. It has a total area, including the patio, of about 22,000 square
yds as against Milan Cathedral with 13,984 square yds, and S. Paul’s, London, with
9,336 square yds. The interior is impressive, owing to its great size and height,
although the nave vault (130 ft high) has ribs which are somewhat confused in
design and overloaded with bosses. The thirty-two immense clustered piers and
numerous stained-glass windows produce an imposing effect, in spite of the absence
of a triforium. The richness of the interior is enhanced by the sculptured stalls of
the ‘coro’ occupying two nave bays, the fine ‘reja’ or grille (1518), the ‘retablo’,
choir stalls, and archbishop’s throne. The exterior, owing to many additions, has a
certain shapelessness and absence of skyline, but bears a general resemblance to
Milan Cathedral, although of a simpler Gothic type and less fanciful in detail. The
slender ‘Giralda’ (1184-96, upper part 1568—), originally the minaret of the mosque,
gives this massive group a curiously Oriental aspect (p. 1233).
S. Juan de los Reyes, Toledo (1478-92) (pp. 638C, 641D), is a royal sepulchral
chapel erected by Ferdinand and Isabella for a purpose similar to that of Henry VII’s
Chapel, Westminster. This late Gothic building, with traces of the incoming
Renaissance, has a sculptured facade and ‘cimborio’ with lofty pinnacles. The
interior (p. 641D) is chiefly notable for the raised galleries for the use of kings and
nobles, surmounted by the characteristic octagonal ‘cimborio’ with its beautiful
squinch arches. The two-storeyed cloisters (p. 638Cc), with their traceried windows
and canopied statues, are held to be the most beautiful Gothic creations in Spain.
Valencia Cathedral (1262-c. 1356) and Leon Cathedral (1255-1303) (p. 652C)
show French influence.
Lerida Cathedral (1203-78) (p. 649E), long used as barracks but now cleared,
is an impressive early building with octagonal ‘cimborio’, three eastern apses,
and adjacent cloisters, and the roofing slabs rest directly on the stone vaults.
The Monastery, Belem, near Lisbon (1499-1522), is a fine ecclesiastical
monument in Portugal, the western part of the Iberian peninsula. The cloisters have
a two-storeyed arcade covered with delicate sculpture, and the church is a richly
ornamented late Gothic structure.
The Monastery, Batalha, Portugal (1387-1415), with its unique fourteenth-
century church and octagonal tomb chapel (p. 634c), forms a fine architectural
group.
The Cistercian Church, Alcobaga, Portugal (1158-1223) is severe and simple
in style, and in its interior resembles a German ‘hall’ church.

SECULAR ARCHITECTURE
The finest secular architecture is found in Catalonia, as seen in the much altered
Palacio de la Audiencia, Barcelona, with its remarkable court containing a
picturesque external stairway (p. 646B); the Casa del Ayuntamiento, Barcelona
(1373-); the Alcazar, Segovia (1410-55), an old Castilian castle with massive
towers; the Torre del Clavero, Salamanca (1480); the Gateway of S. Maria,
Burgos, and the remarkable Puente de Alcantara, Toledo (1258), which spans
the Tagus and is protected by a defensive tower (pp. 239, 645B).
 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 645

The Giralda
A. Seville Cathedral from S.E. (1402-1520). See pp. 643-4

B. The Puente de Alcantara, Toledo (1258). See pp. 239; 644

 646 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

rr

ie Meakin ; ro W i
itr
ill !hi ; t| j |
ih tae : Hl
ittan
eas | E
‘A)courr DUCAL PALACE ‘tHe AUDIENCIA
GUADALAJARA BARCELONA

“4
:&
\i

44 ws q

Uses
3a; oez
\
ies: =% =
ee A
PUERTA pve SERRANOS ~— WINDOW wn BISHOP'S
VALENCIA PALACE “ALCALA perce ox. SOL: TOLED
 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 647
The Ducal Palace, Guadalajara (1480-92) (pp. 646A, 843A), had a picturesque
court, surrounded by two storeys of ornately sculptured arcades, with twisted
columns and multifoil arches.
La Lonja de la Seda, Valencia (1482-98) (p. 646D), used as a silk exchange, has
an unbalanced facade of nearly 200 ft, with central tower, an east wing with large
gateway and two pointed windows, and a west wing with two rows of square-
headed Gothic windows surmounted by open galleries.
The Castillo de la Mota, Medina del Campo (1440-) (p. 646£), is stern in
aspect, with circular towers, battlemented parapets, and windowless curtain walls,
and a high tower commands the surrounding country.
The Puerta del Sol, Toledo (p. 646), much repaired at various times, forms
part of the town walls of the ancient city, and with its horseshoe arches, intersecting
arcades, and Moorish battlements indicates that the Mediaeval Spaniard, with
craftsman-like skill, applied the art of the time to all secular buildings.
The Puerta de Serranos, Valencia (1349) (p. 646F), with its Mediaeval forti-
fications, has two polygonal towers flanking the gateway, above which is traceried
wall panelling and a gallery on enormous corbels.
These and many more similar buildings are eloquent of the power and position
of the Catholic Church and of the Spanish grandee, while the well-preserved town
walls of such old-world cities as Avila and Leon indicate the unsettled conditions
of those times.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. Cathedral plans are of great width and comparative shortness, and the
‘coro’ or choir, like that in Westminster Abbey (p. 424D), is generally in the nave,
west of the crossing, but with a low screened passage between choir and sanctuary,
as in Burgos (p. 637D), Toledo (p. 649D), and Barcelona (p. 6498). This central
enclosure follows the Early Christian basilican plan (p. 255K), and supplied extra
space for the clergy as necessity arose; it avoided the extension eastwards of the
sanctuary usual in England, and sometimes it was enclosed by high walls forming a
church within a church. Chapels are numerous and large, often surrounding the
whole cathedral, and the ‘parroquia’ or parish church is sometimes included in the
cathedral area, as at Seville. The ‘cimborio’ (pp. 637B, 641D) at the crossing of nave
and transepts is similar in treatment to those of France; thus S. Sernin, Toulouse,
and Burgos Cathedral resemble each other in arrangement, as do Valencia
Cathedral and S. Ouen, Rouen, in design. The characteristic octagonal vaults over
the crossing and chapels, intricate in design and ingenious in construction, were
probably inspired by Moorish art.
WALLS. French wall treatment was largely followed, but characterized in the
later period, owing to Moorish influence, by extreme and even fantastic surface
ornament. There is an absence of skyline, and Burgos has effective horizontal
arcades instead of gables, on the lines of the facade of Notre Dame, Paris. Many
facades, as that of the College of S. Gregorio, Valladolid (p. 641B), have a bewil-
dering number of niches containing statues, while figures supporting heraldic
emblems combine to leave no vacant space, thus rivalling the elaboration of a
‘retablo’. Traceried open-work spires, like those at Burgos, were frequent (p. 637E).
OPENINGS. Arcades were of special service in sunny Spain to form effective
screens against the sun, and are numerous; those surrounding the ‘patio’ or court
of the Ducal Palace, Guadalajara (p. 646A), La Audiencia, Barcelona (p. 646B),
and the cloisters of Segovia Cathedral (p. 650A) are typical examples. The early use
of the pointed arch in nave arcades is another feature probably due to Moorish
648 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

influence. Doorways as at S. Vicente, Avila (p. 642A), and La Cartuja, Burgos (p.
650E), are French in design with sculptured figures and luxuriant capitals, while
later doorways, as at Cordova (p. 646c), Granada (p. 638D), and Segovia (p. 650B),
have elaborate features enclosed in intricate framework, due to Moorish craftsman-
ship. Windows were often carried to excess, as in Leon Cathedral, where most of
the wall surface of the clear-story is devoted to great traceried windows, some
being 40 ft high. In the centre, and even in the south, as at Segovia (p. 650A) and
Seville, openings are large, and stained glass was much used, owing to French
influence, but many windows, as at Avila and Barcelona (p. 652A), have been partially
blocked up as unsuitable to the sunny climate. The window in the Bishop’s Palace,
Alcala (p. 646G), shows a novel tracery design, obviously due to Moorish influence.
Roors. Vaulting was freely used, but owes its character to tracery, bosses, and
ribs, which produce a good effect, although the lines are not always good, and
nothing comparable to English vaulting was produced (pp. 637A, 638A, C). The
vaults were often without external wooden roofs found in other countries, and, as at
Seville and Barcelona (p. 652A), bricks and tiles rest directly on the vaults, and form
a fireproof roof. In Catalonia wide interiors were successfully vaulted in one span,
that at Gerona being no less than 73 ft wide (p. 649c). The boldest and most
original vaults are those that support galleries across the western ends of churches,
extending through nave and aisles in three spans or in one span across the nave, and
their decorated soffits frame in the view of the interior from the entrance. The
‘cimborio’ over the crossing is frequently octagonal, and is supported on ornate
squinch arches, thrown across the angles of the square below, thus bringing it to an
octagon (pp. 637B, 638A, 64ID).
COLUMNS. The massive piers supporting the lantern over the crossing, as at
Burgos (p. 6378), are circular in plan and contrast with the great octagonal piers of
S. Sernin, Toulouse. In Seville Cathedral great column-like piers are employed for
arcades (p. 641C), similar to Milan (p. 601B), but without tabernacle capitals. The
circular piers so often used, with their fine shaft articulation, resemble those at
Beauvais Cathedral, and there are capitals in Saragossa Museum (p. 650J) which
indicate the prevailing Romanesque influence.
MOULDINGS. Refinement is not the usual characteristic of Spanish mouldings,
but original and capricious forms were mingled with others borrowed from France
(p. 650). In Catalonia the best and most artistic result was produced in a restrained
manner, as in S. Maria del Mar, Barcelona, where every moulding has its purpose
and expression, but this is far from being usual in Spain.
ORNAMENT (p. 651). The most decorative feature in Spanish churches is the
vast ‘retablo’ (reredos), which, as at Saragossa and Oviedo, is often as wide as the
nave and as high as the vault (p. 638A). It is of wood, stone, or alabaster, and
crowded with niches, figures, canopies, and panelling. The ‘retablos’ at Toledo and
Seville, resembling the great English altar reredoses, as at Winchester (p. 420G), are
the richest specimens of Mediaeval woodwork in existence, and painting and gilding
were used to heighten the effect. Sculpture in stone and marble is often life-size,
naturalistic, and expressive (p. 651B, E, J), and, however deficient in other qualities,
it helps to produce the impressive, if sensational, interiors of Spanish churches.
Classic tradition led to refinement of detail, which contrasts with the often grotesque
features of northern Gothic, but the general design frequently suffers from the
multiplication of accessories. Stained glass, as used at Seville, Oviedo, and else-
where, was Flemish in style, heavy in outline, and strong to gaudiness in colouring.
‘Rejas’ or lofty grilles (p. 637B) in hammered and chiselled iron are also characteris-
tic, especially in the later period, the long vertical bars being relieved by figures in
repoussé work, either single, or in duplicate back to back, and by freely employed
 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 649

X SACRISTIES

‘/CLOISTERS COMPLETED
ABOUT A.D.1448

FOUNTAIN

CLOISTER

x“TON PEND» % Lei

ay wat

A)S.MARIA DEL Quis

CHAPEL CHAPTER

CATHEDRAL
RM,

©a
AR “BARCELONA GERONA CATHEDRAL
CHAPEL OF SAN
ILDEFONSO

WINTER
CHAPEL DE LOS
REYES NUEVOS
| Saeeeeae
5 - i\
fF) OCTAGONAL
alee _ CHAPEL OF LANTERN
SANTIAGO

ENCLOSURE
WEST OF
CROSSING

CLOISTER

MOZARABIC
CHAPEL. SCALE FOR ALL PLAN.
presen 50 50 100 150 200FT

Drain ‘CATHEDRAL : ore lo = Boe | 40lh 50 6OMTRS

 650 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE, ¥Y

sh ETH |Zsa
rs oo 7 ae a

may
0
oe seo i
fu

GNSS
Cease! WRG \ PUA) RS:
u lew THI MGT TTT

oe ile Wao. i ie Sal

SoA
; te bel ~
|la ML ig 78 omy
nll
. H a ae
bina?
o Kay

‘CLOISTERS L- == SE im al
cav hr ee SOL Ece
SEGOVIA a
DOORWAY:S. CRUZ: is) Y D = mM©

AT see '
ff Vas
\
HH | Few. Lily . Nev
\ z —

2
=

ae

hasta
“4
Hcr ys

{
ou | &
| ry »
Skane); 1} I i! by

ac

LANTERN Se Ww,

OLD CATH:SALAMANCA —DOORWAY:LA CARTWJA:BURGOS

ia ak
VA wm

ue
ie ys pas
G

Y N

x
7
i,
iv

CAPS.inM
SARAGOS
 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 651

ee iS
eel

Hil —_— a
ee
:
Gye

=
——, (ae =
Ly Sas 4 tits
aj

B
\| AL Sp Z e e
PT
J) WROT IRON PULPIT (RQ) ALTAR STAULSEe =
S

O
“* AVILA CATHEDRAL. \Y’ BURGOS & CATHE CONVENT OF S. THOMAS: AVILA.
mn SS j

TRS el Ae ae Nal = ARCH ORNAMENT *

aT NG MIPS Su! Nag INFANTE'S TOMB.

Vi
llsere a
eae eee ee
INFANTE'S TOMB (G) |
eb EM — _% a fe Ax Si Pot OGM

QUEEN'S
CANOPY.
 652 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE

A. Barcelona Cathedral: nave and towers B. Burgos Cathedral: west front

(1365-89); cloisters (1382-1448). (1442-57); central tower (1539-67).
See p. 643 See p. 640

c. Leon Cathedral: interior (1255-1303). D. Salamanca New Cathedral: nave (1512-

See p. 644 See p. 640
 SPANISH MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECTURE 653

crestings and traceries, and there are few productions of the period in Spain which
are more original and artistic. Magnificent stalls provided with separate canopies
and tall spires, as at Avila (p. 651C), are common, and Barcelona Cathedral has
some resembling those at Chester, while altars (p. 651B), bishops’ thrones, lecterns,
and choir desks were also very elaborate, and the unusual pulpit of hammered iron
at Avila Cathedral is a remarkable specimen of the smith’s craft (p. 651A). The
Royal Tomb, Miraflores, near Burgos (p. 651J), is perhaps the most elaborate
Mediaeval monument in Spain; it is star-shaped and meticulously carved, with
angels, flowers (p. 65IH), and canopied statuettes, all supporting the recumbent
effigies of King John II and his queen. The Infante’s Tomb, Miraflores (1470)
(p. 651), is elaborate in heraldic devices, kneeling figures, and tabernacle work
(p. 651D-G). The cathedrals are veritable treasure-houses of beautiful Christian
craftsmanship, displayed in holy crosses, reliquaries, monstrances, gold and silver
images and candelabra, and as they have never been despoiled of their treasure, the
cathedrals form the chief museums of art in Spain.

REFERENCE BOOKS
BEVAN;B. History of Spanish Architecture. 1938.
CALVERT, A. F. Spain. 2 vols. London, 1924.
CAPPER,S.H. Masterpieces of Spanish Architecture. 1909.
FORD, R. Handbook for Travellers in Spain. London, 1845, reprinted 1904.
HARVEY, J. The Cathedrals of Spain. London, 1957.
LAMPEREZ Y ROMEA, V. Historia de la arquitectura Cristiana espanola. 2 vols. Madrid,
1908-9.
Monumentos Arquitectonicos de Espafia (a magnificent work issued by the Spanish Govern-
ment). 89 parts, atlas folio (not completed). Madrid, 1859-79.
STREET, G. E. Account of Gothic Architecture in Spain. 1874. Revised edition, with notes,
by G. G. King. London, 1914.
STURGIS, R., and FROTHINGHAM, A. L. A History of Architecture. Vol. III. New York,
I9I5.
VILLA-AMIL, G. P. DE. Espafia artistica y monumental. 3 vols., folio. Paris, 1842-50.
WARING, J.B. Architectural Studies in Burgos. London, 1852.
WARING, J. B., and MACQUOID,T.R. Architectural Art in Italy and Spain. London, 1850.
 , BRANDENBURG
= London ie Berlin
y L9G
NETHER-
ARDS Mainz »,
Paris
gy Nancy :
c UX

e Tt
men KINGDOM

Two

Europe in the seventeenth century

XIX. RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE

IN EUROPE
(fifteenth—nineteenth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. The Renaissance of Classic architecture, which started in Italy
in the early fifteenth century, spread westwards throughout all those countries of
Europe which had formed the Western Roman Empire. This general survey of the
geographical extent of the insidious new development indicates broadly the lines
along which it travelled; while the modifications it underwent, owing to geographical
position, are explained in detail under each country. The Eastern Empire, with its
capital at Constantinople, was gradually falling before the Turk, and therefore these
districts did not come under the influence of the new movement. The countries of
Italy (p. 665), France (p. 761), Germany (p. 806), Belgium and Holland (p. 827),
Spain (p. 841), and England (p. 863) were subject to special geographical influences
which affected the character of the architecture.
GEOLOGICAL. Geological formation varies so widely in different parts of Europe
that its influence cannot here be taken into account with regard to the whole of
Western Europe, but must be considered under each country. Geological condi-
tions, however, are practically continuous in any given country, and they have
already been described under the sections on Romanesque and Gothic architecture.
 RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE 655

The countries of Italy (p. 666), France (p. 761), Germany (p. 806), Belgium and
Holland (p. 828), Spain (p. 841), and England (p. 864) were subject to special geo-
logical influences which affected the character of the architecture.
CLIMATIC. The climate, which differs vastly over such an extensive area, is
constant throughout the different periods, and has also been productive of widely
different architectural treatment in each country to meet the weather conditions,
as has been seen in the Romanesque and Gothic periods. The countries of Italy
(p. 667), France (p. 762), Germany (p. 806), Belgium and Holland (p. 828), Spain
(p. 842), and England (p. 864) were subject to special climatic influences which
affected the character of the architecture.
RELIGIOUS. The whole trend of religious activities in Europe was affected by
the invention of printing, and the consequent spread of knowledge engendered a
spirit of inquiry and freedom of thought which, under Wyclif (1320-84) in England
and Luther (1483-1546) in Germany, had produced a certain desire to break away
from Romish influence. This renewed vigour in intellectual life led to Reformation
in religion, and Renaissance in literature and architecture, with a consequent out-
break of building activity. In England this took the form of domestic architecture,
which had also received a special impulse from the diffusion among laymen of the
wealth and lands of monasteries dissolved by Henry VIII. In Italy, on the other
hand, where the Reformation took no hold, and where, moreover, comparatively
few churches were built during the Middle Ages, there was a revival of ecclesiastical
as well as of domestic architecture, and Renaissance churches were erected on a
great scale. France, Spain, and the Netherlands were all influenced in different
degrees by the new movement, and, as we shall see, this was expressed architec-
turally in varying ways. The Jesuits, who headed the counter-Reformation, carried
the later Renaissance style through all parts of Europe, while at the same time they
gave a special character to the churches they erected (p. 659). The countries of Italy
(p. 667), France (p. 762), Germany (p. 807), Belgium and Holland (p. 828), Spain
(p. 842), and England (p. 865) were subject to special religious influences which
affected the character of the architecture.
SOCIAL. The new intellectual movement manifested itself earlier in literature
than in architecture, and thus had influenced public taste. Dante (1265-1321),
Petrarch (1304-74), and Boccaccio (1313-75), by their writings, aided the spread of
the newly discovered Classic literature which prepared the ground for a revolt
against Mediaeval art, in favour of a revival of ancient Roman architecture, while
the capture of the old Classic city of Constantinople by the Turks (1453) increased
the influx of Greek scholars into Italy, and their learning further influenced an age
already ripe for change. Amongst the Greek and Roman literature brought to light
about this time was the Treatise on Architecture by Vitruvius, written in the time of
Augustus, which, first issued in Latin at Rome (1486), was translated into Italian in
1521. Erasmus (1467-1536), one of the Greek scholars of the period, directed public
attention to the original text of the New Testament and to the Greek Classics, as a
corrective to the writings of mystical Mediaeval philosophers, whose authority had
so long been in the ascendant. A return to Roman architectural style naturally came
about first in Italy, where Mediaeval feudalism had never been firmly established,
and where, moreover, city-states had developed municipal freedom and enterprise.
The countries of Italy (p. 668), France (p. 762), Germany (p. 807), Belgium and
Holland (p. 830), Spain (p. 842), and England (p. 865) were subject to special social
influences which affected the character of the architecture.
HIsTORICAL. At the beginning of the sixteenth century in Europe the smaller
states were gradually grouped into kingdoms under powerful rulers, who main-
tained authority by means of large standing armies. Three great inventions
656 RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

contributed to the general upheaval of these changing times. Gunpowder changed the
method of warfare. The mariner’s compass led to the discovery of the Cape of Good
Hope by Diaz (1487), and of America by Christopher Columbus (1492). When the
Turks took Constantinople (Istanbul) (1453), and conquered Syria and Egypt, the
old trade routes between East and West were blocked, but a new route was opened
up when Vasco da Gama sailed round the Cape to India (1497), and thus started
the foundation of colonies by European states. Printing by movable types, which
was first made practicable by John Gutenberg and John Fust at Mainz about 1450,
promoted that spirit of inquiry which brought about reformation in religion and
revival of learning. Copperplate engraving also came into use towards the end of the
fifteenth century, and helped to spread a knowledge of architectural forms. Galileo
(1564-1642), by astronomical research and scientific discoveries, changed the intel-
lectual perspective of the times, especially by his championing Copernicus’s theory
that the earth was not the centre of the universe, but merely a small planet in the
solar system. Italy (p. 670), France (p. 765), Germany (p. 807), Belgium and
Holland (p. 830), Spain (p. 842), and England (p. 867) were subject to special his-
torical influences which affected the architecture.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The Renaissance movement, which began in Italy early in the fifteenth century,
created a break in the continuous evolution of European architecture which, spring-
ing from Roman and proceeding through Early Christian and Romanesque, had,
during the Middle Ages, developed into Gothic in each country on national lines.
Italy, which was still rich in her ancient Roman monuments, was naturally the
pioneer in the Renaissance movement, especially as the Gothic style had never
taken firm root in a country which had always clung to her old traditions. Though
there was a ready reversion to Classic architectural forms, Gothic methods of con-
struction necessarily prevailed, since Roman methods of building massively in
concrete had been superseded by more refined and compact systems. Fresh struc-
tural devices had been developed, to which Byzantine architecture as well as wes-
tern Gothic had contributed. The mode of living had changed too, and with it many
of the types of building in common use. Thus Renaissance architecture, in spite of
the zeal with which architects sought to recover Classic ideals, remained funda-
mentally different, Classic only in external expression. The salient characteristic of
this new departure was the employment of the Classic Roman ‘Orders’ of architec-
ture, which were now reintroduced after having been in abeyance for nearly a
thousand years. These Orders—Tuscan, Doric, Ionic, Corinthian, and Com-
posite—which were standardized by Renaissance architects, such as Palladio,
Vignola, Scamozzi and Chambers (p. 972), were used, as by the Romans, both
rationally and decoratively; sometimes the Orders actually performed structural
work and at other times were merely ornamental. Yet even in superficial terms the
imitation of antiquity was not slavish; Roman precedent was followed, closely while
the new style was being developed, but new combinations of Classic elements were
progressively evolved, and in the Baroque period the need for Roman sanction was
often totally disregarded. Since the Renaissance was not a natural outcome of
structural method, and largely a decorative system derived from an ancient source,
it was open to personal interpretations which, when made by accomplished masters,
might be taken up by pupils and followers and institute ‘schools’ of design. This
was particularly the case in the early days of the style. The biographies of architects,
as given in the works of Vasari and Milizia, are instructive as revealing the sur-
roundings and incidents of their lives. Italy was ripe, as we have seen, for this new
 RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE 657

phase; for the arts were in the hands of skilled craftsmen, goldsmiths, and workers
in metals, such as Benvenuto Cellini, Ghiberti, Donatello, and Brunelleschi, who
looked upon architecture as an art of form rather than of construction, and indeed
were often, at the same time, painters and sculptors as well as architects. The various
schools of painting likewise had their influence, so that buildings came to be treated
very much as pictures, largely independent of structural necessity, which had been
the controlling element in Mediaeval times. Thus, by a reversal of the Mediaeval
process, architecture became an art of free expression, with beauty of design as the
predominant idea. To the Roman stock-in-trade of elevational motifs the Renais-
sance made several important new contributions. Rusticated masonry, among these,
was a principal class, exploited strongly in the Early Renaissance in Florence, as
instanced by the Riccardi (p. 681), the Strozzi (p. 685) and the Rucellai (p. 680G)
palaces, and by various others in north Italy; and thence extended throughout
western Europe, rustications sometimes even being applied to the Orders them-
selves. The baluster, not known to the Romans, which was developed from can-
delabra, became an inseparable part of the Renaissance decorative system. Among
the features contributed to Italian Mediaeval architecture by the Byzantines was
the pendentived dome, allowing domical vaults to be erected over square or poly-
gonal compartments. This was retained, and used in a variety of new as well as the
old ways (p. 658), and a particular development was that of raising a high ‘drum’
above pendentives to accommodate not only windows but a decoration with the
now inevitable columns, allowing the dome to appear as a grand dominating feature
externally (pp. 663B, 704, 720). To provide for the foreshortened view, domes were
made with a double or triple shell, that on the outside being pointed, and crowned
with a lantern (pp. 663B, 722A, C, 800C, E). The pointed arch, which may be regarded
as the sign-manual of Gothic architecture, was now ousted by the semicircular
Roman arch. Gothic ribbed vaulting too, which was such a striking feature of
Mediaeval buildings, now gave place to the ancient Roman semicircular vaults and
cross-vaults (p. 373A). Cross-vaults of unequal span but equal height had the larger
vault formed as an ellipse by means of ‘ordinates’, so that the groins followed
straight lines on plan (p. 373D) instead of wavy lines as in the Romanesque period
(p. 373B). The same principle allowed the development of many interesting types of
vault in which series of minor vaults appear as lunette ‘penetrations’, as over the
sanctuary of S. M. delle Grazie, Milan (p. 698). Vaults of these various types, de-
veloped from Byzantine as well as Roman architecture, were often formed of timber
framing plastered and richly painted, and were much used in the halls, apartments,
corridors and grand staircases of Renaissance buildings.
The Renaissance passed through a series of stages in its development. Here it is
considered as lasting until about 1830. In Italy, as in other countries where it came
to be adopted, the first phase was that of learning, designers being intent upon
accurate transcription of the Roman architectural elements and their use in con-
temporary buildings. As Italy had not travelled so far from Classic character as had
countries where the Gothic had reached its highest development, the return was
fairly readily accomplished, and by 1500 the average building was thoroughly
classical in appearance. The next stage was the most important to the future of the
style. In the first half of the sixteenth century architects had become thoroughly
imbued with the classical spirit, and need not, if they so wished, any longer scrupu-
lously pay regard to Roman precedent. The Renaissance became an individual style
in its own right; about 1530. By this time the grasp of classical principles had ex-
panded beyond the concept merely of individual buildings to buildings in their re-
lationship one to another, to civic design, the setting of buildings and to gardens and
garden art. But there then emerged a conflict of practice between those designers
 658 RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

COMPARATIVE )
DOMES
iia Ge!

WY; Vy
SS
| ENT a:

Lp
SAU cer DON DM

\ SKETCH OF TYPE |

]
DOME e- PENDENTIVES ove /
OF SAME HEMISPHERE! LAY
% PLAN yI,
(LOOKING UP)- VY,
Tile SAUCER
ZIT \ ¥) —=—$$—$—=
QR a ; 5
lif fi [ ies es ,

= Ee i He. Aceh
Eh Kr n\\I ! a WINDOW
<\ fans
. —- =
=) Ss [
OF DIFFERENT HEMISPHERES l J | [
IKV/IW'®’,,
6/7.
T Xe -~@naaae SECTION b-b
Ma MMM yyWy y
]] Ve “SAUCER DOME /)
ee I
lf
Pt

RA RST La
eH - 7

ing KX Oxi

AS TYPE 2 BUT WITH D

Wy
-

V
sae
Aime
PLAN >
(LOOKING UP)
op SECTION THRO’ \
Sd 2 PENDENTIVE
|
l
!
OF TYPE 3 |
SS

PLAN (tookinc up) FOR TYPES 2&3 A NAVE BAY:S. PAUL: LONDON
 RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE 659

who still held Roman precedent in high respect—though they might not always
follow it meticulously—and others who were confident in their power to use the
acquired classical vocabulary freely, to express their own ideas of form. This division
of opinion and practice continued for a very long time, and indeed was never com-
pletely repaired. The ‘purist’ school may be said to be represented by Palladio (p.
738) and his followers, while on the other hand, Michelangelo (p. 713) was the
leader of the ‘Proto-Baroque’ secessionists from the strict rule. Proto-Baroque
freedom was encouraged by the rediscovery and exploitation of stucco as a plastic
medium, and by the love of ornamentation in certain areas where the traditional
use of brickwork already had endowed architecture with the attributes of intricacy
and small scale, as, for example, the Lombard region and, outside Italy, the Low
Countries. Proto-Baroque architecture is not, however, always profuse of ornament,
though even when relatively plain it has a sculpturesque quality, and tends to
exhibit an irrational and unsanctified use of the classical elements in greater or less
degree. Compared with ‘Palladian’ architecture (using the term to denote a type
rather than the actual output of this particular master), which is logical, staid and
serene, Proto-Baroque architecture, also known as ‘Mannerist’, is vivid, virile and
intense, sometimes disturbingly restless and confused. The Proto-Baroque version,
as the term implies, leads directly to Baroque architecture, in which the previous
unrestrained exuberance has been brought to subjection and effects contrived
which are at once dramatic, rich, grand and alive, architecture, sculpture, painting
and the minor arts all being used in harmony to produce the unified whole. The
Baroque period in Italy has its beginning about 1600, and reached its best in the
fifty years 1625-75. Ecclesiastical buildings rather than secular provided the most
fruitful field for the display of its qualities, and Jesuit churches, in whatever country
the style took hold, afford some of the finest and most spectacular examples.
Baroque architecture normally is bold, opulent and impressive. Typically, forms
and colours are manipulated to induce visual concentration upon local and domi-
nant foci rather than being organized in dispersed consistent rhythms, as in
the High Renaissance and ‘Palladian’ expressions. The devices employed have the
main object of providing highly enriched play and flow of form, and to this end, the
elements usually are multiform rather than single: the Orders are overlaid one upon
the other, used in clusters, variously in pilastered, attached or freestanding con-
dition and at irregular spacings; entablatures are heavily ornate and advance or
recede in response to columnar arrangements below them; pediments, segmental
or triangular, are whole or broken and the free ends turned into volute scrolls, or
pediments are placed one within the other; attic mounts over attic; balustrades,
with reiterated dies, bear balusters of various exotic types; while panelling, with
‘ears’ at the corners, cartouches, heraldic emblems and a great variety of other
ornament as well as sculpture, painting and craftwork are used freely to produce
the calculated effect. Above all, there is the index of the curved or sinuous line,
frequently contrived by arranging concavities or convexities of the wall or by
employing circular, elliptical or other curvilinear plans. As a whole, buildings were
contrived for dramatic effect, and internally, great care was taken to control the
incidence of natural light. Frequently, concealed windows directed the flow of light
to specific points or areas. Interiors were conceived in terms of spatial volume rather
than as a complex of individual surfaces, and the volume contained might be treated
alternatively as a single geometrical complexity or as a series of lesser volumes of
diversified character. Baroque architecture is grand, vigorous and robust, very
decisive in its effects, and strongly modelled. It became progressively more refined
and subtle as time passed, though the unity of architecture with all the subordinate
arts became still more strongly marked. Exteriors became plainer than interiors.
660 RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

This subsequent phase is recognized as the ‘Rococo’, reached in Italy about 1700.
It endured for some fifty years, and was succeeded in its turn by the ‘Antiquarian’
phase, when designers looked back once more to ancient models. Renaissance
architecture then acquired an austere aspect, to the extent that one version aspired
to reproduce the stately simplicity of Grecian architecture. On the other hand, the
old Gothic architecture too was romantically imitated.
In due course Renaissance architecture was adopted in all the European countries,
delay depending upon distance from Italy and a variety of other factors. Below is a
table showing, comparatively, its incidence in three important countries, Italy,
France and England, and the phases through which it passed in each.

HIGH RENAISSANCE &

1420 EARLY PROTO -BAROQUE BAROQUE ANTIQUARIAN
es I as RSS a
ere
Se |

ITALY 1500 1600 1760 1830

EARLY CLASSICAL LATE

= 23

FRANCE 1495 1589 1715 1830

ELIZABETHAN JACOBEAN STUART GEORGIAN

ENGLAND 1558 1603 1625 1702 1830

Necessarily, the Renaissance had common characteristics in all the various

countries, but the versions produced nevertheless were nationally quite distinct.
France and England particularly, had first to counter Gothic architecture, so much
more deeply rooted than in Italy, and in each country, national traits as well as
contemporary events operated to determine the complexion which Renaissance
architecture was to assume. The early Renaissance in each country was inevitably
individual, being a compound of the Classical with the style or styles hitherto
practised. The Baroque, as understood in Italy, never found great favour either in
France, Holland or England, but blossomed extravagantly in Spain and delightfully
in Central Europe, while finding congenial soil in Belgium too. Holland, England,
and to some extent, France, inclined to reject the Baroque in favour of the ‘Pal-
ladian’ expression. All countries, however, were in unison from about 1750 in turn-
ing back again for inspiration to bygone styles; Roman, Greek and Gothic.
The variation in characteristics, with examples, will be shown for each country,
Italy (p. 671), France (p. 765), Germany (p. 808), Belgium and Holland (p. 831),
Spain (p. 845), and England (p. 868).

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
The following table gives the main differences between the Gothic and Renais-
sance styles in Europe:

GOTHIC RENAISSANCE
PLANS. Plans were largely the fortuitous PLANS. Plans were arranged with special
result of the various necessary parts regard to symmetry, produced by simi-
arranged for convenience rather than for larity of parts on either side of central
symmetry (p. 442E, L). axial lines (pp. 680C, 690C).
 RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE 661

GOTHIC RENAISSANCE
Church interiors were planned in oblong Church interiors were planned in square
bays covered with rib and panel vaulting bays covered with barrel or cross vaults
(p. 418B) or with open timber roofs (p. and with a central dome (p. 723G).
435).
Naves are divided into numerous bays, and Naves are divided into few bays, and thus
this repetition gives an-appearance of an appearance of spaciousness is ob-
length, as in Winchester Cathedral, which tained, as in S. Paul, London, which
with a length of 270 ft has 12 divisions with a length of 160 ft has only 4 divi-
(p. 410c). Grandeur was thus produced sions (p. 910). Grandeur was here
by the large number of parts into which obtained by the small number of large
the building was divided. divisions or parts employed (pp. 908c,
QOOB).
‘Towers, often crowned with spires, are Towers are sparingly used, and when they
freely used and are predominant features occur are symmetrically placed, whether
which accentuate the verticality of the in pairs, as at S. Paul, London (frontis.),
design. They occur as single western or as a single western tower, as at S.
towers, towers over the crossing, twin Bride, where it is crowned by a spire
western towers, and even in groups of (p. 919). The dome is a predominant
nine, as intended at Chartres (p. 540). feature externally (p. 739A).
WALLS. Walls are often constructed of WALLS. Walls are constructed of ashlar
rubble masonry (p. 490) not laid in hori- masonry, accurately laid in horizontal
zontal courses, or of brick and rough flint courses, or of brick lined up with bond-
in patterns. In accordance with Mediaeval ing courses. In accordance with Roman
usage materials were in small pieces, even practice, materials were in large blocks,
when of squared stones or ashlar, fitted which give dignity, often accentuated by
together to meet the requirements of a rusticating the blocks in the lower part
style in which church walls were practi- of walls, which were only pierced at inter-
cally replaced by glass windows and pro- vals with windows (p. 681).
jecting buttresses.
Wall angles are often of squared ashlar Wall angles are often rusticated to give an
masonry, while the rest of the walling is additional appearance of strength (p.
of rubble, flint, or brick. 756).
Gables are steep, pierced with windows and Pediments are of low pitch (p. 742A), due
finished either with stone parapets (p. to Classic influence, or semicircular (p.
418A) or ornamented timber barge-boards 735A), sometimes filled with sculpture.
(p. 456B).
Skylines are characterized by rising towers Skylines are characterized by horizontal
and the intricacy resulting from numer- cornices and balustrades, which give
ous pinnacles (pp. 345, 601). simplicity of outline (pp. 699A, 705B).
OPENINGS. Arcades of pointed arches are OPENINGS. Arcades of semicircular arches
characteristic, as in Westminster Abbey appear in courtyards and street archi-
(p. 4228), and in cloisters are frequently tecture, especially in Italy (p. 6998).
filled with tracery, as in Westminster
Abbey (p. 425A).
Door (pp. 498, 539B) and window openings Door and window openings have their sides
(p. 499) have their sides or jambs in re- or jambs unrecessed and finished with a
cessed planes, richly moulded and often moulded architrave of Classic type (p.
provided with small nook-shafts (p. 330A). Openings were placed with regard
330B). Openings were placed with regard to symmetry and to grouping one above
to convenience rather than to symmetry the other, and were spanned by semi-
or position one over another, and were circular arches (p. 6828) or lintels (p.
usually spanned by pointed arches (pp. 756).
449A, 558H).
Windows are divided by vertical mullions Windows, except under transition condi-
and horizontal transoms, and are often tions, followed Classic lines and remained
of enormous size for the display of small as determined by the climate of
662 RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

GOTHIC RENAISSANCE
painted glass—a translucent form of Italy, and were unbroken by mullions
decoration which influenced the number and transoms (p. 692F) and not used as
and size of the windows (p. 499) as at S. frames for painted glass pictures.
George’s Chapel, Windsor.
Roors. Vaulting is developed by means Roors. Vaulting is characterized by
of the pointed arch and depends for effect semicircular vaults without ribs (p. 705),
on the beauty of curve of the numerous and depends for effect on coloured
ribs which support the panels and which frescoes; the dome (pp. 658, 676A),
are frequently enriched at their junctions whether of the flat saucer type or raised
by carved ‘bosses’ (p. 399). on a drum, is also frescoed (p. 679G).
Open timber roofs are beautiful features of Timber roofs are no longer left open, but
the style, especially in England, both in are frequently lined internally with
royal palaces, such as Westminster Hall plaster ceilings, horizontal or arched,
(p. 500), and in parish churches (p. 435), and enriched with plastic decoration
and manor houses (p. 449B). (pp. 884, 904C, E, 939C, 977A, B).
The external treatment of roofs varies in The external treatment of roofs varies in
ecclesiastical and domestic buildings, each country; in Italy they are flat and
but is characterized in general by towers hidden behind balustrades (p. 734D),
and spires (p. 531B), high gables, elabo- while in England, Germany, and especi-
rate chimneys (p. 455A), ornamental ally France they are high; the dome is the
parapets (p. 511), lofty pinnacles, and dominating feature and gives a smooth
slender fléches (p. 564), which give a and rounded outline (p. 663B).
jagged and spiky skyline.
COLUMNS. Columns were used _ struc- COLUMNS. The Classic ‘Orders’ were
turally; the Classical proportions be- again used and their proportions stan-
tween height and diameter were not dardized (p. 972), and they appear either
observed; capitals and bases were decoratively in facades (pp. 690A, 699A)
moulded and carved according to the or structurally, as in porticoes (p. 703B).
fancy of the craftsman. Piers combined Shafts were varied by rustication, fluting,
with shafts were frequently used instead and carved foliage. In the Baroque period
of cylindrical piers, and their plan was the Orders often were used in clustered
determined by the moulded arches and form and in many other unorthodox ways
vaulting ribs they had to support (pp. (Pp. 724E, 728B).
503, 547B, 535C).
MOULDINGS. The contours of mouldings MOULDINGS. The contours of mouldings
consist of curves forming parts of circles consist of curves formed of parts of circles
or combinations of these curves joined by joined by fillets, as in Roman entabla-
fillets, which enriched the sides of open- tures (pp. 164, 165, I91), but were now
ings and were contained within rect- used in novel combinations; while the
angular recesses or on a ‘chamfer plane’ sides of openings have simple architrave
(p. 507) at an angle of 45 degrees with the mouldings formed on the wall surface
wall-face. (pp. 699E; 749, 753C).
Mouldings, when used as horizontal string Mouldings, when used in intermediate
courses, are sometimes enriched with cornices, are Roman in character and,
carved ornament varying in character when carved, the ornament is derived
according to the period (p. 508). from the same source (pp. 750, 757; 758).
Projecting vertical buttresses, emphasized Projecting horizontal cornices casting deep
by their deep shadows, lofty moulded shadows, with balconies and moulded
pinnacles, together with steep roofs, string bands, all combine to produce an
towers, and spires, all produce an effect effect of horizontality. Above the crown-
of verticality (pp. 532C, 543, 663A), ing cornices there were often balus-
while parapets, battlemented or pierced trades, the baluster being an important
with tracery, take the place of boldly Renaissance invention, much exploited
projecting Classic cornices (pp. 5II, decoratively (pp. 6868, 689D, 718A,
556, 563). 740A, 756).
ORNAMENT. Ornament generally was ORNAMENT. Ornament generally was
 RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE 663

B. S. Paul’s Cathedral, London from S.W. (1675-1710). See p. 906

664 RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN EUROPE

GOTHIC RENAISSANCE

founded on Mediaeval mysticism and founded on Classical mythology and

Christian subjects. pagan subjects.
Carving, often boldly executed and Carving is generally carefully executed and
grotesque, possesses a decorative charac- has a character in harmony with Classic
ter in harmony with the architecture, and ideals and precedent, whether in cornices,
enriches doorways, windows, buttresses, consoles, capitals, friezes, pilaster shafts,
pinnacles, and gargoyles (pp. 512, 566). or pediments (pp. 749, 750, 754, 757).
Sturdy craftsmanship characterizes the Fine craftsmanship is distinctive of the
style, not only in stone, but also in metal Early Renaissance period, as seen in the
and woodwork, and was determined by metalwork of individual artists, such as
structural forms rather than by indivi- Ghiberti, and in the glazed faience of the
dual taste (pp. 517, 518). Della Robbia family (p. 672).
The human figure determined the scale, The human figure was not the unit of scale,
both for statues and for doorways. The either for statues or for doorways, both
statues spring from and form part of the of which increased with the size of the
structural features of the buildings and building. Statues, anatomically correct,
are thus architectonic in character (pp. are not an integral part of the structure
543, 566), and are an integral part of the (pp. 663B, 686A, 720B, 721A, 724D-F, 736,
structure. 739A, C, 741, and frontispiece.
Stained glass is the coloured glory of the Fresco painting gives the coloured mural
style and was largely the raison d’étre of decoration of the style in which windows
the immense traceried windows which were subordinate, and it was handed
framed the glowing pictures of Bible down from the Roman period and
incident and church history (p. 371), and attained the height of elaboration on the
it culminated in the translucent coloured walls and ceilings of Baroque interiors.
windows of Rheims.
External colour schemes were usually the External colour effects were usually pro-
result of the combination of the materials duced by ‘sgraffito’ decoration on
used, as in Florence (p. 615A) and Siena coloured plaster, as in the Palazzo del
Cathedrals (p. 617A). Consiglio, Verona (p. 744H).

The Palazzo del Laterano, Rome (1586; see p. 725),

with S. Giovanni in Laterano (right; see p. 729),
and the obelisk from Karnak (see p. 50)
 Muang

TYRRHENIAN

sae AG

+ Land over 1,500 ft

Miles 100
|b —— se —— ae
EW.

Italy in the sixteenth century

XX. ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

(fifteenth—nineteenth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. The Renaissance in Italy is best considered geographically under
the three great distinctive cities of its activity, Florence, Rome and Venice, which,
however, will be taken as centres of influence rather than localized schools. Each
had its own regional traits, though these became less marked as time progressed,
and gave way almost completely to universal characteristics during the Baroque
period. At no time did South Italy and Sicily play more than a minor or subservient
role.
Florence. The city-state of Florence, centrally situated, was one of the chief
666 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

powers of Italy. Though its expanding dominions never included more than a small
part of the peninsula, the Florentines not only exerted considerable influence over
the whole of Tuscany but carried Renaissance architecture, which originated with
them, much farther afield. Under Florence are included Genoa, a maritime republic,
which was little affected by the new style until mid-sixteenth century, and Milan,
centre of yet another powerful state and in which Florentine architects were the first
to build in Renaissance style: Turin comes into the picture in later times.
Rome. The shrunken and distressed Mediaeval city began to recover its prestige
and unique influence while the Renaissance was taking root in Florence, and soon
popes and cardinals were reviving its glories in fine architecture. The ruins of
ancient Rome, then better preserved than now, supplied the models for new build-
ings which, in their turn, became models for all Europe. The Popes claimed tem-
poral rights over the Papal States, extending from the region of Rome northwards
along the east coast to link with the Republics of Florence and Venice. In the more
remote of the States papal authority was negligible until the early sixteenth century,
and they were in fact in the hands of despots, who created their own individual
artistic environments.
Venice. The greatness of Venice was founded during the Mediaeval period (pp.
312, 599) on her Oriental commerce, and this prosperity continued well into Renais-
sance times. By 1500 her territories in Italy extended westward almost to Milan,
thus embracing Padua, Vicenza, Verona, Brescia, Bergamo and other cities along
the valley of the River Po, while across the Adriatic she retained Dalmatia and en-
larged her holding in Istria. The history of the Venetian State was always influenced
by her impregnable location in the Venetian lagoon, protected by a belt of islands,
and by her sea-power which secured her maritime trade with the East; until geo-
graphical discoveries opened up new routes and she gradually sank into decline.

GEOLOGICAL
Florence. As shown previously (pp. 312, 600), the quarries of Tuscany yielded
ample fine stone, obtainable, when needed, in large blocks. Siena, a rival republic
until 1555, had her own local supplies, as well too of white and yellow marble. From
Carrara and vicinity in the north-west of the modern province of Tuscany came the
famed white marble—the Luna marble of Roman times—and also coloured, and
from quarries at Fiesole, the Florentines won the ‘pietra serena’, a blue-grey stone
of fine quality much employed in Early Renaissance buildings in the city, as well as
the ‘pietra forte’, a brown stone more suitable for outside work. The Genoa district
was equally well favoured, having ready access to the northward extension of the
same massif as includes Carrara, and to the green- and vari-coloured marbles of
Liguria and Piedmont. In the Milan region, where brick and terra-cotta were
normal, coloured marbles could be obtained, though with some difficulty and
therefore tended to be used in sparing, precious fashion.
Rome. Good building stone of many varieties was available within ready reach of
the city (pp. 168, 253, 312), the finest being travertine, won from quarries around
Tivoli, a stone much used by the Romans. But as in previous periods, Renaissance
builders often found the decaying pagan buildings a much more handy source, as
well too for the coloured marbles which the Romans had brought at such great
pains from various parts of their mighty empire. Apart from the enlightened
policies of Popes Leo X (1513-22) and Pius IV (1559-65), little respect was paid to
the ancient monuments, and they long continued to be despoiled of their material,
recovered sculptures and carvings being used for the adornment of Renaissance
buildings and their stones for new constructions; or, in the case of suitable marbles
and travertine, burnt for lime. The northerly Papal States also mostly lay in stone-
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 667
producing districts, except around Bologna and the neighbouring lower Po valley,
where brick was the natural material.
Venice. The site of the city was devoid of suitable materials, but brick-earths
were accessible on the nearby mainland, and by easy water-carriage, stones, timber
and marbles could be obtained according to need, as in the Mediaeval period
(pp. 312, 600). Istrian cream-coloured stone continued to be used extensively in
Venice, and red- and orange-coloured marbles were available near Verona. West-
ward, the cities under Venetian rule lay in the brick-producing zone, but stone
from the neighbouring foothills of the Alps was never too far distant for the best
work.

CLIMATIC
Florence. As elsewhere in Italy, the bright and sunny climate rendered large
windows not only unnecessary but also unsuitable. The open ‘cortile’ or court,
normal to palaces, and the sheltering colonnade or arcade are arrangements per-
petuated from ancient times; while the low-pitched roof, natural in a country where
snow was rare, lent itself to cornice and parapet or balustrade.
Rome. The effects of climate were much as in previous times (pp. 169, 312, 600).
The narrow streets of Italian towns gave protection not alone against the blaze of
summer sun but also against winter cold, severely felt in the indifferently-heated
buildings. The cramped, bustling streets in their turn, along with the risks of
faction fights, brawls and nocturnal depredations, led to living on upper floors of
palaces, the first floor being the principal or ‘piano nobile’, while the ground floor
was devoted to general service purposes.
Venice. As shown earlier (pp. 312, 600), the extreme heat of summer was here
tempered by sea breezes, and to enjoy them, belvederes and balconies were usual,
these all the more necessary in that the restricted island sites gave little room for
gardens. On the other hand, the northern latitude and the winds that swept down
from the snow-topped mountains, made fire-places almost essential, and the funnel-
topped chimneys are a distinctive Venetian feature.

RELIGIOUS
Florence. The Dominican friar, Savonarola (1452-98), by his ardent piety and
reforming zeal, changed the habits of the citizens, swayed the policy of the State and
even menaced the authority of the Pope, Alexander VI. His impassioned denuncia-
tions of corruption in Church and State, his eloquent exhortations to purity of life
and his personal devotion and singleness of purpose, spread consternation in the
gay city of Florence; he roused the citizens to opposition to the oppressive tyranny
of the Medici and called upon the rulers of Christendom to summon a general
council to reform Church abuses. At one time banished from Florence by a Medici,
at another excommunicated by a pope, and yet again forsaken by his own people,
Savonarola, in spite of all, became the saviour, law-giver and dictator of the Floren-
tine Republic. His influence lived on after his death.
Rome. The return of the Popes (1377) from Avignon to Rome had helped to re-
establish her former position of importance and prosperity. From the time of the
Council of Constance (1417), the Popes, notably Nicholas V (1447-55), Julius II
(1503-13) and Leo X (1513-22), took a prominent position as Italian princes and
patrons of art; Sixtus V (1585-90) is often credited with the comprehensive change
to Renaissance character of the city. Directly or indirectly, certain of the Popes
were concerned in attempts to consolidate Italian unity, endeavours by no means
restricted to the objective of giving reality to papal authority over their legitimate
temporal domains. Caesar Borgia (1475-1507), natural son of Alexander VI (1492-
668 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

1503), went his wilful way towards accomplishing the overthrow of the northern
Italian States piecemeal, and after the death of his father, clashed with Julius II,
member of a rival family, who pursued with considerable success the same militant
aim directly on the papal account, bringing all the States of the Church to heel with
the exception of Ferrara. Thus do we see the impossibility of unravelling into
separate threads the warp of religious and social conditions of this restless period.
Great wealth accrued to the Popes, and they were concerned in turn to benefit their
families, or to mark their pontificate by the erection of costly buildings. The greater
part of the famous palaces of Renaissance Rome, and the splendid villas fringing the
ancient city, are associated with the name of one or other of these great papal
families. Yet meantime the authority of the papacy had been undergoing challenge.
The Reformation and the growth of nationalism in countries which formerly had
submitted unquestioningly to the spiritual leadership of Rome, spurred the Church
to put its own house in order, and one most important outcome was the appearance
in the sixteenth century of fresh religious Orders, the Theatines (1524), the Capu-
chins (1536; a branch of the Franciscans, becoming a separate Order in 1619) and
the Jesuits, founded by the Spaniard, Ignatius Loyola, in 1540. The latter proved
by far the most important Order of the three, and strengthened Spanish influence
in Italy. The Jesuits’ purpose was to combat the effects of the Reformation by re-
newing the ideals of the Church, while buttressing the papal power. They built
preaching churches and religious colleges, and were not only religious enthusiasts
but also a building confraternity.
Venice. No part of Italy remained unaffected by the recovery of Rome and the
papacy, but the Venetians were unsympathetic to spiritual control, and maintained
a semi-independence of the Popes, specially manifested during the attempted Inter-
dict (1607) of Paul V, when the learned theologian, Paolo Sarpi (1552-1623) was
the adviser of the Venetian State.

SOCIAL
Florence. The rediscovery of classical literature produced a wave of enthusiasm
throughout Italy for old Roman architecture. This new movement began in
Florence about 1420, and was developed with enormous zeal. It was stimulated by
the Medici family, founded in 1424 by Giovanni de’ Medici (d. 1429), which ac-
quired great wealth in the upsurge of commercial prosperity, and gradually assumed
supreme authority in the State. Giovanni’s son, Cosimo (d. 1464), founded the
Medici Library and the Platonic Academy, and was a most generous patron of
artists, such as Brunelleschi, Michelozzi, Donatello, Masaccio and Lippi. He in turn
was succeeded by his son, Piero (d. 1469), followed by his grandson, Lorenzo ‘the
Magnificent’, whose brilliant personal gifts and devotion to the Arts marked the
most glorious phase in Florentine history. Through banking activities, from
which their riches sprang, the Medici family had considerable repute in other
Italian cities and even abroad; it produced two Popes, Leo X (1513-22) and Clement
VII (1523-34), and its fortunes long remained interwoven with those of Florence.
For at least a century after the inception of the Renaissance in architecture, Floren-
tine social life exhibited intense vitality at every level, never quite paralleled else-
where at this or any other time in Renaissance Italy. The welfare of the State was
the deep concern of almost every citizen—the semi-fortified character of the palaces
is witness to the feuds of rival political parties—and the arts and crafts were pursued
with the utmost fervour, evidenced no less in the rivalries and petty jealousies which
constantly arose, than in the admiration and delight ungrudgingly shown for the
works and persons of the accomplished masters. For artists to be distinguished in
several rather than a single art was almost a commonplace, and social distinctions
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 669
rested far more upon ability in commerce, craftsmanship, literature and the arts
than upon class. All the records of Florence of the time indicate a city of vital,
pulsating energy, its streets a bustle of purposeful activity. The powerful and well-
organized craft guilds, which had religious and not merely lay connotations, had a
considerable share in directing the activities of studio and workshop which, inspired
by the Renaissance movement, sprang up in every Florentine street. Florentines
soon began to carry the Renaissance to other fields, and their ardent spirit rapidly
inspired rivalry in other Tuscan cities. The earliest architects to work in Renaissance
style in both Rome and Milan were Florentines. Genoa was more tardy, and scarcely
began to show architectural evidences of the movement before the sixteenth
century.
Rome. The ancient city took time to recover from its Mediaeval poverty, and it
was the patronage of the Church, with its renewed temporal power, and of the great
papal families, that drew flocking to it aspirants of every description. Population
increased enormously, and building proceeded apace; splendid new palaces and
churches were erected and embellished by eminent craftsmen and artists. The
Renaissance took hold, and the movement was furthered by the setting-up of
printing presses about 1465, which opened up to wider access the study of ancient
writers. Because of the special circumstances, the social structure in Rome was
substantially different from that of Florence. Rome had no commercial importance,
and therefore no close-knit burgher community, and subsisted largely upon its
metropolitan functions, exercised by an aristocracy that, through papal favours,
now became extremely rich and powerful, while the former meagre populace re-
ceived a tremendous infusion of newcomers whose common bond was little more
than that of ambition. Though as in ancient times in Rome their dwellings might
be intermingled, there was here a much greater distance between the social classes
and between patron and client. Artists and architects stood out more strongly on
their own personal count, rather than pursuing the Renaissance collectively, while
airs and graces, and wealth lavishly expended in display, strongly distinguished
lordly patrician from earnest artisan and homespun commoner. With interludes of
comparative austerity, as after the sack of Rome by Spanish and German forces in
1537, or that due to the impact of the Counter-Reformation over the middle of the
sixteenth century, the great families held almost regal court in their palaces, vying
one with the other in cultivated extravagance. The Popes, avaricious of their
revenues outside the city, spent them prodigally within, and even ran up enormous
debts. Yet the eventual outcome was a grand and resplendent city, replete with fine
buildings and civic embellishments, while outside the city were luxurious villas in
the delectable neighbouring hills. Until brought under effective papal authority in
the time of Julius II or later, certain of the more northerly of the States of the
Church held their own petty but brilliant courts of the leaders of the tyrant families
which governed them, such as the Malatesta family of Rimini, the Montefeltri of
Urbino or the Este of Ferrara; and thus for a while, architecture in these centres
was more responsive to local factors than to developments in Rome.
Venice. During the whole of the fifteenth century, Venice was engaged in con-
quering neighbouring towns, over which Venetian nobles were appointed as
governors. The Republican government of Venice gave special care to the regula-
tions for the development of trade, both in home and overseas markets. Her pros-
perity was due to a State commercial system, and was not the result of mere accident
or of the enterprise of individuals. This successful trading community produced
many kings of commerce, whose rivalry in display led to the erection of numerous
fine palaces on the Grand Canal, which from their situation on the broad waterfront
needed less protection against civic turmoil than was necessary in Florence and
670 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

other inland cities, and so could be more splendid and open externally. John of
Speyer established (1469) the first of those printing presses for which Venice became
so famous when, at a later time, the Aldine Press issued its editions of the Greek
classics. Thus, though her prosperity was fading as the Renaissance advanced, due
to her receding Eastern trade, Venice was far-famed for her artistry, her theatre and
her joyous, luxurious life. These survived even into the eighteenth century when
her political importance had almost gone.

HISTORICAL
Florence. The grouping together of independent commonwealths in Italy is a
feature of this period when, as in ancient Greece, one city bore rule over another.
In 1406 Florence conquered Pisa and thus obtained a seaport, and in 1421 she took
Leghorn from the Genoese and was strong enough to challenge Milan and Lucca in
war, and so became the chief power in Italy and the art centre of Europe. The feuds
between nobles were aggravated by the warfare between the Guelphs and Ghibel-
lines (pp. 315, 603). In 1494 Charles VIII of France occupied Florence during his
brief invasion of Italy to enforce his claims to the Kingdom of Naples. The short-
lived Republic of Savonarola followed, but the Medici, in spite of successive banish-
ments, were reinstated by the Emperor Charles V when he took the town in 1530,
after a siege of eleven months, during which Michelangelo acted as engineer to the
Republic. Political liberty was subsequently curtailed, especially under Cosimo I
(1537-74), who, however, greatly extended the Florentine dominions and took
Siena in 1555. The Grand Dukes of Tuscany passed through varying fortunes
until, in 1737, the House of Medici became extinct and the Duchy passed to Austria.
In 1801 Florence again attained political freedom as a republic and afterwards as
the Kingdom of Etruria. Between 1807 and 1814 she was incorporated with France,
and in 1860 she was united to the Kingdom of Italy.
Rome. The Council of Constance, which followed the return of the Popes after
their long sojourn in Avignon, put an end not only to the scandal of rival Popes, but
also to the factions of the barons within the papal city; so that times of more stable
government and greater security resulted in an increase of wealth and prestige and a
revival of building in Rome. That ambitious Pope, Julius II, besides extending the
temporal power of the papacy, sought to aggrandize himself in the popular imagina-
tion, and thus his original intention of erecting a monumental tomb house for him-
self developed into the gigantic scheme for the rebuilding of S. Peter’s, as the
greatest cathedral in Christendom (p. 717). For the seventh and last time Rome was
taken and plundered by the Emperor Charles V (1527). One external power after
another then exercised authority in Italy, and so modified the natural tendency of
Italian architecture. First came Charles V and the influence of Spain which, with
her dignified state ceremonials, was responsible for the introduction of extravagant
ornament. This was followed by the French ideas of the magnificent times of Louis
XIV. Then the Italian peninsula passed largely under the yoke of Austria, until the
Napoleonic interlude of 1796-1815.
Venice. In the middle of the fifteenth century, when Constantinople was taken by
the Turks (1453), the supremacy of Venice, which had been her commercial ally,
was undermined; while the discovery by Vasco da Gama in 1498 of the new route
round the Cape to India diverted her commerce to the Portuguese. The League of
Cambrai (1508-29) against Venice indicates the strength of the Republic. During
the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the Venetians were at constant war with the
Turks, and eventually in 1718 Venice lost the whole of her possessions, except those
in north Italy; but even when her territorial power was reduced and her commerce
diverted, the mighty sea-republic still cherished the arts.
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 671

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The Renaissance in Italy may be divided broadly into three main periods, viz.:
Early Renaissance—fifteenth century
High Renaissance and Proto-Baroque—sixteenth century
Baroque—seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries.
Thereafter, from c. 1750-1830, the Renaissance follows an ‘Antiquarian’ trend.
It has been shown earlier (p. 603ff.) that the welter of influences upon Italian Gothic,
including the ancient Roman, exerted by the still-numerous monumental remains,
produced differing regional types, these mostly quite unlike the Gothic architecture
of Western Europe. The round arch was never completely abandoned, and Byzan-
tine structural and decorative practices, even more than the Western Gothic, were
interwoven with those developed from the direct Roman and Romanesque succes-
sion. The Renaissance reversion to Ancient Roman architectural character was in
fact more superficial than might at first appear, and indeed neither in their manner of
construction nor in their building types nor purpose in planning did the Renaissance
enthusiasts make the least attempt to turn back the hands of the clock. Roman mass
construction had long been conclusively superseded by the more compact and
scientific Mediaeval systems, and if there was some attempt to emulate the Roman
grand manner of formal planning, it was for visual effect and not for the improve-
ment of physical comfort and convenience. In all fundamental respects, from a
threshold of its Gothic and Byzantine inheritance the Renaissance pursued its own
individual and characteristic course. Thus for instance, in tracing its development
we see a protracted struggle for favour between the Gothic longitudinal and the
Byzantine centralized church plans, resolved in a happy marriage in the Baroque
period when the Byzantine ordonnance was commonly adopted for the eastern half
of a Latin-cross scheme, while without the aid of the Byzantine pendentive and the
tie-bar system—which generated the hoop-tie principle (pp. 722c, 912)—we
probably never should have known the glories of the domes of S. Peter’s, Rome
(p. 723) or S. Paul’s, London (p. 6638).
In the Early Renaissance, regional character importantly survived; in the High
Renaissance and Proto-Baroque period it was partially eradicated, owing to a
widening dissemination of ideas fostered by travel and the convergence on Rome
of so many architects for their training, while with the Baroque it almost wholly
disappeared. By the High Renaissance, the stage of elementary learning of Roman
decorative systems had been passed, and architects worked in the freedom of firmly
acquired knowledge. The true nature of the Renaissance as a distinctive style then
began to emerge. These relatively untrammelled adventures exposed the personal
style of individual designers, and hard on the heels of the High Renaissance came
the phase known in art history as ‘Mannerist’, wherein practices which had no
ancient Roman precedent were interspersed among those fully sanctioned, or whole
buildings were conceived in a non-Roman way. Such exuberance in design was in
many cases strongly marked by the mid-sixteenth century, and was encouraged by
the rediscovery of hard-plaster stucco as an artistic medium, long ago exploited in
ancient Roman art. Here, the term ‘Proto-Baroque’ is used for these non-conform-
ing manifestations—though ‘Mannerism’ is convenient for the less obvious depar-
tures from Roman precedent—since they represent a genuine stage towards that
ultimate fulfilment of the entire Renaissance movement in the Baroque, on the
threshold of the seventeenth century. The High Renaissance and Proto-Baroque
phases, together covering the sixteenth century, cannot readily be separated, as the
672 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

latter is at first spasmodic in its incidence. Further, it is a phenomenon of the Re-

naissance movement that even in the ‘High’ Baroque phase (c. 1625-75), ancient
Roman canons retained their prestige, and from time to time monuments were pro-
duced which were almost wholly Classical in character; and about 1750, architecture
as a whole returned to a profound regard for the Roman and Greek antique, in what
is known alternatively as the ‘Neo-Classical’ or ‘Antiquarian’ phase.
Below, the course of development is considered in the three main regions under
the headings of the great distinctive cities which represent them, to the point where
regional differences almost wholly disappear in favour of the universal Baroque
characteristics, explained on p. 659.

FLORENCE
The Renaissance of the fifteenth century in Italy had its birth in Florence, where,
under unique conditions and influences, a type of palace-building was evolved, to
which huge blocks of rusticated masonry give an unusually massive and rugged
appearance. The typical palace was built round an internal court, similar to a
Mediaeval cloister, surrounded by an arcade supporting the walls of the upper
stories (pp. 681C, 690D). There is a general absence of pilasters as decorative
features in the facades, which are therefore called ‘astylar’; while sparing use of
detail, together with concentration on pronounced features, produces boldness and
simplicity of style. The imposing appearance of these massive palaces fronting on
narrow streets is emphasized by boldly projecting roof cornices, which crown the
walls and are proportioned to the height of the buildings, as in the Palazzo Riccardi
(p. 681A, B). The columnar arcade is a favourite feature, not only in courtyards, but
also in streets, as in the Foundling Hospital (p. 675A). Early Renaissance churches
are conspicuous for refinement, in strong contrast to the rugged, fortress-like
character of the palaces. The architectural character owes much of its interest to the
individual fancy of sculptors and painters. Among others there were Luca della
Robbia (1400-82), famous for his coloured glazed reliefs in terra-cotta, Lorenzo
Ghiberti (1378-1455), who designed the Baptistery doors (p. 677), and also Dona-
tello (1386-1466), Mino da Fiesole (1430-84), and Benedetto da Majano (1442-97),
renowned for their bas-reliefs, carvings, and statues. Thus, with this wealth of
genius, it is natural that altars and monuments, fonts and pulpits should be richly
decorated with sculptured ornament. Florentine craftsmanship, whether displayed
in capitals, consoles, corbels, arabesques, fountains, niches, or torch brackets, shows
highly developed artistic perception and technical skill (pp. 749, 750). Not only
does ornament depend upon the personality of the artist, but architectural design
also now becomes the product of the individual architect rather than of a school of
craftsmen working on traditional lines. The examples which follow will therefore
be classified and considered under the names of the different architects.
Florence contains very many examples of Early Renaissance architecture, but
fewer of the High Renaissance and Proto-Baroque period and almost none of the
Baroque. In the second quarter of the sixteenth century Michelangelo led the Proto-
Baroque breakaway from academic formalism in design with his New Sacristy of S.
Lorenzo (p. 716A) and the Laurentian Library (p. 716B), and was soon emulated by
local architects such as Ammanati and others in Rome and Genoa. About this same
time Florentine garden art was approaching its zenith. The earliest Renaissance
villas (from c. 1450) in the neighbouring beautifully-diversified, undulating country-
side, had retained something of Mediaeval character; progressively they developed
towards an intimate charm of formally related garden compartments of differing
types, centred on a summer dwelling or ‘casino’, growing more natural as they
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 673
merged at the fringe with the surrounding landscape. The Villa Gamberaia,
Settignano (c. 1550-) (p. 712B) is a fine instance, while in the city itself are the
Proto-Baroque Boboli Gardens (c. 1550-) (p. 712A), related to the rear facade of the
famous Palazzo Pitti.
In Milan, the Early Renaissance at first secured only a precarious hold, but there
then appeared a very distinctive small-scale diversified architecture, in the local
brick and terra-cotta, of a character often associated with the name of Bramante,
who worked hereabouts before his great High Renaissance achievements in Rome.
In Genoa, almost the first appearance of the Renaissance was at the Proto-Baroque
Stage, its palaces distinguished by the remarkable treatment of their airy, axial stair-
cases, and there, as in Milan and Turin, the Baroque reached full flower.

ROME
The Early Renaissance in Rome is comparatively unimportant, though some
gracious buildings were completed in the various Papal States. The High Renais-
sance and later phases are splendidly represented. Roman palaces nearly always
have a ‘four-square’ majesty and dignity (pp. 699A, 705B). At first the Classic Orders
often were used in simple, direct arrangements in superimposed tiers on facades
and in cortili (pp. 699, 705E, 7IOF, 753E), but afterwards in a giant arrangement
extending the whole height of a building (pp. 710J, 718). Bramante was the chief
figure of the High Renaissance, of which his Tempietto at S. Pietro in Montorio
(p. 700B) is a notable example, but other great architects, scarcely a generation
younger than he, began to show Mannerism in their buildings, using architectural
elements in a free, decorative, and sometimes illogical way unsanctified by antique
precedent, particularly around wall-openings and in novel treatments of rustication
(p. 710B, E, G), while large and small Orders were employed in juxtaposition (p.
7I0F). Michelangelo’s Roman work is of this Proto-Baroque class (p. 718). Per-
uzzi, an architect of great discernment and taste, showed scholarly appreciation
of ancient architecture and at the same time manifested individuality in such as the
use of the coupled Order and jewel-like enframements to windows of the facade of his
Palazzo Massimi (p. 703). He, like Romano and Vignola, carried Proto-Baroque
traits afield (pp. 709A, 711). Domestic planning evidences great skill and ingenuity
together with a Roman formalism (pp. 703H, 705G, J, 7IOA, D, 711), and in churches
the Byzantine-type centralized plan retained much of its popularity (pp. 704A, 722F).
Civic design and the adornment of street and public open places made great strides,
the pace increasing in the Baroque period (pp. 718, 721, 730A), and many splendid
villas were created in the vicinity of the city. The Baroque flourished greatly in
Rome. Carlo Maderna was its first successful exponent, and Bernini its most
brilliant and versatile figure: among Bernini’s several very able contemporaries was
the eccentric Borromini, and together they mark the climax of the movement (c,
1625-75). Palaces maintained their cliff-like character, and generally were astylar,
their planning now extremely adept and incorporating grand axial staircases and
dignified ceremonial apartments, often of circular, elliptical or other regular geo-
metrical shapes. Stylar treatment mostly was reserved for church facades, which are
richly ornate with reiterated clusters of pilasters and columns, and have great
vigour of expression, the fronts often being convex or concave on plan, to afford
forceful contrasts of light and shade (pp. 727C, 728A, B). Unity is strongly marked,
usually resolved in the entrance portal (p. 697B). Church plans were either centralized
and compact, building up to a circular or elliptical dome (p. 728c), or the centralized
plan served for the eastern half of a longitudinal scheme. The latter solution,
originated with Vignola’s Gesu church (1568-84) (p. 704D), became universally
Y H.O.A.
674. ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

popular (p. 743H) and was eventually adopted for S. Peter’s (p. 723G). The output
of Rome diminished in quality, virility and bulk in the eighteenth century, and
about 1750 the true Baroque gave place to a renewed and academic Classicism. Asa
whole, Roman Renaissance ornament displays great technical skill and fine crafts-
manship (pp. 753, 754), and though exceptionally rich and even excessively
exuberant in the Baroque period, shows a brilliant unity of all the Arts.

VENICE
The Renaissance style in Venice is distinguished from that of the rest of Europe by
features peculiarly Venetian, and it is coloured by the history and unique character
of the sea-city, with its own beautiful type of Mediaeval architecture, impressed
more by Near-Eastern Byzantine trends than by the normal current of Gothic or by
Rome and her Classic traditions. So strongly marked an individuality responded
grudgingly to the new movement, and the Early Renaissance was delayed and at
first hybrid in character, manifested in buildings which retained intermingled
Gothic features, as in the courtyard of the Doge’s Palace (p. 733B). The architecture
of Venice is, in general, lighter and more graceful than that of Florence. Its special
character is in some part due to the fact that its gleaming buildings are built upon
a hundred islets on a multitude of wooden and stone piles, the mundane brickwork of
their walls often concealed by sparkling marble sheathing; the ubiquitous waterways,
spanned by charming bridges (p.757E), carry colourful reflections and throw back the
brilliant light to expose every detail in crystal clarity. To such imponderous effects,
rustication, though frequently practised, seems far less appropriate than to the
massively-founded masonry of Florence. Marble sheathing is typical of the Early
Renaissance, used in panels decorated centrally (or intermittently, in the case of
friezes and architraves) with coloured marbles in ribboned medallions or jewel-like
devices (pp. 733, 734, 739C). A notable Venetian feature is the central grouping of
windows, marking deep rooms behind the comparatively flat palace facades which
outline the waterways (p. 734). Orders are used freely on exteriors at most times,
and are usually confined to the main storeys of palaces, these being crowned by
entablatures often containing a deep, windowed frieze (pp. 734C, 740A). Balconies
(pp. 734B, D, 757B) are graceful and important features, their projections adding
materially to the play of light and shade. Palace plans normally were compact, owing
to the cramped and precious sites, while early churches were simple and mostly
aisleless, resplendent with marble encrustation within and without (p. 735). The
Lombardi family, particularly Pietro, contributed greatly in the early period;
Sansovino, with his rich, sculpturesque style (pp. 740, 757H) heralded the High
Renaissance and Proto-Baroque period. The latter phase is denoted by the use of
large and small Orders together, coupled columns and ‘tabernacle’ windows (as p.
757D). Sanmichele and the famous Palladio, working mostly in the inland towns of
the Venetian State, used rustication more legitimately and effectively (p. 744B, J),
and Palladio made great play with the giant Order in his many palaces and villas
(p. 742). The Venetian sixteenth-century churches are mostly longitudinal, but
with the Byzantine-type centralized arrangement toward the eastern end (p. 743D,
H) in a kind of plan now popular everywhere. For church west fronts a giant Order
masking the nave was combined with a threaded lesser Order extending to the aisle
ends, a treatment not wholly successful (pp. 736A, 743C, G). Venetian orna-
ment, whether in doorways, capitals, entablatures, panels or candelabra, is charac-
terized by refinement and freedom of line, the sculptured carvings naturally having
various maritime allusions.
Baroque architecture was adapted to the strict Venetian conditions, and there
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 675

A. The Foundling Hospital (Ospedale degli Innocenti), Florence:

loggia (1421-4). See p. 677

B. The Ducal Palace, Urbino (1444-82): c. Palazzo Piccolomini, Siena (1469-).

cortile. See p. 695 See p. 684
 676 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

PAZZ1 CHAPEL: FLORENCE

.~

S=
SSS
SS}
<

OOE|lt
|=
=¥
I\
sO
LS
Pa
<<
: 2: SNS ‘\
y ys
s 2SNS
" 3) $
———
SSS
== <=
~
Sa
\~~
Lom
a5
Os,
iFer
BANS.
— ca
SS
SSS
ee /
15
=k
zGZ
=e= \Paap
*”
—.
=SS
See
y,

LLC
|*\IS
B=pee By
\=<
4rapt.
a

-~=7>.,40:0"----4
Z5

N. I \.
=ya3
Vas
=

e
TB
LL
=
|
WSF
~ 2e
|
aes:
Se
_\

S ASS Seee WOE

tJ) (UU) Wut RRR
+. COFFERING IN | | =

ORDER AT & DOME ORDER AT b

D)DETAILS

oe oe He = Mee ee ee ee

mig NS ipiaae
Ly ese a .

50
T (K)PLAN FT

ry ; 0 20° 30 40MET!
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 677
were few attempts to model frontages in curved plan advances and recessions. S.
Maria della Salute (p. 739A), the masterpiece of Longhena, was a rare exception
with a free site, and this spectacular church, rising gloriously from her water-steps,
crowned by a great dome upheld by scrolled buttresses, is the finest monument of
the Venetian Renaissance.

EXAMPLES
FLORENCE
EARLY RENAISSANCE
FILIPPO BRUNELLESCHI (1377-1446), one of the most famous sons of Florence,
entered the competition among sculptors in 1401 for the bronze doors of the Bap-
tistery, Florence—this competition marking the introduction of the Renaissance
Lorenzo Ghiberti, however, was successful, and the doors were executed between
1403-24. Brunelleschi set out for Rome after the competition, to study Classic
architecture at the fountain head. Returning to Florence, his career as an architect
began in 1418. Most of his works were completed by others after his death.
The Foundling Hospital, Florence (1421-45) (p. 675A), the first of the kind in
Europe and one of the first buildings undertaken by Brunelleschi, has a famous
arcaded loggia (1421-4) of Corinthian columns supporting broad semicircular
arches, with glazed terra-cotta medallions in the spandrils. In many respects the
arcade maintains old Florentine traditions, as may be seen by comparing the west
front of the Romanesque church of S. Miniato (p. 321A).
The Dome of Florence Cathedral (1420-34) (pp. 615A, 616A, B, C, D, F), which
was entrusted to Brunelleschi as a result of a competition, is a miracle of design
which triumphantly blended a Renaissance dome with a Gothic building and set
the crown on that masterpiece of Mediaeval Florence. The dome covers an octa-
gonal apartment, 138 ft 6 ins in diameter, and is raised on a drum, with circular
windows to light the interior. This unique dome, pointed in form, consists of inner
and outer shells constructed on the Gothic principle, with eight main and sixteen
intermediate ribs supporting panels of brickwork with horizontal joints. It is said
that it was erected without centering, but this may have been used to a limited extent.
An entirely new departure in the history of building is the introduction of a hoop,
made up of lengths of timber, secured with iron at the junctions, binding-in the
base of the dome (p. 616D—plan C) to prevent its splitting outwards, thus obviating
the need for buttresses and making it practicable to raise the dome on a drum. Tie-
bars, a Byzantine invention, had long been used in Italian architecture, and indeed
appear in the Mediaeval nave of the same building (p. 616G), but this is the first
known example of the application of the tensional principle to domes. The other
great historical domes, S. Peter’s, Rome, and S. Paul’s, London, are bound with
iron chains (pp. 722C, 9IIE, 912).
S. Lorenzo, Florence (1421-60) (p. 676) is of the basilican type, with nave and
aisles separated by Corinthian columns supporting entablature blocks, the earliest
instance of such features in the Renaissance. The aisles have simple domes over
each compartment, and the side-chapel openings are enframed with continuous
mouldings, without imposts at the springing of the arches. At the crossing is a dome
with pendentives, carried out by Antonio Manetti, who took over the work after
Brunelleschi’s death. The sanctuary is flanked by the Old Sacristy (1421-8), the
earliest part of Brunelleschi’s building, and the famous New Sacristy (1521-34)
added by Michelangelo as described on p. 713 and illustrated on p. 716A. The west
facade of the church was never built, and remains in rough brick.
678 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

S. Spirito, Florence (1445-82) (p. 679), barely begun in Brunelleschi’s lifetime,

is also of the basilican type, which Italians preferred through the Middle Ages, but
has wide transepts making a Latin cross, and there are domical-vaulted aisles round
nave, transepts and choir. The nave has arcades forming another early instance of
columns supporting pieces of entablature interposed between them and the arches,
while a flat timber ceiling covers the nave, and there is a dome over the crossing.
The charming campanile (p. 679A) (c. 1506) is by Baccio d’Agnolo.
The Pazzi Chapel, Florence (1429-46) (p. 676) is an architectural gem which
inspired many later buildings, such as the church of S. Maria delle Carceri, Prato
(1485-91), by Giuliano da Sangallo, and is itself a developed version of the San
Lorenzo Old Sacristy dispositions. It faces into the cloisters of S. Croce, and has a
centralized plan covered in part by short barrel vaults but chiefly by a rib-vaulted
dome on pendentives, capped by a lantern. The dome ribs support small barrel
vaults diminishing towards the lantern; at their base, the lunettes allow circular
windows in an upstanding drum, which, with its tiled conical roof, conceals the
dome externally. A smaller pendentived dome covers the altar recess, and there is
another of similar size, ornamented with coloured terra-cotta coffering, placed
centrally in the stone barrel vault which spans the six-column portico. The stone-
panelled front recalls the marble encrustations of the great Mediaeval monuments
of the city. Indeed this miniature building may well be described as Byzantine in
conception, Gothic in construction and Classical in decorative detail.
The Palazzo Pitti, Florence (1458-) (p. 680), designed for Luca Pitti, a friend
of Cosimo de’ Medici, is the largest palace in Italy except the Vatican. It was, how-
ever, erected piecemeal, and commenced only after Brunelleschi’s death from his
designs. The original design comprised solely the central portion, and this had
proceeded up to the top of the second tier (1458-65) in the charge of Luca Fancelli
when the palace was left unfinished; until brought to initial completion under
Ammanati, who added the great cortile, and gave the present character to the rear
facade (1558-70). Extensions to the length, which included the small lateral cortili,
were made (1620-40) under G. and A. Parigi, and the outer projecting wings were
added (1764-83) by Ruggeri. Minor alterations and internal remodellings followed
later. The grand facade, with three-storeyed centre 119 ft high, is 660 ft in length.
It is of astylar treatment, bearing in its rugged simplicity a curious resemblance to
the bold Claudian Aqueduct, with its massive blocks of masonry and arches of the
ground storey (p. 749F). The windows within these arches are by Ammanati, and
the lions’ heads below the sills are relatively modern (p. 749F). The cortile (p. 680D),
facing the Boboli Gardens (p. 712A), is unique in its rusticated treatment of Doric,
Ionic, and Corinthian attached columns. The palace became the grand-ducal
residence and is partly occupied by the famous picture gallery.
The Palazzo Quaratesi, Florence (1462-72) (p. 680E), formerly Pazzi, is be-
lieved to have been designed by Brunelleschi but its execution was mainly due to
Giuliano da Majano. The Pazzi arms survive on the angle of the facade, which has
channelled masonry and characteristic windows, each with a central shaft support-
ing sub-arches, perpetuating Mediaeval practice (p. 749D). There is an overhanging
roof in place of the usual cornice. The cortile is especially fine.
MICHELOZZO MICHELOZZI (1396-1472) was a friend of Cosimo de’ Medici,
whom he accompanied in exile to Venice. He also at one time visited Milan, where
he built the Portinari Chapel (1462-6) in S. Eustorgio, domed like Brunelleschi’s
Old Sacristy in S. Lorenzo, Florence.
The Palazzo Riccardi, Florence (1444-60) (p. 681), is Michelozzi’s best known
building. It was built as the Medici home, and here Lorenzo the Magnificent kept
his brilliant court. The palace was sold in 1659 to the Riccardi family, and in 1680
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 679

5. enone hee ee

Coa Se ee |
SS
Gm Ly \
ve
EX lr
Pees =SSSSs imma SSeS

Ue
==
TEE Yap
any,
é ays
SEESESIE
Dee
Sear
litaal
fC

SScoscou
QOOOoOoO000
Oogooo0u

50 ; 0 150 200 FEET

L 10 20 39 40 50 60 METRES (K)LoNGiTUDINAL SECTION
 680 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

PALAZZO PITTI: FLORENCE

aa op
ae (A)Facape TO THE PIAZZA

f
nai BOBOL] GARDENS

P2 QUARATES! ruorence (enn GUADAGNI: FLORENCE PAL. RUCELLAI. rtoreno

 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 681

PALAZZO RICCARDI >FLORENCE

TOOL)
,
hill2Za

\i=

TS oe 11/7/7ee—.
be hk eles
Sena
Wigs taseZN

SADLPRERUABERREUE
\\>. |
= = —

a er ES ||
i
Cisalg ="| ee |ccna ITI
i
i
:
——
Sy 5
eles
er aS TS RS ed ld
a | Me A eae
YS
ee eats
| VILA [beet
gee aN
ee
wae
Coe By
|
c
: : mn — mz i y rR ‘€ J — ali times (| :

= Seer

ialpono

Dale
ZV
ARS 7

ill Lissa
es
uf a VR
m alt ee ARR

GR? FLOOR WINDOW

 682 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

Sian

A. S. Francesco, Rimini (1446-50). B. Palazzo Piccolomini, Pienza (c. 1460).

See opposite page See p. 684

c. Ponte S. Trinita, Florence (1567-70). See p. 687

D. S. Maria in Carignano, Genoa E. Palazzo di Venezia, Rome (1455-64).

(1552-1603). See p. 688 See p. 696
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 683

it was extended to the north, adding seven new windows to the original ten of the
first floor on the main front. The older portion of the-plan (p. 681F) shows a typical
arrangement of the period, the rooms arranged around an open cortile (p. 681C), the
main apartments being those on the ‘piano nobile’, approached by an unpreten-
tious but generous staircase, not symmetrically placed. The more intimate of the
family rooms were on the second floor. The exterior is an admirable astylar example
and shows the effect of graduated rustication. The ground storey has heavily
rusticated masonry, with semicircular arches enclosing windows added from the
designs of Michelangelo (p. 681£); the intermediate storey has channelled masonry,
with bifurcated windows not very different in appearance from the type usual in
Florentine Gothic palaces (p. 681G); and the upper storey, in plain ashlar masonry,
has similar windows. The whole facade is crowned by a bold cornice, about one-
eighth the height of the building and projecting 8 ft 4 ins (p. 681A).
LEON BATTISTA ALBERTI (1404-72) was a student of classical literature, and
his book on architecture, De Re Aedificatoria—the first architectural book pub-
lished with movable type (1485)—helped the revival of the old Roman style. His
academic attitude is reflected in the buildings he designed.
The Palazzo Rucellai, Florence (1446-51) (p. 680G), ornamented externally
with superimposed pilasters, is thus the first ‘stylar’ building of the Renaissance.
The presence of the tiers of pilasters brought the difficulty that the crowning
cornice could not be in scale with the whole height of the building as well as with
the order immediately below it, a problem which did not arise in ‘astylar’ palaces.
The quality of the detail is refined, and set standards for future buildings of the
type. Alberti was the designer, but the work was carried out by Rossellino (see
below), an able architect in his own right.
S. Francesco, Rimini (1446-50) (p. 682A), a Gothic church, was remodelled for
Sigismondo Malatesta, as a monument to himself and his wife, from the designs
of Alberti externally but internally mainly by Agostino di Duccio (1418-81), a
Florentine by birth, in charming and varied but somewhat naive Renaissance
details. The entrance facade, which was never completed, bears some resemblance
to the Arch of Augustus in the same city; on the flank are arcaded recesses contain-
ing sarcophagi of scholars and poets who had figured at the Ducal court.
S. Maria Novella, Florence, a Gothic church (p. 614), has a Renaissance facade
(1456-70) (p. 632A) designed by Alberti, and was one of the first churches in which
flanking scrolls were used to connect aisles and nave into one composition.
S. Sebastiano, Mantua (1459) has suffered various misfortunes in the course of
time and is ill preserved. It was the first church of the Renaissance to be designed on
the Greek-cross plan, though chapels like Brunelleschi’s Pazzi at Florence had
already shown a development towards the Byzantine idea of ‘centralized space’.
S. Andrea, Mantua (1472-94) (p. 679F-K), designed by Alberti, was begun only
in the year of his death. The grand entrance portico, looking rather like a Roman
triumphal arch (p. 679F), leads into an imposing and finely-proportioned barrel-
vaulted aisleless nave, flanked by side-chapels between chambered piers which are
faced by pairs of Corinthian columns on pedestals. This arrangement of the chapels
columned
allows a stronger and more unified building than is possible with the
the
basilican plan. Eastwards, the crossing, transepts and apsidal sanctuary reflect
of the nave, and yet give the spaciousness of Byzantine
wide and narrow alternations
of plan which
‘centralized space’, the whole church establishing a Latin-cross type
churches. The eastern portions, including the
was to be followed in very many later
and crossing, were built in 1 597-1600 and later, and the dome added by
transepts
Juvarra (p. 695) in 1732-825 but the general conception is due to Alberti.
BERNARDO ROSSELLINO (1409-64), Florentine architect and sculptor, was the
684 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

creator of the Bruni tomb (1445) in S. Croce, Florence, which established a type
for this class of mural monument (p. 754L) .He was even more distinguished as an
architect. From 1450 he, with Alberti, was employed for the reconstruction of the
old S. Peter’s at Rome. His work on the Palazzo Rucellai has been described above.
The Palazzo Piccolomini, Pienza (c. 1460) (p. 682B) closely follows the design
of the Rucellai, having three tiers of regularly-spaced pilasters enframing round-
headed windows on its channel-rusticated walls, crowned with a bold cornice. The
palace faces the principal square of this tiny hill-town, twenty-four miles south-
east of Siena, renamed Pienza after Pope Pius II, who was born here in 1405. Also
facing the square are the Cathedral, again by Rossellino, the Palazzo Pubblico and
the Episcopio (episcopal palace), attributed to him, all of about the same date.
The Palazzo Piccolomini, Siena (1469-) (p. 675C) shows a reversion to astylar
design and to round-headed, bifurcated windows similar to those of the Riccardi at
Florence, but the heights of the three storeys are less well graded and there is no
differentiation of the rusticated stonework, which is channel-jointed throughout.
Nevertheless, the palace has a fine, massive quality, the ground storey being especi-
ally forceful, and the cornice is quite novel in having a plain frieze below it, this
affording an effective liaison with the facade and permitting a less ponderous cornice
than would otherwise be necessary: small windows are inserted there.
IL CRONACA (1454-1508), properly Simone Pollaiuolo, had studied ancient
architecture in Rome. Architect of the delightful Sacristy of S. Spirito (1489-92),
conjointly with Giuliano da San Gallo, he is better known for the works below.
The Palazzo Strozzi, Florence (1489-1539) (p. 685), begun by Benedetto da
Majano, was continued by Cronaca. It is the representative Florentine palace of the
period. The chief features are a large central cortile with arcades on the three
storeys, off which are the stairs and surrounding rooms. The astylar tripartite fagade
(p. 685B, D) is rusticated uniformly in bolster-like units which give the building a
somewhat hard and mechanical appearance, and is capped by a grand cornice, pro-
jecting over 7 ft and occupying about one-thirteenth of the height of the building,
with a plain astragal frieze like that of Rossellino’s Palazzo Piccolomini at Siena,
though here not containing windows (p. 685F). The main windows (p. 685H), angle-
lanterns and link-holders (p. 685A, C) are attractive features of this famous building.
The Palazzo Guadagni, Florence (1490-1506) (p. 680F) has the two main
storeys faced with ‘sgraffito’ of black plaster overlaid with white, cut away to show
patterns, and an open loggia crowned with a widely-overhanging roof serving as a
fourth storey.
ANTONIO FILARETE (1396-1465), a famous Florentine sculptor, was also an
architect of note and is best known for his work in Milan, where he was among the
first to introduce the Renaissance style, preceding Michelozzi there (p. 678).
The Ospedale Maggiore, Milan (1457-c. 1624) (p. 698F, G, H), the earliest
municipal hospital (p. 608), has facades towards the grand cortili with delicate
transitional detail, suitable to the plastic terra-cotta. These are the work of Filarete;
but the style reverted to Late Gothic in 1465 under his successor, Solari, and the
building was completed about 1624 by Ricchini. It was very badly damaged by
bombing in 1943.
GIOVANNI AMADEO (1447-1522), Lombard sculptor and architect, was a
notable figure in the early Lombard Renaissance, and took part with other famous
masters in the work proceeding in his day at the cathedrals of Milan and Pavia and
at the Certosa di Pavia.
The Certosa di Pavia (p. 617D, E, F) was begun in 1396 with the monastic
portions, and the body of the church probably was not seriously undertaken before
¢. 1453 (p. 604). The church is transitional from the Gothic in its main features, and
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 685

PALAZZO STROZZI: FLORENCE

W
eters

|ce
oe
SO
AOU
ag
ea
Re
Se

scalaneied

\ ANGLE
ANTERNE==3

(F CROWNING CORNICE : Teale hs F

“ll Eg
(Gp ay FIRST FLOOR WINDOW
686 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

A. The Certosa, Pavia, from N.W.

(c. 1453-97; facade 1473-c. 1540). See pp. 604, 684

B. Palazzo Sauli, Genoa (c. 1555). See p. 688

 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 687

except at the east end, the external expression is almost everywhere round-arched
and bears little likeness to the western, pointed style. It is a brick and terra-cotta
architecture, characteristically small in scale, and marble is used sparingly at im-
portant decorative points, while the crossing has the galleried cupola traditional in
the Lombard region; the ‘lanterns’ at Chiaravalle (p. 629p) and Milan Cathedral
(p. 598Cc) are versions rising to a spire. The church was finished by c. 1497 except
for the west facade (p. 686a), constructed wholly in marble between 1473-1540. In
this Amadeo contributed both as a sculptor and in the design, having been given
charge of the work in 1491, at which time certain of the prepared marbles were
ready for assembly in position. Several other sculptors took part. The upper half is
simpler, owing to a halt in the progress of the work. The framework of the facade,
with its canopied and pinnacled buttresses, still is partly Gothic, but filled in with
Renaissance features, such as profusely ornamented windows, arcaded galleries and
statues in niches, which, together with carved ornament and medallions, make it one
of the most elaborate combinations of architecture and sculpture in Western history.
The Colleoni Chapel, Bergamo (1470-6) (p. 689A) is less sculptural externally
than the Certosa di Pavia facade, but is extremely richly encrusted with white- and
rose-coloured marbles, displayed in surface patterns, and profuse ornament. Lom-
bard canopied pinnacles appear again, along with arcaded open galleries, medallions
and many versions of the candelabrum motif. Indeed it is in this building that we find
what are probably the earliest instances of the use of the true baluster, here occur-
ring as alternating supports in the continuous arcade below the main cornice. The
type came quickly into general use; in Rome, the first example is probably that of
the Singing Gallery of the famous Sistine Chapel (c. 1480) (p. 754G). Hitherto,
parapets had been made up of miniature columns (p. 750F, pulpit from design by
Brunelleschi) or with low-relief or pierced panels (p. 758E, H) based on Byzantine
precedents. The baluster thus is a Renaissance invention, derived from the can-
delabra ornament, and the subsequent development of baluster forms affords clues
to the dating of monuments.

HIGH RENAISSANCE AND PROTO-BAROQUE

BARTOLOMEO AMMANATI (1511-92), sculptor and architect, worked in Lucca

Montepulciano, Rome and his native Florence. He had considerable ability, and
was responsible for a large number of buildings, one of the most important being
the Collegio Romano, Rome (1582-4). In Florence or Tuscany in general, there was
virtually no High Renaissance interlude following the vigorous early developments,
and Ammanati’s work shows most strongly that individualism or ‘Mannerism’ which
is a first-found freedom from Classical restraints that presages the Baroque. He was
thus a follower of Michelangelo, who, with Raphael, first evidenced in his archi-
tecture the new trend. Notable in much of Ammanati’s work is the exploitation of
rustication, and it is likely that the fagades to his extensions of the Palazzo Pitti,
referred to earlier (p. 678), influenced the design of the Luxembourg Palace, Paris,
built for Marie de’ Medici by de Brosse (p. 780).
The Palazzo Micheletti, Lucca (c. 1550) (p. 689C) is representative of Amma-
nati’s earlier style, orthodox in most respects but showing Mannerist devices in the
lower portion of the facade, especially in the use of rustication; the vertically-tooled
cushion-like units are characteristic of his personal style.
The Ponte S. Trinita, Florence (1567-70) (p. 682C), by Ammanati, is of brilliant
design, profoundly Renaissance in spirit but quite un-Roman in its flat-elliptical
arches, panelled spandrels and gay keystones and cartouches. ‘The bridge was blown
up in 1944 and rebuilt to the original design in 1957-8.
GALEAZZO ALESSI (1512-72), born in Perugia and trained in Rome, came under
688 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

the influence of Michelangelo. Nearly all his buildings are in Genoa, where he
settled about 1549. Up to that time the Renaissance had had little important effect
there. The work of Alessi and the small band of architects that gathered about him
is still more strongly inclined towards Mannerist freedom of expression than that
of Ammanati, for the local traditions, like those of Lombardy, favoured elaborate
ornamentation; and also, as in Rome at this time, hard stucco had been rediscovered
as a plastic medium admirable for the architectural adornment of brick-carcassed
buildings. In essentials, the ancient Classical principles are reasonably observed,
but the lesser features commonly are brilliantly ornate, and superficial decoration
sometimes is modelled in extremely high relief, externally as well as indoors. Panel-
ling, strip-rustication, masks, cartouches and scrolled foliations repeatedly occur,
and great decorative emphasis often is placed on focal features, such as entrance
doorways. Alessi was an architect of great originality and distinction and had a pro-
digious output of palaces and villas; such as the Palazzo Sauli (c. 1555) (p. 686B),
of which little remains. Mostly of brick faced with stucco, they are famous for their
entrance vestibules, courtyards, and flights of steps, and the sloping sites were
utilized to form beautiful vistas of terraces and hanging gardens. The facades
frequently have rusticated basements surmounted by pilasters and a bold crowning
cornice over attic windows between supporting consoles.
S. Maria in Carignano, Genoa (1552, completed 1603) (p. 682D) resembles
Bramante’s church of SS. Celso and Guiliano, Rome (destroyed) and his more
elaborate scheme for S. Peter’s, maintained in essentials by Peruzzi (p. 722F), in
being of Greek-cross type filled out with angle bays so as to form a square plan,
with no significant projection except at the sanctuary apse. The arms of this large
church are barrel-vaulted and the crossing domed. Tall, staged campanili rise on
the wings of the entrance front, and the central doorway, with its columned
enframement following a recessed curve and the rich ornamentation above, is
clearly Proto-Baroque.
The Palazzo Marino, Milan (1558-60) (p. 724D) is a sumptuous example of
Alessi’s style, in which the influence of plastic stucco ornamentation is plainly
demonstrated. The lavish enrichments include garlands, cartouches, masks, en-
framed sculptured panels, niches with statues, scroll-ended ‘broken’ pediments and
downward-tapering pilasters, either with double Ionic capitals or these replaced
with human-headed grotesque figures. Especially noteworthy are the graceful
arcades, one of the first instances of the arrangement, with wide-spaced paired
columns carrying the arches, in place of the single columns usual in early Florentine
arcades.
Rocco LuRAGO (d. 1590), a Lombard working in Genoa, was one of the more
important and talented of the contemporaries of Alessi. In his palace designs he
showed great appreciation of the potentialities of falling sites.
The Palazzo Municipale, Genoa (1564) (p. 690) has a magnificent plan (p. 690C)
on axial lines, with central entrance leading to a large vestibule and cortile, beyond
which stairs lead to the ‘piano nobile’ and terraced gardens. The cortile (p. 690Cc, D)
established a type followed by many others in this city of opulent palaces. The
facade (p. 690A), a dignified composition about 200 ft long by 80 ft high, has Tuscan
and Doric pilasters, each framing two storeys of windows, the lower Order being
flanked by arcaded loggias giving breadth to the design.

BAROQUE
BARTOLOMMEO BIANCO (c. 1589-1657) made important contributions to the
magnificent series of Genoese palaces. He followed Alessi’s lead at some distance
of time, and he is accounted Genoa’s best Baroque architect. His palace work is
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 689

A. The Colleoni Chapel, Bergamo B. S. Maria dei Miracoli, Brescia

(1470-6). See p. 687 (1488-, 1522-). See p. 732

c. Palazzo Micheletti. Lucca, Palazzo Durazzo-Pallavicini, Genoa

(c. 1550-). See p. 687 (1619-). See p. 691
 690 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

PALAZZO MUNICIPIO : GENOA

PO De

—— CE Se SWS
SS ee i IK SA
———= = c 7 rT iT | S SI

ma) ) (l(t ima) |(me ETL ee

gah

i i i)

ll = i I A

+ = mm | Cet i
‘i SA ; & iz fh 4 cup CA |BSI Baty) Vy
or: 2 i: oe = oe eae
Qu i Wa wd wl sti J
Comoe Soe oS No ac
aa SN a a =
$ - cS}

ENTRANCE. FACADE
FR

LONGITUDINAL
SECTION

20 10,0 20, , 40, 60, 80, 100, 40, 40 160 FEET

os 9 10 20 30 40 50 METRES
S PLAN AP EVEL va-a CORTILE & GRAND STAIRCASE
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 691

much more pure and gracious than that of his predecessors, and freed of excessive
sculptural ornamentation.
The Palazzo Durazzo-Pallavicini, Genoa (1619-) (p. 689D) follows the scheme
used by Lurago for the Palazzo Municipio, the front being arranged in two double-
tiered stages rising to a massive cornice over the centre block, with flanking shallow
wings finishing in open loggias, though this time the loggias are on the level of the
upper stage rather than on the lower. Comparatively, the treatment is grand and
austere, though it is possible that the front was intended to be painted or frescoed
in accordance with old local traditions.
The Palazzo dell’ Universita, Genoa (1634-6) (p. 692B, D), built as a
Jesuit college and created a university in 1812, is Bianco’s finest building. It im-
proves upon the plan principle inaugurated by Lurago in the Palazzo Municipio;
the cortile again is utilized in the stately stair approach to the ‘piano nobile’, but
now the stairway beyond the cortile is duplicated to lead also to terraces above the
arcades, while the lower tier of the latter is continued towards the street to form an
airy enframement to the lofty vestibule (p. 6928). The light and gracious arcades
stand upon columns more closely paired than in Alessi’s Sauli and Marino palaces,
surpassing in their airy simplicity those of the court of the Palazzo Borghese, Rome
(1590-) (p. 724F), which otherwise they closely resemble.
The Porta Pila, Genoa (1633) (p. 693C), attributed to Bianco, a gateway now
re-erected away from its original position, has the full power and vigour of the true
Baroque, though its qualities are the less easy to appreciate in the lack of the con-
trasting plain walls within which it formerly stood. The massive entablature and
heavily rusticated columns have precedents in gateways built for the defensive
walls of Verona by Sanmichele more than a hundred years earlier; their impressive
scale is emphasized by the relative delicacy of the shrine which stands aloft.
GIOVANNI BATTISTA ALEOTTI (1546-1636) is best known for his Teatro
Farnese, Parma (1618-28) (p. 693D, F)—largely destroyed in the Second World
War—showing an advance on the theatre at Vicenza (p. 693B) by Palladio and
Scamozzi in having an elaborately-enframed proscenium spaced apart from a deep
U-shaped auditorium by archways on each side. The superposed arcades surround-
ing the auditorium resemble those around Palladio’s Basilica at Vicenza (p. 741).
Both this theatre and that at Vicenza are fitted within rooms independently
roofed.
FRANCESCO RICCHINI (1583-1658), studied in Rome and returned in 1603 to
Milan, where such of his important Baroque work as has survived is to be found.
S. Giuseppe, Milan (1607-30) (p. 697A), the earliest Baroque building in the
city, has a simple octagonal plan, 50 ft across, covered by a pendentived dome. The
facade is skilfully integrated with the staged octagonal cupola, and the whole makes
a strongly unified composition comparable with Carlo Maderna’s S. Susanna, the
earliest Baroque church in Rome (p. 6978).
GUARINO GUARINI (1624-83), an extraordinary genius whose remarkable
buildings show some influence of Borromini (p. 726), was born in Modena and
became a Theatine monk. He was at various times in Messina, Paris and elsewhere,
and a church from his designs was erected in Lisbon (Portugal); from 1666 he
worked mainly in Turin. The vaulting of his centralized churches there, such as
S. Lorenzo (1668-) and the S. Sindone Chapel of the Cathedral (1667-90) (p.
693E) is an astonishing and unique complication of interlaced or imbricated ribs,
usually carrying vertical windows instead of solid webs, the whole fabric rising
externally in a series of stages perpetuating the cupola form of covering to the
crossing which so long had been a tradition in Lombardy and Piedmont. Schemati-
cally, his church planning is based upon overlapping circles or ovals, usually of
 692 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

A. Tempietto in S. Pietro in B. Palazzo dell’ Universita, Genoa (1634-6):

Montorio, Rome: detail (1502-10). vestibule. See p. 691
See p. 701

c. Hemicycle, Giardino della D. Palazzo dell’ Universita, Genoa: cortile (1634-6).

Pigna, Vatican, Rome See p. 691
(c. 1503-13). See p. 701

E. SS. Annunziata, Genoa (church, F. Casa Pollini, Siena, (c. 1527). See p. 702
1587; portico, c. 1800). See p. 695
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 693

A. Villa d’Este, Tivoli B. Teatro Olimpico, Vicenza: interior (1580-4).

(16th cent.). Water organ. Scenery at back of stage. See p. 738
See p. 713

. The Porta Pila, Genoa D. Teatro Farnese, Parma: auditorium (1618-28).

(1633). See p. 691 See p. 691

S. Sindone Chapel, Turin: F. Teatro Farnese, Parma: proscenium (1618-28).

dome (1667-90). See p. 691 See p. 691
694 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

B. Palazzo Carignano, Turin (1679). See opposite page

 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 695

minor curvilinear shapes intruding into larger ones, and from these there proceeds
in the internal structure a spatial illusion of interrelated volumes; while externally,
walls follow sinuous or undulating lines, ornamented superficially with thin and
scratchy architectural detail or locally by clustered pilasters and detached columns.
His buildings, in particular the longitudinal churches, had a considerable influence
on Late Baroque architecture in Southern Germany (p. 808).
The Palazzo Carignano, Turin (1679) (p. 694B), is the best known of Guarini’s
domestic buildings. The undulating central part, masking paired grand staircases
alongside a spacious oval hall, relieves this majestic mass from any danger of mono-
tony that might arise from the regular fenestration, much more effectively than
could be contrived by any other means. The facades are almost wholly in brick and
terra-cotta.
FILIPPO JUVARRA (1678-1736) is another outstanding personality in Pied-
montese Baroque architecture, which flourished in the hundred years from about
1660, when initiative in Rome had begun to decline. A brilliant and prolific de-
signer, Juvarra achieved great fame. Born in Messina, he studied in Rome under
Carlo Fontana (p. 726), and thereafter was in demand in several countries abroad,
working chiefly in and around Turin after 1714. There, he built many major struc-
tures; royal palaces, town residences and churches.
The Superga, Turin (1717-31) (p. 694A), a church and convent, is Juvarra’s
masterpiece. It stands on a hill overlooking the city; the domed church, with its
columned portico and flanking campanile, precedes the monastic establishment of
which the modest, window-studded facades lend emphasis to the majestic climax
in the frontispiece. This building is as simple, forceful and straightforward as the
work of Guarini is complex, and is one of the greatest monuments of the whole
Renaissance.
SS. Annunziata, Genoa (p. 692E) has a fine portico (c. 1800) by Carlo Barabini
(1768-1835), added to Giacomo della Porta’s incomplete brick-faced facade (1587),
which brings into contrast the strict Classical proprieties of the Antiquarian Phase
and the free individualism of the Proto-Baroque.

ROME
EARLY RENAISSANCE

LucIANO LAURANA (c. 1420/5-1480). Before the Renaissance reached Rome

importantly, it had spread to the more northerly of the Papal States, and some
charming, delicate work had been done at the Ducal Palaces of Urbino and Gubbio.
With the first of these at least, the name of Laurana is associated. He came from
Dalmatia, was perhaps trained in Venice, and worked mainly at Urbino, where
Bramante was one of his pupils, for both Bramante and Raphael were born in that
neighbourhood.
The Ducal Palace, Urbino (c. 1444-82), built for Federigo Montefeltro, is
transitional in certain respects, but after Laurana took charge c. 1465 it took on
Early Renaissance character. It is celebrated for the beauty and charm of its apart-
ments, with their doorways, simple plaster vaults, marble-hooded chimneypieces
and gracious windows. The cortile (p. 675B) shows Classic principles to have been
well imbibed; the arcades stand on single columns like so many at Florence, though
the arrangements for turning the angles on clustered piers are individual. The
pilastered upper tier contains wooden, two-light transomed windows, with simple
architrave surrounds and cap-moulds. The Ducal Palace, Gubbio (1474-80),
also built for Federigo Montefeltro, is so similar in all respects that it safely may be
ascribed to the same architect.
696 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

MEO DEL CAPRINO (1430-1501) was one of several Florentines who first
brought the Renaissance to Rome, working there between 1462-89.
The Palazzo di Venezia, Rome (c. 1455-64) (p. 682E), built with stones from
the Colosseum, was not designed by Caprino—it has been conjectured that Alberti
was the designer—but he took part in the supervision of its erection, along with
Francesco di Borgo di San Sepolcro. It is a transitional building, as the machicola-
tions show, the Renaissance elements appearing mainly in the windows, those with
transomes being distinctively Roman, and in the fine entrance doorway. There are
several other Early Renaissance palaces or houses in Rome, and a few churches.
DONATO BRAMANTE (1444-1514) was Rome’s first outstanding architect of
the Renaissance, but he did not work there until 1499, and by then he had under-
taken a number of important commissions in the Milan area. He was born near
Urbino, and began as a painter. From 1467-72 he worked under Laurana at
Urbino, settling in Milan c. 1477, practising still as a painter for a while. He was
destined to have great influence on the development of Renaissance architecture,
not in Italy only but also in Europe. It was he who made the first designs for the
new S. Peter’s at Rome, and inaugurated the rebuilding of the Vatican.
S. Satiro, Milan (1482-94) (p. 697C, D) was built alongside the old ninth-century
small church—with campanile—of that name, which is now approached from the
north transept of Bramante’s church. The latter has aisled barrel-vaulted and
coffered transepts and nave, but owing to the proximity of the street there was no
room for a sanctuary arm, so Bramante rendered this in extremely shallow, modelled
perspective, an art which was very much engrossing painters and architects at that
time. The lunettes at the ends of the transept arms have each five ‘wheel’ windows
forming a half circle around another semicircular shape, placed centrally; this was a
favourite device with Bramante. The arcades are of the so-called ‘Roman Order’,
here expressed as arches between pilasters. Above the crossing is a coffered dome
carried on a deep entablature above pendentives, the exterior being concealed by a
drum with conical tiled roof and a lantern, like Brunelleschi’s Pazzi Chapel at
Florence. Off the nave is a splendid octagonal sacristy (1488) (p. 697D), one of the
most original of Bramante’s designs.
S. Maria delle Grazie, Milan, is a fifteenth-century abbey-church to which in
1492-7 Bramante added the choir, transepts and crossing (p. 698). The crossing
gives a Byzantine spaciousness, for it is a square the full width of the old church,
covered by a dome, 65 ft across, concealed externally by a sixteen-sided galleried
cupola, with sloping roof and lantern, all in the tradition of this northern region.
Light is cleverly admitted through circular windows in the dome and from a range
of windows in the shallow drum on which it stands, while the lunettes of the crossing
have circular decorative panels in lieu of the wheel windows used in S. Satiro in this
position. The choir arm is covered by a ‘cloister’ vault (square dome) penetrated by
minor vaults which allow light from circular windows at the east end, over an apsidal
termination. Two other apses serve in lieu of transepts. The exterior all is in brick
and terra-cotta, except the column shafts in the cupola, which are of marble. The
panelled pilasters, candelabra, medallion and wheel ornaments are normal to
Lombard practice of the day. Other works by Bramante in this area are the Canonry
of S. Ambrogio, Milan (1492), recently restored after war damage; the west facade
to the abbey-church at Abbiategrasso (1497); and additions to the Castle of
Vigevano (c. 1494).

HIGH RENAISSANCE AND PROTO-BAROQUE

The Palazzo della Cancelleria, Rome (1486-98) (p. 699) has for long been con-
sidered a work of Bramante, and indeed in certain respects it recalls his Milanese
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 697

a. S. Giuseppe, Milan: fagade (1607-30). B. S. Susanna, Rome: facade (1597-1603).

See p. 691 See p. 725

Old Church (restored externally in 1478) and p. Sacristy: interior (1488)

old campanile in foregroun d
S. Satiro, Milan (1482-94). See opposite page
 698 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

S MARIA DELLE GRAZIE :MILAN

es: ie
+i e7, :
cas :
1 mi
iilil Pe
bi |} ih |
I) \ AM
VW Wie Wn 8 on F|
|‘| Ug Ld | til Bil a ae |

r ao
ioy

@ TERIOR Fron VIA DELL’ OSPEDALE sade CORTILE

 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 699

PAL. pELLA CANCELILERIA : ROME

i — I
V7 jae
(BYTHE CORTILE FROM UPPER STOREY
o Wh Yr MS

CAPITAL: UPPER
ORDER OF CORTILE
 700 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

TEMPIETTO mw CLOISTER : S.PIETRO IN;

f: IRKOMIE FTP
Bad |
|
|
_—— r
STEN
|
y

ee ie

a 207,
ay Ee) 50 5 10 15 20 25Ft mn mn
Talay 4 METS Ue
Ty ry | f | Ry A ; itis at

Uz
ee — it es Saal,

~~ MW SIMN
ey
IeOg aA
%) AW)
NNR a7 \AR
way =

; F TRANSVERSE
SECTION
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 701

style, but it was substantially complete before his arrival in Rome and the architect
is unknown. Still slightly immature, it is the first really important Renaissance
building in Rome, and was a rebuilt residence for Cardinal Riario, incorporating
S. Lorenzo in Damaso, an ancient basilica which previously had been on another
site (p. 699D). The facades are of travertine stone robbed from the Colosseum; they
rise in three main tiers, the lowest in channelled masonry and the two upper each
ornamented with plain Corinthian pilasters arranged in alternating spacings instead
of the regular spacings of earlier stylar palaces. The intermediate full entablature is
subdued, while that at the top has vertical modillions across the frieze, giving it all
the vigour of the crowning cornice of the Colosseum. The shallow pilasters stand
upon simulated pedestals, the corresponding ‘blind’ parapets serving as aprons to
the main windows, which latter have arched openings on the first floor, fitted within
square, corniced heads (p. 699£). The main doorway is an addition by Domenico
Fontana (1585). The wings of the principal facades are advanced slightly, and round
the corner to the left of the entrance front (p. 699A) is a first floor balcony with
extremely delicate decoration (p. 753C). The imposing cortile, 103 ft 6 ins by 63 ft
6 ins, is surrounded by two stories of arcades (p. 699B) of Doric columns (p. 699C)
carrying a third, solid, storey ornamented with pilasters spanning two tiers of small
windows in height and carrying a bold cornice similar to that used on the fronts.
S. Maria della Pace, Rome has a beautiful cloister (1500-4) (p. 753E) surrounded
by a two-storeyed arcade designed by Bramante, in which, as in examples by him
in the Milan area, the upper storey has twice as many openings as the lower. The
church itself was reconstructed by Pietro da Cortona in 1656-7, to whom is due the
skilfully designed plan and semicircular portico (p. 729).
The Tempietto at S. Pietro in Montorio, Rome (1502-10) (pp. 692A, 700),
erected to mark the spot where S. Peter was martyred, is a perfect architectural gem
by Bramante, in full High Renaissance style, resembling in design a small Roman
circular temple. It is only 15 ft in diameter internally and is surrounded by a Doric
peristyle, behind which rises the drum, pierced with windows alternating with
shell-headed niches and carrying a dome. The crypt was superficially redesigned
internally in 1628.
Cortili of S. Damaso and Belvedere, Vatican (pp. 720A, 721A, B). The home
of the Popes contains the Court of S. Damaso, of which the lower arcades are by
Bramante (p. 721A), and the much larger Belvedere Court which also he undertook
for Julius II (1503-13). The latter court (pp. 720A, 721), extremely long and narrow,
was later subdivided into two by other buildings on the line of a series of terraces,
which had formed part of Bramante’s scheme, and the one half, called the Giardino
della Pigna (Garden of the Pine Cone), contains at its northern end a great, three-
storeyed, half-domed hemicycle, with a terrace and pavilions over (p. 692C). The
buildings flanking this feature are two-storeyed and ornamented with pilasters in
alternating spacings; on the lower storey the wider spacings contain arches, and
thus give an effect of a series of ‘triumphal arch’ motifs.
BALDASSARE PERUZZI (1481-1536) designed many buildings in Rome and his
work shows great versatility and skill as well as a refinement often approaching the
Greek. Born in Siena, he settled in Rome in 1503, studying ancient architecture and
travelling extensively in Italy. A design by him in 1523 for the west front of S.
Petronio, Bologna (p. 607), was not carried out.
The Villa Farnesina, Rome (1509-11) (p. 710H), built for Agostino Chigi, a
Sienese banker, has two stories of superimposed Orders and a central arcaded
loggia between projecting wings on the rear side, and is famous for frescoes by
Peruzzi, Raphael and others. The topmost storey has a deep ornamental frieze, in
which windows are inserted, an idea originated by Rossellino in his astylar Palazzo
702 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

Piccolomini at Siena (p. 684) and afterwards adopted by Sansovino in the Library
of S. Mark, Venice (p. 740A).
The Palazzo Pietro Massimi, Rome (1532-6) (p. 703), refined both in design
and detail, is especially interesting for the clever treatment of a convex fagade to
follow the line of the street. The plan (p. 703H) shows remarkable skill in arranging
two separate palaces on an irregular site. The entrance to the right-hand palace is a
recessed vestibule (p. 703C) which leads into a cortile (p. 703G) with portico (p. 703J)
and steps to-an upper loggia (p. 703F), whence the grand salon (p. 703E) is reached.
The facade (p. 7038) relies for effect on the Doric Order of columns and pilasters
stretching from end to end of the ground storey, contrasted with the severe astylar
treatment of the upper storeys, with architrave-enframed windows, unadorned
balconies and a vigorous crowning cornice. In several particulars the Massimi
shows ‘Mannerist’ departures from strict Classical precedent, as do several other of
the buildings of Peruzzi’s later life. The chaste Casa Pollini, Siena (c. 1527) (p.
692F), and the Palazzo Albergati, Bologna (1519-40), the latter only partially
completed in his lifetime, are other well-known buildings attributed to him.
S. Maria della Consolazione, Todi (1508-1604) (p. 704), designed by Cola da
Caprarola, with Peruzzi as adviser, was a long time in building. It is another of the
churches based on the popular Greek-cross plan, here with apses forming the four
arms (p. 704A) of a square crossing 50 ft in diameter. The exterior (p. 704B) has
superimposed pilasters, surmounted by a low attic, above which semi-domes abut
the dome on its high, windowed drum, the whole rising to a height of 180 ft. The
interior (p. 704c) has a similar pilaster treatment, and the line of these is carried up
in dome ribs. Giant pilasters mark the angles of the crossing, and carry arches
between which span the dome pendentives.
The Madonna di S. Biagio, Monthepulciano (1518-29) (p. 706A), built by
Antonio da Sangallo the Elder (1455-1534), is another splendid Greek-cross church
of confident High Renaissance design, here with four rectangular arms, that at the
east end being extended to form an apse. Twin, free-standing campanili towers
were intended to flank the west front, but only one was fully completed. The arms
are barrel-vaulted, and the dome over the crossing is sustained on a high, windowed
drum over pendentives. The one completed campanile has superimposed Doric,
Ionic and Corinthian Orders paired at the angles of the square-planned tower, the
inner shafts being in the round, and above them is a squat, staged octagonal spire.
Also at Montepulciano is the Palazzo Contucci, begun by Sangallo and finished
by Peruzzi about 1535 in thorough-paced Mannerist style.
ANTONIO DA SANGALLO the Younger (1485-1546) worked in Rome most of
his life, and for a time after 1506 was an assistant of Bramante.
The Palazzo Farnese, Rome (1530-) (p. 705), the grandest palace of this period,
was designed by Sangallo. The plan (p. 705G) is rectangular and symmetrically
arranged on axial lines with main entrance, vestibule (p. 705H) and side colonnades.
The cortile, 81 ft square, is surrounded by arcades off which are the apartments and
a fine staircase, not itself symmetrically aligned, leading to the ‘piano nobile’. The
ground floor loggia in the centre of the rear facade opens on to the garden. The
facade to the piazza (p. 705B) is an imposing astylar composition without any break,
185 ft long by 96 ft 6 ins high, of three storeys of nearly equal height, of brick
covered with stucco and stone dressings of travertine from the Colosseum. The
ground storey has a fine central entrance (p. 705c), flanked by windows; the first
floor has pedimented windows (p. 753A), alternately triangular and segmental,
carried by a full Order, a regular and characteristic practice at this period. The top
storey, added by Michelangelo (1546-), has windows definitely of Proto-Baroque
design (p. 753B), with columns on brackets, surmounted by triangular pediments,
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

PA TLAZZO PIETRO MASSIM

(= a Spe —=)

\\ t |
|
|
|
4 |
|
if!
1S
pe
|
|
|
|
|

s |
ia i : |
het a =

ENTRANCE EXTERIOR FROM CORSO V. EMANUELE

CORRIDOR

&
THIHHHHHE
D ENTRANCE
DOORWAY

VSS
i ;
aul:
li(el
pee

Wise
L
4, at —— S

Vi he
A
|| + : \

G\cor tLe sie 25 0 75 __—‘IQOFEET PORTICO TO CORTILE

| 10 20 30 METRES
 704 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

S MARIA,D
N
ELLA CONSOLAZIONE; TODi
me

| i i = ts a
= a 4. ; 1 Hilts He
oe myo ha i Hild oH
oa ar, 4 yA i
= Tt fe it

E Hi ‘ = =
= rr fae ) | Re » -- =
5 11) ff i
V = 4} ith | Phi , | =
e al a a es
ee SS fia

EXTERIOR ~ (C)INTERIOR LOOK!

= fi (a ioe

IL GESU > ROME

MW.
eea ne

60:0"-—-—--—--+
ABOUT
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 795,

PALAZZO FARNESE :ROME

SECTION a eer
a frDanaea
hthPe
=

Zatatitit
—

Sapo
2-4

’
Sis! |
=| | = | | aN i

al fess iam
WA i | a i as | Sait
HI | CxS {I Hcsil

2S SS SII
A= “Tt _@ 7 ‘h = “eet
SROWNING CORNICE ADE [CIPzZ oy
Ag. ~(CENTRANCE.
uit

BESS
==

is
=
SNE
ote
SI
Her
Se
22
=
ae
OA
) BAY ? FACAD

poe a:
ei:

‘Goro.
5 1 Mn 4q

may
OUND PLAN (J FIRST FLOOR PLAN
aaa aime , 50 ,_!Q0FEET 20 2) 30 4oMETRES

Z H.O.A.

| _
 706 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

A. Madonna di S. Biagio, Monte- B. Giulio Romano’s house, Mantua (c. 1544).

pulciano (1518-29). See p. 702 See p. 708

c. Garden Pavilion, Caprarola D. Palazzo Odescalchi, Rome (1664-).

(c. 1549). See p. 713 See p. 726

E, Villa Medici, Rome (1574-80). F. Palazzo del Laterano, Rome:

See p. 713 cortile (1586). See p. 725
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 707
the window arch encroaching on the entablature. The great crowning cornice (p.
705A) is allied to the wall by an ornamental frieze, which allows it to be lighter than
that of the Strozzi at Florence (p. 685F)—here about one-eighteenth of the height
of the facade, or one-eleventh if the frieze is included. The facade was taken by Sir
Charles Barry as the model for the Reform Club, London (p. 1019). In the cortile the
storeys are marked by superimposed attached Orders, arcaded in the two lower tiers,
while in the upper the overlying pilasters and the window enframements again
evidence Michelangelo’s Proto-Baroque style.
RAPHAEL SANTI (1483-1520) of Urbino, one of the world’s greatest painters
and an architect of distinction, was active in Urbino, Perugia and Florence before
being invited by Julius II to Rome in 1508, where his reputation as a painter had
preceded him. Pope Leo X in turn employed him extensively, and it was he who
called Raphael to advise as to the design of S. Peter’s (p. 717) though Raphael does
not appear to have taken any actual part in carrying it out. The exploration of such
half-buried ruins as the Baths of Titus, Nero’s Golden House and the other
mouldering ancient buildings gave artists the opportunity of studying Roman mural
decorations and frescoes, in which flowers and foliage, men and monsters, birds,
vessels and trophies were all blended together in delicate colour schemes, and on
these Raphael based his decoration of the world-famous Vatican Loggie. As Cellini
tells in his fascinating Memoirs, the term ‘grotesque’ was coined to describe the
Roman arabesques through their ‘being found in certain subterranean caverns in
Rome by students of antiquity; which caverns were formerly chambers, hot-baths,
cabinets for study, halls and apartments of like nature’, buried in the processes of
time. Other architect-decorators were similarly inspired by these ancient mural
decorations, and modelled stucco was enthusiastically exploited for the next few
decades, sometimes to extravagant extremes (p. 7I5B), invading architecture ex-
ternally as well as indoors.
The Villa Madama, Rome (1516-) (p. 710J), designed by Raphael and con-
tinued after his death by his assistant, Guilio Romano, was never completed, but
the part executed became the model for nearly all the formal gardens of Italy. The
charming loggia, which is virtually all now to be seen of the ambitious residence or
‘casino’ intended, was brilliantly decorated with stuccoes and frescoes by Romano
and Giovanni da Udine.
The Palazzo Pandolfini, Florence (c. 1520-7) (p. 756), one of Raphael’s most
famous designs, was carried out jointly by two local architects. It inspired the design
of the Traveller’s Club, London (p. 987). The stuccoed walls are set off with angle
rustications, while the windows are the High Renaissance ‘tabernacle’ type, with
flanking pilasters or attached columns carrying entablatures with alternating tri-
angular and segmental pediments. The effective cornice, above an astragal frieze,
is of wood. A low, one-storey wing gives asymmetry to the composition, and the
portal giving access to the garden approach has the extremely deep voussoirs to the
arched head favoured by Raphael in other palace designs.
GIULIO ROMANO (1492-1546), a pupil of Raphael, approached architecture
through painting, and acquired great skill in combining stucco decoration with
frescoes in panels, an art learnt from Roman remains. He assisted Raphael at the
Villa Madama and at the Loggie and Stanze of the Vatican. In 1524 he left Rome
for Mantua, where he was employed as painter, decorator, garden-designer and
architect. At Mantua he had as a pupil Francesco Primaticcio (1504-70), who in
1532 joined I] Rosso in Fontainebleau, and thus spread the stuccoist art to France
(pp. 762; 774).
The Palazzo del Té, Mantua (1525-35) (p. 709A), a one-storey summer
pleasure house for Duke Federico Gonzaga II, has a grim exterior for this class of
708 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

building, but originally was only the chief feature in vast grounds, including sub-
sidiary buildings, groves and avenues, mazes, fishponds and delightful formal
gardens, furnished with pavilions, terraces, statues, fountains and pools. Primarily
a decorator, Romano regularly shows himself impatient of Classical rules; here
evidenced by the structurally-illogical distribution of the Doric pilasters on the
facades, and the casual omission of triglyphs from the frieze to provide small
windows. The palace is quadrangular on plan, with grand saloons and an arcaded
garden vestibule around a central garden court, the rooms having splendid paintings
and ornament by Romano and his pupils.
Giulio Romano’s house, Mantua (c. 1544) (p. 706B) is among his latest and
most accomplished architectural works, with rustications on two floors, pedimented,
marble-enframed upper windows and marble and terra-cotta decorations. De-
partures from Classical principles are again notable; in the stressed and rusticated
voussoired arches duplicating the window-enframements, the elliptical-arched
doorway and its rusticated pediment breaking through the string-moulding line,
and the location of the ornaments within the arches. A niched statue of Mercury
crowns the entrance doorway.
The Villa Lante, Bagnaia, near Viterbo, has one of the most delightfully inti-
mate formal gardens of the Renaissance, laid out on axial principles on a gently
sloping site, from designs by Romano and Vignola but only completed about 1580.
With its terraces, fountains and other delectable features (p. 709B, C) it is an ex-
ample of the many beautiful villas of the period, particularly abundant in the hills
around Rome.
GIACOMO BAROZZI DA VIGNOLA (1507-73), born in Bologna, worked princi-
pally there and in and around Rome, apart from two years in the service of Francis
I of France (1541-3). Author of The Five Orders of Architecture (published 1562),
he was destined to have great influence upon the course of the Renaissance and
especially in France, where his precepts were followed in preference to those of
Palladio, favoured in England. He was more academic in his writings than in his
architecture, which shows great versatility, elegance and originality of design.
The Villa of Pope Julius III, Rome (1550-5) (p. 710), as it now survives is the
nucleus of what formerly was a much more extensive scheme. Even so, it is an
architectural gem. Other famous architects had a hand in it, including Michelangelo
and Vasari, but essentially it is by Vignola and is his best-known work. Nowadays,
it serves as the Etruscan Museum. The plan (p. 710A) shows a straight front with
entrance leading to the semicircular portico; grand cortile with formal garden;
sunken court embraced by summer rooms, approached by sweeping flights of steps
and having a central fountain grotto with caryatid figures, rippling water and tiny
cascades; and a further flower garden beyond. The whole forms a delightful piece of
garden architecture. The facade (p. 710B) is a most pleasing composition and in-
fluenced later buildings. It has rusticated ground-floor windows (p. 7I10E) and
crested first-floor windows (p. 710G) which together with the central feature show
some Proto-Baroque departures from Classical precedent. The semicircular facade
to the grand cortile (p. 710F) instances a clever and attractive interweaving of
large-scale and small-scale Orders of architecture.
The Palazzo Farnese, Caprarola (1547-9) (p. 711), a semi-fortress of pentagonal
form situated on a mountain spur, is one of the most magnificent of all Renaissance
buildings, and incorporates many brilliant features which have inspired later de-
signs. The plan (p. 71ID) is a great pentagon, each side being 150 ft long. Paired
steps and staircases of varied patterns, interspersed with terraces and axial pavilions
and grottoes, ascend on the main axis to the Gran Sala, beyond which is a circular
cortile, 65 ft in diameter, with facades of two arcaded storeys, rusticated below and
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 709

A. Palazzo del Té, Mantua (1525-35). See p. 707

B. Villa Lante, Bagnaia (sixteenth century): water garden and casino.

See opposite page

c. Villa Lante, Bagnaia: Fountain of the Giants

 710 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

VILLA OF POPE JULIUS :ROME

+v
[o}

|
| "a
| .
iN
~
|
| "O
au
|
val +
iS
zl
ac) oO
eh Te
> cI ;
1
\

LOWER ORDER
= GRAND CORTILE
OE
OSS
LON
k----

et !
Wes boil

ar . VAG
aK !

pe ine
SOF ame mG) 50 190 150 200 FT
- —- 7 = i
oO) 0OSCOsiCiHsCiHs—CiOSCO ME
GROUND PLAN UPPER FLOOR PLAN
;

-e
——~ E=
=~

gets
=
s|-
-8.9+ S|
he
SII

—
== 2
va
=) =
SET ae, aes eee

WINDOW AT a ~
(FicgRanp CorTILE

Lsf
pte ie oe 4
al euabint
ey ab Mn
z aa eM vilj ss
Assesg IHD DSmi we It
ILLA FARNESINA: ROME. VILLA MADAMA: ROME
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

PAL. FARNESE: CARRAR GLA: NE ROME

UTITTTTTIN. =" ANNI TT TN ian

m a)

al

A)BIRDS-EYE VIEW
FEET METRES
1257,
rs

100-130

F239

Yj
| WW

V
i
age ‘i
ail
Fl

ml
i pea

Arua

Sales ee
Hay uy
me + Hl

e INTERIOR OF Bak FLOOR

CIRCULAR STAIRS WINDOW
We ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

A. Boboli Gardens, Florence (sixteenth century). See pp. 673, 678

B. Villa Gamberaia, Settignano (c. 1550-). See p. 673

 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 713

above ornamented with attached columns in a ‘triumphal arch’ arrangement. In

one angle of the plan is the famous circular open staircase (p. 711C) (cf. Chateau de
Chambord, p. 773). The general lay-out (p. 711A), with entrance portal, circular
ramps, stairs and moat, makes a fine symmetrical and monumental group. Con-
nected with the palace but a little distant from it there survives another famous
formal garden, where a series of charming elements, including several kinds of
water display, is arranged along a falling axis. Commanding them all, astride the
axis, is a delightful garden house, single-storeyed on the upper side and double on
the other, which is among Vignola’s most original creations (p. 706c).
S. Andrea, Rome (c. 1550) (p. 700), on the Via Flaminia, is one of Vignola’s
smaller works, the very simple plan (p. 700G) being covered by an elliptical dome,
borne on a normal Corinthian cornice (p. 700J) over pendentives, thus showing a
new departure in Renaissance adventure. The method of buttressing the dome by a
quasi-drum is the same as in the Pantheon, Rome (p. 199A). On the entrance front
(p. 70OD), a portico, with pediment, is simulated with pilasters.
The Gest. Church, Rome (1568-84) (p. 704), completed by Giacomo della
Porta, who modified the scheme for the facade, is one of Vignola’s best-known
works. The interior was redecorated in 1668-83 and the walls lined with marble in
1860; the altar in the north transept (p. 704G), a superlative Baroque masterpiece by
a great number of craftsmen, was designed in 1695-9 by Andrea Pozzo. Vignola’s
plan (p. 704D) is an improved version of that of Alberti for S. Andrea at Mantua
(p. 679J), and became the type for very many later churches. It is the Byzantine
centralized type, domed over the crossing, with short barrel-vaulted transept and
sanctuary arms but an extended nave, where there are close-spaced chapels in lieu
of aisles, and lunette windows over them in the base of the barrel-vault (p. 704H).
The lunettes afford a much better lighted church than Alberti’s. The Proto-Baroque
facade has a centre-piece of two superimposed Orders, while the aisle roofs stop
against large scroll brackets, as used by Alberti at S. Maria Novella, Florence (pp.
632A, 683).
The two small cupolas at S. Peter’s (p. 717), and the Portico de’ Banchi, Bologna
(1562), were also from the designs of this master.
PIRRO LIGORIO (c. 1520-80) is remembered principally for his spectacular
Villa d’Este, Tivoli (1549-) (pp. 693A, 715A), with its remarkable formal gardens
containing endless natural and artificial delights; and his charming Villa Pia, Rome
(1561) (pp. 715B, 721), embodying ornate pavilions around a decoratively-walled
oval court in the Vatican gardens. In the garden features of both of these, stucco is
used extensively: the passion for modelled stucco at this time extends freely to the
encrustation of building exteriors, where too, antique panels were often embedded,
and is illustrated by several well-known palaces and villas, including the Villa
Medici, Rome (1574-80) (p. 706E) by Annibale Lippi. Stucco was a cheap and
tractable medium eminently suited to the modelling of garden ornament, but used
sculpturally on buildings tended to produce a restlessness conflicting with the
architectural lines.
MICHELANGELO (1475-1564), the long-lived and world-famous Florentine
sculptor and the painter of the vaulted ceiling of the Sistine Chapel (1508—), was no
less distinguished in his later years as an architect, and is a most striking instance of
the wonderful versatility of artists of this period.
The Medici Chapel, Florence (1521-34) (p. 716A) constitutes the New
Sacristy (p. 676K) in S. Lorenzo, and was added by Michelangelo to correspond
with the Old Sacristy built (1421-8) by Brunelleschi. The interior, 40 ft square,
approximates in design to its counterpart; pilasters of black Istrian stone carry the
main entablature, which is surmounted by an attic with pilaster-enframed windows
714 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

and niches. A deep, dome-crowned recess contains the altar. Yet in the architec-
tural settings for the funerary elements of the ducal tombs which give the building
its special renown, there are very significant differences of style, manifesting the
first important Proto-Baroque departures from ancient Classical precedent. The
white marble mural tombs are those of Giuliano de’ Medici and, directly opposite;
Lorenzo (II) de’ Medici, each with a commanding sculptured figure of the deceased
against a background of pilaster-enframed niches, over a marble sarcophagus bear-
ing recumbent allegorical figures, representing in the first case Night and Day, and
in the other, Evening and Dawn. The architectural settings are treated sculpturally,
and in quite a few respects are illogical in structural implication, both within them-
selves and in relation to the fundamental architectural theme of the Chapel.
The Laurentian Library, Florence (1525-) (p. 716B), adjoining S. Lorenzo,
was well advanced by 1534 but continued afterwards by Giorgio Vasari (1511-74),
best known for his Lives of the Painters, who, with Ammanati, carried out the
vestibule and staircase from 1559 (p. 716B), with some modifications of Michel-
angelo’s plans. Proto-Baroque features are again notable, in the triple staircase
itself and on the flanking walls, where coupled columns, supported on consoles,
are set within recesses between protruding sections of wall ornamented by panels
and pedimented niches flanked by downward-tapering pilasters. The library, de-
signed to contain the books and manuscripts collected by the Medici, has walls
bearing pilasters and a fine timber ceiling; it probably was the model for Wren’s
Trinity College Library, Cambridge (p. 921F).
The Capitol, Rome (p. 718), the reconstruction of which was planned by
Michelangelo about 1546, was his most successful civic work and a fine town-
planning achievement. He not only remodelled on symmetrical lines the approaches
to the piazza, but also designed the great palace facades on the three sides. He
superintended the erection only of the approach stairway, the monumental double
flight of steps of the palace opposite and, at an earlier time (1538), of the statue of
Marcus Aurelius (p. 718c) in the centre of the piazza, the remainder being executed
from his designs by his successors. The Palazzo dei Conservatori (1564-8) (p.
718A, D, E) has a facade 66 ft high. The Palazzo del Senatore (1592-), completed
by Girolamo Rainaldi (1570-1655) with slight modifications of Michelangelo’s
designs, rises 90 ft high and has a rusticated basement behind the imposing stair-
cases, and giant Corinthian pilasters carried through two storeys, while above the
facade peers a campanile (1579), standing over the ancient Tabularium (pp. 182,
I7IA), overlooking the Forum Romanum. The ‘Capitoline Museum’ (1644-55)
(p. 718A, B, E, F), again carried out by Girolamo Rainaldi, illustrates Michelangelo’s
method of securing unity by carrying up a giant Order, a feature of all three facades.
The planning scheme is complemented by the fine flights of steps leading right and
left to the triple-arched loggias designed (c. 1550-5) by Vignola.
S. Maria degli Angeli, Rome (p. 207A, D, F), was a daring experiment by which
in 1563 Michelangelo converted the tepidarium of the Baths of Diocletian into a
Christian church (p. 206). This hall (200 ft by 80 ft) became the nave of the church,
but in 1749 Vanvitelli transformed the nave into a huge transept, placed the en-
trance on the west side, and formed a deep chancel on the east. The actual bases of
the ancient monolithic granite columns are 7 ft below the new floor constructed by
Michelangelo.
This great master was also responsible for many important features in the plan-
ning and final treatment of S. Peter, Rome, which is therefore dealt with under his
name.
S. Peter, Rome (1506-1626) (pp. 720, 721, 722, 723), the most important build-
ing of this period, was the outcome of the work of many architects under the
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 715

B. Villa Pia, Rome (1561): garden pavilion.

See p. 713

A. Villa d’Este, Tivoli (1549-). c. Scala Regia, Rome (Vatican) (1663-6).

See p. 713 See p. 726
716 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

A. The Medici Chapel (New Sacristy) S. Lorenzo, Florence (1521-34).

See p. 713

B. The Biblioteca Laurenziana, Florence: entrance (1525-3 staircase 1559-).

See p. 714
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE LT

direction of many popes during a period of 120 years. The present Cathedral had its
origin in the intention of Pope Julius II to erect a tomb house for himself (1505)
(p. 670). This Pope was an outstanding personality as pontiff, statesman, and patriot,
with great ambitions for the papacy, the Church, and Italy; so his initial personal
project finally took the form of ruthlessly pulling down the old basilican church
(p. 259) in order to erect such a monument as should enshrine all the magnificence
which he wished to stand as associated with the papal power, the Christian religion,
and the Latin race. A competition produced a number of designs—still preserved
in the Uffizi Gallery, Florence—and that of Bramante was selected. In 1506 the
foundation stone was laid of Bramante’s church, planned as a Greek cross, and his
proposed dome (p. 722B) was founded on that of the Pantheon, with the addition of
a peristyle and lantern. In 1513, on the death of Julius II, Bramante was superseded
by Giuliano da Sangallo, Fra Giocondo, and Raphael, but the two former died in
1515. Raphael proposed a plan (p. 722) in the shape of a Latin cross, but he died in
1520, and Baldassare Peruzzi, who was then appointed architect, reverted to the
Greek-cross plan (p. 722F). Ecclesiastical funds were now running short, there were
troubles both in Church and State, and finally the sack of Rome (1527) disorganized
all artistic projects. In 1536, on the death of Peruzzi, Antonio da Sangallo the
Younger submitted a slightly altered plan, with an extended vestibule (p. 7226),
lofty campanile, and elaborated central dome (p. 722D). On his death, ten years later,
Michelangelo, then in his seventy-second year, succeeded him, and the present
building owes most of its outstanding features to his genius. He reverted to a Greek-
cross plan, strengthened the piers of the dome, and redesigned the surrounding
chapels and apses. He planned and indeed commenced the construction of the
great dome, the drum of which was completed before his death, in 1564, and he left
models for dome and lantern. From these models the dome was completed (1585-
90) by Giacomo della Porta and Domenico Fontana. In 1564 Vignola had added
side cupolas (pp. 721A, 723C), but these became ineffective when Carlo Maderna
lengthened the nave to form a Latin cross (p. 723G), and added the gigantic facade
(1606-12). Finally Bernini erected (1655-67) the noble entrance piazza, 650 ft wide,
surrounded by 284 columns forming the imposing fourfold Tuscan colonnades
(pp. 720, 721).
Cathedral, Piazza, and Vatican (p. 701) form a world-famous group (p. 721A, B).
The completed plan (p. 723G), of vast proportions, is a Latin cross with an internal
length of 600 ft, and an internal width across the transepts of 450 ft, while the total
external length, including portico, is 700 ft, or about half as much again as that of
Salisbury Cathedral. The nave, 84 ft wide, consists of four immense bays, and is
about the same width as the Basilica of Constantine (p. 200k), but considerably
longer. The crossing is covered by the majestic dome, 137 ft 6 ins internal diameter,
while the short transepts and the sanctuary are terminated by semicircular apses.
The magnificent entrance portico, 234 ft by 43 ft 6 ins, extends the whole width of
the church (p. 723F, G), and leads to the interior (p. 720B), the walls of which are of
brick faced with plaster coloured to imitate marble. It is almost impossible to gauge
its vast proportions, and this difficulty is further increased by the false idea of scale
given by such features as the colossal cherubs, about 7 ft high, which support the
holy water stoups, and an idea of the actual size can only be estimated by comparison
with the groups of moving people. The mighty nave is flanked by great piers faced
by a gigantic Order of Corinthian pilasters, 83 ft 6 ins high, and entablature 20 ft
high, or nearly double the height of the Pantheon portico (p. 199), surmounted by a
semicircular barrel vault, coffered, gilded, and frescoed, 150 ft above the marble
pavement. The four stupendous piers (60 ft square) which uphold the dome have
colossal statues 16 ft high, and the impression on gazing into the vast internal
 718 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

APITOL ge ar ROME

=—---------66'0

patil
ke
ree
Hat

ORTICO: PAL DE CONSERVATOR MUSEUM FROM THE PIAZZA

 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 719

cupola, 335 ft high, with its coloured frescoes and mosaics, is awe-inspiring and
sublime. The planning of the supports of the dome and its four pendentives is in
marked contrast with that of S. Paul’s, London (p. 912), with its eight piers. The
Throne of S. Peter, in the western apse, is a Baroque work of Bernini, as is also the
magnificent Baldachino (p. 7208), 100 ft high, covering the High Altar, which
stands over the alleged tomb of S. Peter in the crypt, beneath the dome.
The exterior (pp. 720A, 721A, 723C), roughly executed in travertine stone, has a
giant Order of Corinthian pilasters carried round the entire building, giving unity
to the design, with podium 18 ft, Corinthian columns and pilasters 90 ft 9 ins
(diameter 9 ft), entablature 20 ft, attic and balustrade 38 ft 6 ins, which, excluding
the statues, 20 ft high, gives a total height of 167 ft 3 ins, or more than half as high
again as the facade of S. Paul’s Cathedral (p. 912). The gigantic scale of this build-
ing can best be realized by comparison with Trajan’s Column, Rome (p. 228), which is
97 ft 7 ins high, with a diameter of 12 ft 2 ins, and is placed on a pedestal 18 ft high.
Thus the countless half-columns and pilasters which encircle the great Cathedral
are actually only about 7 ft less in height than the single column of Trajan. In no
other building has an Order of such immense size been used. If Michelangelo’s
design for a portico of free-standing columns had been carried out, it would have
been one of the most impressive features in all Christendom.
The great dome (pp. 721, 722A, C, 723), 9 ft thick at base and upper part, formed
of two shells of brickwork, with stone ribs supporting the crowning lantern, nearly
equals that of the Pantheon in diameter, but Michelangelo set himself a very difficult
problem, inasmuch as the base of his dome is nearly 250 ft from the pavement, and
depends for support only on four massive piers instead of on a continuous circular
wall. No less than ten iron chains at the base have been inserted at different times
to prevent the dome from spreading. Although the dome with the lantern is 452 ft
in height—more than twice that of the towers of Westminster Abbey—its domi-
nating effect is impaired externally, except from a distance, by Maderna’s lengthened
nave and additional portico, which latter is not only over 167 ft high, but is also as
much as 450 ft from the centre of the crossing, and consequently hides the lower
part of the dome from the near spectator. The Order round the drum, 50 ft high,
might well have been on a larger scale, and it might have gained in impressiveness,
had it been connected by scrolls with the attic above, as designed by Michelangelo.
It is in effect far less pleasing than the colonnaded treatment of the dome of S.
Paul’s (pp. 663B, 909A). In spite of these conflicting elements in the design, the
dome of S. Peter’s is the greatest creation of the Renaissance, and a dominating
feature in all views of Rome.
Lantern, dome, drum, balustrades, and statues, all in turn piled above the
gigantic pilasters of the encircling walls, and even partly obscured by the monu-
mental portico, are awe-inspiring in their massive grandeur, and in themselves
make up a monument of cunningly contrived parts. Externally, however, S. Peter’s
owes half its majesty to the manner in which it sits enthroned above its vast entrance
piazza (650 ft wide), with its grouped fountains and central obelisk, which is guarded
by those noble colonnades whose proportions are on such a generous scale that they
are not dwarfed even by the huge Order of the facade on which they abut. No other
city has accorded such a wide-swept approach to its Cathedral Church, no other
architect could have conceived a design of greater nobility; this colonnade-encircled
piazza of Bernini is, if one may say so, the greatest of all atriums before the greatest
of all churches in Christendom.
DOMENICO FONTANA (1543-1607), born near Lake Lugano in Lombardy,
came to Rome in 1563, where he received many commissions, including that for
his share in S. Peter’s, referred to above. He laid out new streets and places, with
720 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

A. S. Peter, Rome: aerial view from E. showing Vatican on right, with

covered approach from Castle of S. Angelo (1506-1626;
colonnades 1655-7). See p. 714

B. S. Peter, Rome: interior

 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 721

SPE VTE ROME

== CORTILE Di
— BELVEDERE

fjam
YW
CSow
\
Tego)Sy
Ls PETER ie
| W
KE
\&
DI lea
Le‘i CORTILE DIF) “bella a
\\ \\
E
X ele
Zeg
___ir ‘« \ SS \AK iQU =<\// \
ie\ VSSYAT CAN “MUSEUM — @ -—\

ug ’’ REFERENCE TABLE
=<
fo
)//1 CORTILE DI S. DAMASO
/// 2 SISTINE CHAPEL
// 3 ENTRANCE 10 PICTURE GALLERY
4 ENTRANCE TO MUSEUM
5 OCTAGONAL COURT

i eer.a g a a 600 1900 FT

Sy A 300 MIS
Sas
PLAN OF S.PETER AND THE VATICAN
 722 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

s. PETER ROME
87-0--+
——

FEET METRES
—452’-0°
PAVEMENT>
TO
— 300; Igo

»
250)

200.69

|‘

=---~~167'3"—--—-->
110°9"-----«3a-6">)
«K--—-—

DOMEah eySeBRAMANTE
elie (a)

SECTION & or D
SHOWING SETTING OUT

RD
XXX
rh EB PLAN artriguteo To
PLAN area To el RUZZI arter SERLIO PLANS
RAPHAEL arter SERLIO gg
a eer ==
SANGALLO
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 723

S, PETER : ROME
b-——Tia --——b

17) ittat ea EUS

TN]HONOREM |PRINCIPIS APOST|PAVLVS V BVRGHESIVS ROMANVS JPONT MAX AN MO]Gul_ PONT [Vil

Bt Ht shi al i be sa = lil liga

ill

mae = = Te = rey ul Ti
1 fA 1
--—- ——]109'---
180 «--
—90.9"—Ss
>R00%-38.6"!

ELEVATION or EAST FACADE

THE PORTICO | |
F)GOKING S. G
 724 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

A. General view, west side B. Entrance block, west side

Palazzo Barberini, Rome (1628-38). See p. 725

c. Madonna di S. Luca, Bologna D. Palazzo Marino, Milan:

(1723-57). See p. 729 cortile (1558-60). See p. 688

E. S. Maria Maggiore, Rome: F. Palazzo Borghese, Rome: cortile (c. 1590).

facade (1743). See p. 729 See opposite page
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 725
their ornaments and fountains, for the latter collaborating with his brother, Gio-
vanni (1540-1614), a distinguished water-engineer. Towards the end of the century
he moved to Naples, where he designed the Royal Palace (1592). Architecturally,
his work is not greatly distinguished, and he represents the last stages of the Proto-
Baroque in Rome.
The Palazzo del Laterano, Rome (1586) (pp. 664, 706F), erected by Fontana
on the site of the former palace, was, after being an orphan asylum, turned into a
museum in 1843. The buildings are arranged round a court, and the astylar facade
is a simple and tame version of the Palazzo Farnese treatment.

BAROQUE
CARLO MADERNA (1556-1629), also from Lake Lugano, came early to Rome and
was trained under his uncle, Domenico Fontana. He is the chief figure of the early
Baroque in Rome. His architecture has a vigour and robustness superior to that of
his immediate predecessors (Michelangelo excluded), as is evident in the main work
of his active life, the lengthening of S. Peter’s.
S. Susanna, Rome (1597-1603) (p. 6978), has a facade virtually devoid of win-
dows, their place being taken by enframed niches, comprised of two tiers of super-
imposed Corinthian Orders, expressed in crisply-projecting pilasters except on the
centre bays of the lower tier, where attached columns appear. The decorative
interest is built up to centre strongly on the entrance doorway, the bay spacings
being progressively increased in width towards it, and advanced in planes. The
crowning, balustraded pediment over the nave is reflected in a lesser pediment
breaking the lower cornice, and in others of segmental form serving to emphasize
the upper and lower axial openings The rich reiteration of features, as here in the
theme of the pediments and in the clustered Orders, is typical Baroque practice.
The Palazzo Barberini, Rome (1628-38) (p. 724A, B), was only started the
year before Maderna’s death, but externally at least, was executed closely according
to his designs by Bernini, with Borromini serving under him in a subordinate
capacity: some novel features of the internal planning are due to Bernini. The plan
of the palace is unusual for Rome, as it has no courtyard, and takes an ‘H’ shape, as,
however, had been customary for some time for villas. The three-storey main
facade is strongly rhythmical, like most Roman palaces, but unlike the majority is
stylar, of fairly orthodox ‘Roman Order’ design except on the top floor, where there
are overlaid pilasters, their lines carried up into the entablature, while the seven
windows are treated in perspective.
FLAMINIO PONZIO (1560-1613), another Lombard, was an excellent designer,
though less advanced in his style than his contemporary, Maderna.
S. Sebastiano fuori le mura, Rome (1608-13) (p. 727A), completed by Vasanzio,
has a chastely severe facade, of which the lower storey has arches standing on paired
columns, a motif appearing also in the courtyard of the Palazzo Borghese, Rome,
begun in 1590 by Martino Lunghi the Elder and finished by Vasanzio; and again at
a later time (1634-6) in Bianco’s Palazzo dell’ Universita at Genoa (p. 691).
Ponzio’s Fontana Paola, Rome (1612) (p. 753H) is one of the city’s finest monu-
ments.
GIOVANNI LORENZO BERNINI (1598-1680) represents the Roman Baroque at
its peak. Born in Naples, he was brought to Rome at a tender age (c. 1604), for his
father was a sculptor of repute and followed his art in Florence, Naples and Rome
in turn. In Rome, the father, Pietro Bernini (1562-1629) was the creator of the
‘Barcaccia’ (c. 1629), a boat-shaped fountain in the Piazza di Spagna, Rome, which
attractively complements the spectacular ‘Spanish Steps’ (p. 730A). The son quickly
achieved renown and social esteem. Primarily a sculptor, he was brilliant too as an
726 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

architect and painter; being a facile and prodigious worker he executed a host of
varied commissions in his long life, virtually all of them in and around Rome. His
one and only foreign excursion was a short and abortive visit to Paris (1665) (p.
774). Much of Bernini’s finest architectural as well as sculpturesque work was done
for S. Peter’s, where his colonnades for the piazza are world-famous (pp. 720A, 721A).
Besides buildings, he designed very many altar pieces and also fountains, such as
the ‘Fountain of the Four Rivers’ (1647-52) in the Piazza Navona, Rome.
S. Andrea del Quirinale, Rome (1658-70) (p. 727B), is the best known of
Bernini’s churches, each of them small, but widely imitated later on. The exterior
demonstrates the essential simplicity of Bernini’s effects. The protruding vestibule
comprises a pair of overlaid plain Corinthian pilasters, with pedimented entabla-
ture above, enclosing an archway and a semicircular two-columned porch, on which
is a large, sculptured coat of arms. The church behind is a domed ellipse, 80 ft by
55 ft across, with the main axis at right angles to the approach, and from this cen-
tralized space open eight radiating chapels, making, with the entrance and sanctuary,
ten recesses embedded in the very thick walls. The scheme thus is similar to that of
the ancient Pantheon, Rome (p. 199); and the likeness is still more close in the case
of his S. Maria dell’ Assunta, Ariccia, Rome (1662-4), which has a domed
circular plan, with eight radiating recesses in the walls. Another church at Castel
Gandolfo, Rome (1658-61), has a simple Greek-cross plan, with a pendentived
dome over the crossing.
The Palazzo Odescalchi, Rome (1664-) (p. 706D), has a stylar main block with
a giant Corinthian pilastered Order embracing the two upper floors, in a composition
which has the broad simplicity typical of Bernini. Large consoles bestride the en-
tablature frieze, and they are paired over the line of the pilasters. The length of the
central facade was doubled from the original seven bays by additions made in 1745
by Salvi and Vanvitelli.
The Palazzo Montecitorio, Rome (begun 1650), was completed by Carlo Fon-
tana (1634-1714) several decades later, but much on the lines Bernini had planned.
The Scala Regia, Rome (1663-6) (p. 715C), a magnificent monumental stairway
approach to the Vatican, lies adjacent to the portico of S. Peter’s, from which there
is also an approach (p. 723G). It is celebrated for its remarkable perspective effects.
FRANCESCO BORROMINI (1599-1667), born near Como and at first a sculptor,
came to Rome about 1614 and there received training under Carlo Maderna and
Bernini. In temperament he was introspective and intense, and his architecture is
as tortuous and involved as Bernini’s is direct and fundamentally simple. He died
by suicide.
S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane, Rome (1638-41, facade 1665-7) (p. 727¢),
shows ingenious planning to meet the difficulties of a small and cramped site.
Borromini here discards the typical Renaissance plan made up of clearly demarcated
geometrical elements and adopts a scheme which, although resolving itself ulti-
mately into an elliptical pendentived dome running east to west, begins at wall level
internally as an undulated Greek cross, made up of four concave lobes passing into
one another in convex curves. Undulating plan curves appear on the west front too,
and henceforward Baroque architecture repeatedly takes advantage of this kind of
device.
S. Ivo della Sapienza, Rome (1642-50) (p. 727D), the church of the University,
which for the rest had been built by Giacomo della Porta in 1576, is another in-
stance of the bizarre planning of Borromini, having a centralized plan contained by
six lobes, of which three are semicircular and the alternate ones shaped as half-
hexagons; Corinthian pilasters line the inner walls, and from their entablature
springs a steep dome, faithfully retaining the plan shape internally, but masked
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 727

4. S. Sebastiano fuori le mura, Rome B. S. Andrea del Quirinale (1658-70).

(1608-13). See p. 725 See p. 726

. S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane, Rome D. S. Ivo della Sapienza, Rome: from
(1638-41; facade 1665-7). See p. 726 cortile (1642-50). See p. 726
 728 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

A. Fountain (1648-51) and S. Agnese B. S. Maria della Pace, Rome: facade

(1652—), Rome. See p. 729 (1656-7). See p. 729

¢. S. Maria di Monte Santo and S. Maria dei Miracoli, Rome (1662-79).

See p. 729
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 729
externally by a six-lobed cupola and hexagonal lantern terminating in a corkscrew
spire.
S. Agnese, Rome (1652-) (p. 728A), facing the Piazza Navona, was begun by
Rainaldi, continued by Borromini from 1653-5 and completed by others by 1666.
Owing to the circumstances, the plan is comparatively restrained, but the splendid
and impressive composition, with recessed front, twin campanili and commanding
dome is largely due to Borromini.
PIETRO DA CORTONA (1596-1669), distinguished painter and architect, was of
the same generation as Bernini and Borromini; his early architecture had great
vigour and originality, but became more commonplace in later life. He carried out
very many commissions, both ecclesiastical and domestic.
S. Maria della Pace, Rome, the church to which Bramante had added the
cloister (p. 753E), was rebuilt by Cortona, with a fine facade and semicircular
portico (1656-7) (p. 728B) which well represent the vigorous modelling of this
architect’s schemes. He obtains forceful expression by the interplay of convex and
concave plan forms at large and at small scale, or by advancing and receding planes,
while securing richness by a lavish use of columns and pilasters. He rarely employed
the giant Order, but expressed his buildings in distinct tiers. Similar characteristics
appear in his SS. Martina and Luca, Rome (1634-47) and the facade of S. Maria
in Via Lata, Rome (1658-62).
CARLO RAINALDI (1611-91), another High Baroque architect, is of only slightly
less importance than the three last named. His extensive church work includes the
commencement of S. Agnese, Rome, mentioned above, and the reconstruction
(1673) of the east end of the old Basilica of S. Maria Maggiore, Rome, a very fine
scheme.
S. Maria di Monte Santo and S. Maria dei Miracoli, Rome (1662-79) (p.
728C), are twin churches by Rainaldi dividing three main roads of central Rome as
they leave the Piazza del Popolo, skilfully planned to present a fine civic effect to-
wards the square. As there is a difference in width of their sites, the plans are not
identical, and to give the illusion of symmetry externally, the central space and
covering dome of S. Maria di Monte Santo are made elliptical in the depth of the
church, while in the other church they are based on a circular plan. Both domes
have faceted drums externally. When approaching completion, Bernini was given
charge of the Monte Santo church.
CARLO DOTTI (1670-1759) represents the eighteenth-century Late Baroque at
Bologna, in the north of the Papal territories, where the Madonna di S. Luca
(1723-57) (p. 724C), a finely-massed, hill-top pilgrimage church outside the city,
is his masterpiece. In its circumstances it resembles the Superga, Turin (p. 694A).
ALESSANDRO SPECCHI (1668-1729) was an able civic designer who, among
other works, began the delightful Scala di Spagna, Rome (‘Spanish Steps’) (1721-
5) (p. 730A), connecting in cleverly-varied curvilinear flights and landings the
Piazza di Spagna with SS. Trinita de’ Monti. It was, however, FRANCESCO DE
SANCTIS (1693-1740) who took over in 1723 and completed the design.
ALESSANDRO GALILEI (1691-1737) carried out the principal facade of S. Gio-
vanni in Laterano, Rome (1733-6) (p. 736B), and as this was entrusted to him as
the result of an important architectural competition, it should well represent the
standard of taste of the day.
NICOLA SALVI (1697-1751) has claims to fame for his Fontana di Trevi, Rome
(1732-62) (pp. 730B, 754D), finished by Pannini.
FERDINANDO FUGA (1699-1780-), the designer of the entrance facade of S.
Maria Maggiore, Rome (1743) (p. 724), was the last notable Baroque architect of
Rome.
730 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

B. Fontana di Trevi, Rome (1732-62). See p. 729

 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 731

VENICE
EARLY RENAISSANCE
PIETRO LOMBARDO (1435-1515) was one of a family who impressed their per-
sonality upon the architecture of the sea-girt city, where the Renaissance arrived
much later than in Florence.
The Doge’s Palace, Venice, commenced in the Mediaeval period (p. 607), was
continued at this time. The Cortile (p. 733) was undertaken by Antonio Rizzo from
about 1485, continued by Pietro Lombardo from 1499-1511, and completed by
Antonio Scarpagnino in 1545-50. The Cortile facades are transitional in retaining
series of pointed arcades, but are otherwise quite Renaissance in character (p. 733B,
C, E), especially the upper tier of the south face of the small Court of the Senators
(p. 733C). Inside the main entrance (Porta della Carta) is the famous ‘Giants’ Stair-
case (Scala dei Giganti) (1485-9), flanked by Sansovino’s figures of Mars and Nep-
tune (p. 733A, B). The Ducal Palace is equally renowned for its external Gothic
arcades (p. 611) and its sumptuously-enriched apartments, with their elaborate
chimney-pieces (p. 757J) and stucco-encrusted walls and ceilings enriched with
paintings by Veronese and Tintoretto and many other famous artists. The Bridge
of Sighs (c. 1595) (p. 733D), connecting the Doge’s Palace and the prison, is a
romantic external feature, with its elliptical arch, rusticated pilasters, and heraldic
devices.
The Palazzo Corner Spinelli, Venice (c. 1480) (p. 734B), which may be by one
of the Lombardi family, is a delightful example of the Early Renaissance, and has
some fine apartments. The symmetrical elevation; the dignified axial entrance from
the Grand Canal; the balconied windows, so disposed as to give extra light to the
large rooms reaching the centre of the facade; the strong angle treatment; all are
traditional features in Venice, carried on from the Mediaeval period (p. 6128, E).
The Palazzo Vendramini, Venice (1481) (p. 734), ascribed to Pietro Lombardo,
has the customary three-floored scheme and window arrangement, but is stylar, the
attached Corinthian Order, with varied designs for the capitals, being used for each
floor (p. 734E, G). The top entablature is made abnormally deep so as to serve as a
fitting termination for the whole front, and, as usual in Venetian palaces, the full
architectural treatment is confined to the main facade. The bifurcated, traceried
windows (p. 734F), retaining a Mediaeval note, are typical of the Early Renaissance
in Venetia. The charming balconies (p. 7346) still retain the miniature columns in
place of the true baluster by this time usual in Italy elsewhere.
5. Maria dei Miracoli, Venice (1481-9) (p. 735), designed by Pietro Lombardo,
is a marvel of marble work, both within and without. This miniature church has an
aisleless nave covered internally by a deep segmental wooden roof with gilded panels,
and with a non-concentric semicircular roof showing externally. The recessed
sanctuary and the choir over the sacristy are approached by a wide flight of steps,
flanked by marble balustrades and twin pulpits, while the altar is enclosed with
beautiful pierced screenwork (p. 758H). Above the sanctuary is a small pendentived
dome with a shallow, windowed drum. The east end, with its adjacent circular
staircase carried up as a domed turret, and the lead-covered, external timber dome
over the sanctuary, forms a delightful composition as seen from the nearby canal.
The walls of the church are faced internally and externally with coloured marbles.
The exterior (p. 735A), although clothing a one-storeyed structure, has two stages
of superimposed pilasters, the upper as a blind arcade recalling Mediaeval treat-
ment, while the roof runs through on the west front to a semicircular pediment,
such as is seen at S. Zaccaria and the Scuola di S. Marco (p. 739c), probably
732 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

borrowed from the Byzantines, with whom it represented the exterior of their
vaults.
S. Zaccaria, Venice (1458-1515), and S. Giobbe, Venice (1451-93), are other
early examples which have many interesting features, and show much the same
character as the work of the Lombardi.
FRA GIOCONDO (1435-1515), a native of Verona, in later life worked in Rome,
where for the two years before his death he was associated with the work at S.
Peter’s (p. 717).
The Palazzo del Consiglio, Verona (1476-92) (p. 744H), is notable for the
delicate arcade, with columns directly supporting arches, after the manner of the
Foundling Hospital, Florence (p. 677), but stiffened with a pilaster midway. The
upper tier has paired segmental-headed windows of a Venetian type, and panelled
arabesque decoration.
S. Maria dei Miracoli, Brescia (1488-) (p. 689B), was designed by Mastro
Jacopo, but work continued slowly, and the scheme was altered in 1522. The
delicately-sculptured marble facade of the earlier portion included a remarkably
ornate porch.
S. Salvatore, Venice (1506-34), by Tullio Lombardo, a son of the famous Pietro,
and Giorgio Spavento, has a Baroque facade (1663) and a plan somewhat similar to
Alberti’s S. Andrea, Mantua (p. 679J), but with a nave covered by two large domes,
repeating, precisely, the dome over the crossing. In this manner of covering the
church, the Byzantine influence is strongly apparent.
The Scuola di S. Marco, Venice (1485-95) (p. 739C), now the City Hospital,
by Martino Lombardo, has a facade which echoes that of S. Mark. The ground
storey has Corinthian pilasters between which are panels bearing some curious per-
spective reliefs. These are by Tullio Lombardo, and bear witness to the intense
interest of artists in the science of perspective at this period, evidenced also in
Bramante’s S. Satiro, Milan (p. 696). The pediment over the doorway and those
serving as cresting, again are semicircular, and bear acroteria decorations at base and
apex.
S. Giorgio dei Greci, Venice (1538-), in which Sante Lombardo had a part, is a
graceful little building in the style of the Early period, except the facade, which is
mature Renaissance. It has an aisleless plan (p. 735G), somewhat resembling S.
Maria dei Miracoli (p. 735B), and a triapsal sanctuary (p. 735G). A dome is
placed centrally over the nave (p. 735H), while the exterior (p. 735F) has a rather
unusual treatment, terminating in three pediments, and the group is completed
with a lofty campanile (1587).

HIGH RENAISSANCE AND PROTO-BAROQUE

MICHELE SANMICHELE (1484-1559), born at Verona, was trained in Rome from

the age of sixteen. He acquired distinction as a military engineer, and after 1527
was employed by the Venetian Republic in the design of fortifications. His work in
architecture consequently has great vigour, and he often makes use of rustication,
sometimes on the Orders themselves. His originality was not unduly restrained by
observance of Roman precedent. The gateways of Verona, the Porta Nuova (1533-
40) and the Porta del Palio (1542-55) (p. 746A) are excellent instances of his bold
treatments.
The Palazzo Bevilacqua, Verona (1527-) (p. 744J), has rustications carrying
across the pilasters on the ground storey and spirally-fluted Corinthian attached
columns on the upper tier, arranged in alternating spacings suggestive of the Roman
‘triumphal arch’ motif. These features of the upper floor, and the smaller arched
openings capped by alternating triangular and segmental-headed pediments, all
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 733

DOGE'S PALACE ‘VENICE

ha

i \ : ; tT = j fl

y \. | Tit cette a
Mf \ 1 Aaa a = ingly
Va i
ares 7 Hal \ MM )) i i
nn i pe A at
II
|

cal) DBAs My
= SIGHS
teeE
\

OF

-RI0 DEL PALAZZQ | BRIDGE

OF SIGS PONTE DELLA
a ae ————- ‘pete, bn FEET
E

SS a
S

+70

a fi

Sy Sate Bs tL | 12
GIGANTI 1 ft Us)
aa a!
© © 2° t
GRAND CORTILE ig x =

@ I i
; 4

ELL HEAD if
See af ‘20
| 501
CATHEDRAL OF S.MARK 4
10

eh L o:E0
 734 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

PESARO
k1 REO) PAL CORNER PALCORNER DELLA
PALVENICE cometLEVENICE CA GRANDE: VENICE

ie ae Fi ls
Hn ENEUT — TT
onl 5Aa
marsedt

PA LAZZ O VENDRAMINI: VENICE

B6BRB nO
oa
ae
ppnpacaed G}
SP
ea
ave.

tay
[
ee

‘D)
UD)
EXTERIOR
7
ot Ceri
FROM GRAND CANAL
= 4.0 == pe 8'0-p
LITA IV IISILTT ILIT ILLITE PLLEr eyes terry

16.0"
3----
-—
—
|
|
|
|
\
|
|
ako
O'-
4oe
--
~-
== II--==
5-24
= I
ist)

= nN

pe Jae |
(

--
17- ee es oe
|

{
i}
|
= a

ORDERS oF IRST ais: TO

& SEC’? FLOORS = peer FLOOR WINDOW GROUND FLOOR
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 735

S. MARIA DEI PURACOLT : VENICE

METRES ee
Sse | i
100}130
WA:
eoseo

CANAL

f|' ,
HI FIM

Lz ene ee
V/s ieee aoe) oe
e® ——— Re
| =» Sead “HO

SAAT A i vt
Se aia
fe ae aS. y
ULSI | NMOOULOL ©) FOUOU)|
DFRANS. SECTION : F )ONGITUDINAL SECTION “
i S. GIORGIO nz GRECL+ BF
‘ «x VENICE
736 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

B. S. Giovanni in Laterano, Rome: facade (1733-6). See p. 729

 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 737
have direct precedents in Roman arches still existing in the city, but the sculptured
spandrels and keystones are his own innovations.
The Palazzo Pompeii, Verona (1530-) (p. 744), is a stately composition on axial
lines, with a simple arched portal leading to a cortile. A rusticated basement, with
arched windows, supports the ‘piano nobile’, with its fluted Doric columns, tall
semicircular-headed windows and carved masks on keystones (p. 744C).
The Palazzo Grimani, Venice (1556-) (p. 745), facing the Grand Canal, is
Sanmichele’s greatest work. The plan is most cleverly contrived on an irregular
island site with three large openings to the columned vestibule and long hall, off
which are the staircases. The symmetrical facade, 90 ft long and 97 ft high, has
superimposed Corinthian Orders, the lower comprising two storeys and the whole
bound together with a striking balcony stretching from end to end. By doubling
the Order to demarcate the end windows, the customary Venetian fenestration is
preserved. A crowning entablature, 8 ft 8 ins high, is proportioned to the full height
of the facade.
The Palazzo dei Diamanti, Verona (completed 1555) (p. 744G), has a facade
showing some influence of Sanmichele, with faceted rustications, whence the name.
The Gran Guardia Vecchia, Verona (1610-) (p. 744), for public meetings, is
the work of Domenico Curtoni, nephew and pupil of Sanmichele, and is more
purely Classical than any of the buildings of the uncle. The facade, over 285 ft long,
has a rusticated ground storey with semicircular arches, and an upper tier graced
with a stately line of coupled Doric columns, surmounted by an entablature, while
the centre is emphasized by an upper storey.
JACOPO SANSOVINO (1486-1570), sculptor and architect, born in Florence and
trained there and in Rome, settled in Venice in 1527, where all his most important
work is to be found. He was among the first to react from the strict Classical rule,
and shows himself a skilful assimilator, borrowing ideas from Peruzzi, Sanmichele
and other contemporaries and blending them cleverly in a unique manner.
The Zecca, Venice (1536-) has a peculiar treatment of column rustication, giving
a severe appearance in keeping with its purpose as a mint.
The Library of S. Mark, Venice (1536-53) (pp. 61IA, 740) is the most out-
standing of the buildings by Sansovino, finished with magnificent sculptural grace.
It has arcades of superimposed Jonic over Doric Orders, the upper embracing
minor Ionic columns sustaining the window arches. The use of a deep, windowed,
frieze in the upper entablature (p. 740B, D) gives the necessary extra importance to
allow it to;command the whole height of the facade, while the rich ornament of re-
clining figures in the arch spandrels and of cherubs and festoons in the upper frieze,
remains firmly subservient to the architectural lines. The adjacent building, facing
into the Piazza di S. Marco, rising one storey higher than the Library, was com-
menced by Scamozzi in 1584. This and the corresponding structures on the opposite
side of the Piazza once were a series of residences for the nine ‘Procurators’, the
chief officials of the Republic after the Doge.
The Palazzo Corner della Ca’ Grande, Venice (1537-56) (p. 734C) has excel-
lent proportions and stands on an imposing site fronting the Grand Canal. The
lower part is rusticated and has three central openings flanked by windows in two
tiers, while the two upper storeys are faced with paired Ionic and Corinthian Orders,
embracing circular-headed windows. The windowed frieze is used again, but the
arrangement of the windows has now become completely regular.
The Loggetta, Venice (1540-) (p. 757H), at the base of the great Campanile of
S. Mark, is a light and graceful structure with detached Corinthian columns
arranged in Sansovino’s favourite ‘triumphal arch’ disposition, with a high attic
and balustrade over. It is richly adorned with sculptures.
2A H.O.A.
738 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

ANDREA PALLADIO (1508-80), the most influential architect of the whole Re-
naissance, was born in Padua and at first trained as a mason. Moving to Vicenza
about 1524, his second home, where so much of his work was to be done, he secured
the patronage of a connoisseur, with whom, after 1540, the date on which he first
appears as an architect, he twice voyaged to Rome and made the intensive studies
of ancient remains which led eventually to the publication of his famous book I
quattro libri dell’ Architettura. The results of his Classical research can be traced in
his designs for buildings both in Venice and Vicenza. They were unfortunately
mostly in mean materials, such as brick faced with stucco, and the success he
achieved is an instance of how genius can produce works of art out of commonplace
materials. Some of his buildings were never completed, or were finished by others,
but the publication of the designs in his book, first issued in Venice in 1570, and
since published in every country in Europe, has had a far greater influence on archi-
tecture than have his buildings; especially in England, where Palladio had an ardent
disciple in Inigo Jones (p. 870), who published an annotated edition of his book
(now in Worcester College, Oxford).
The Palazzo Chiericati (designed 1550, completed c. 1580), Palazzo Thiene
(1556), Palazzo Valmarana (1566) (p. 742D), Palazzo Barbarano (1570), Palazzo
Capitanio (1571), and Casa del Diavolo (1571) (p. 742G) at Vicenza, are some of
the palaces exhibiting rusticated lower storeys supporting an Order often carried
through the height of a building to give unity of design. He also built very many
splendid villas in the Venetian countryside.
The Teatro Olimpico, Vicenza (1580-4), with a permanent stage built in per-
spective, is an interesting building, designed by Palladio but completed by Scamozzi
(p. 693B), and inspired by ancient Roman theatres.
The Basilica, Vicenza (1549) (p. 741), is famous for its Renaissance arcades
added by Palladio to the Mediaeval structure erected in 1444. The design was won
in competition in 1545, and completed 1614. The plan (p. 741E) shows the large
Mediaeval hall, 173 ft by 68 ft, with its supporting piers which gave the lines for the
Renaissance piers of the surrounding arcades, while the transverse section (p. 741C)
shows the upper floor, which regulated the height of the surrounding Orders. The
arcades showing the cross-vaults and the twin columns supporting the arches are
very impressive (p. 741F). Palladio had to adjust the arcades as an outer husk to the
width and height of the Gothic building. The end bays on each facade were un-
restricted in width, so Palladio made them narrower in order to give an effect of
strength at the angles, as had been previously done by the Greeks, e.g. the Par-
thenon (p. 94). These arcades (p. 741B), in fine hard stone which has beautifully
weathered, consist of superimposed Doric and Ionic Orders which, under the main
entablature, frame intervening arches supported on smaller free-standing twin
columns, and there are circular openings in the spandrels. This grouping and com-
bination of columns and arches has been termed the ‘Palladian motif’, and is exceed-
ingly effective, especially when seen in conjunction with the slender campanile
alongside (p. 741D).
The Villa Capra, Vicenza (1567-) (p. 742), known also as the Rotonda, is a
square building with pillared portico on each face, leading to a central circular hall
of which only the low dome appears externally above the tiled roof, which is hipped
from the angles of the main building. This design was an important departure, and
caught the popular taste. It was utilized by Lord Burlington at Chiswick (p. 936B)
and by Colin Campbell at Mereworth Castle, Kent (936A, 966G), and has often been
copied both in England and on the Continent.
S. Giorgio Maggiore, Venice (1565-) (pp. 736A, 743), has a cruciform plan with
apsidal transepts. The interior has piers faced with Corinthian columns and the
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 739

A. Exterior B. Interior
S. Maria della Salute, Venice (1631-82). See p. 747

c. The Scuola di San Marco, Venice, from S. (1485-95). See p. 732

 740 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

.VENICE

3ete
I = = am
——— ef CANAL

Hl Sie :
i)

he 60a UNIS poe ees |

E li ii » | = 2o
A (Zz eR eee ss :

——— ;
|
=n == r = ~ |
5 ; ; : © 404
7 =) is
a) (Re 1 }

om sm :
wy | \

7 Se '
z i Le
iets] [Lletete | 205 ie
q] ] be Wel
SS i) L pe
oo mee Sa iv

=: > i& z \
——
oa

aE a » j =
(B)DETAL OF ANGLE (CTRANSVERSE. SECTION DETAIL: UPPER STORE

y Y Y YY YJ) WH: Y); YW.

1 eae ‘ Fe _Fer Fee ee __e ~e f i _

(EJFIRST FLOOR PLAN

» ©
ae : Picea in Ke) ‘
‘
&
Ba a
Poof
ie a
fee
eat i
Oe
te
© eo 8 © 8 oe
274.850 = = = SS SS ees Se

ee eo ee
Bunt
20 3) 49 50_60 FEET (F grouno PLAN S49 § 10 ismeTRes
ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 741

Ox

(F) PPER ARCADE

742 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

VILLA CAPRA: VICENZA

es

FEET METRES
7

MOCENIGO| CASA DEL

Nj

ah)
==
y
4 ss
j
f Eek7ig,
ae

Hh
ai eee
=a
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 743

3. GIORGIO MAGGIORE :VENICE

50 75FT
10 15 20MTBS j

COTHE FACADE PLAN

IL REDENTORE : \

FI mR
1007.20

VAAL,
[ilguartes

nes eT 5
=) Se SSS)
fl ef

Be ; if

Rs =
om(I Ve at i
SS ele 3 |
Trey), 2) afiole nL} =
=| SAE 4|
Esa a Fel pa
SCALE FOR re
(yo) 2a + 75 FE —— 14

we 2
ee z=
ee
{a 5 6 5 10 15 ZoMTBS
Se
veal S00
j
Orne FACADE sii PERSPECTIVE VIEW
 744 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

PALAZZO POMPEI: VERO

[| EEREi|

ee
ee
ee
a. ee :
PLAN (B)exterior FROM W. ” BAY

GUARDIA VECCHIA: VERONA

ae
Co
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 745

PAL. GRIMANI-VENIC
=A
=

He
~3k-2'6*
Ilo—

RHONA A no0A00

L] LTT] FEM’
=
| fs
y
at 58 d| 2
=se (amen N
x = | 420
= cS)
2!
a ie lift)
2 ; ae
~ ae TSE |
aa 10
| Sh AG ol
°° Oo u ai
®
i
|
ae

a os)
SS Orn. LONGITUDINAL SECTION
—— PLAN ke ---2/.10+ —4

en

5.8’———-+*—~—2'6-—
PODIUM
——-
ORDER TO
Janannaa’ GROUND FLOOR
ieee RD ER T
FIRST FLOOR
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

B. Palazzo Rezzonico, Venice (1667 -1756). See opposite page

 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 747

facade, completed by Scamozzi (1602-10), shows the adaptation of Classic Orders

to a church of the basilican plan. The church, with pedimented facade, dome,
turrets, and campanile, stands picturesquely on an island framed in by the waters
of the Lagoon (p. 743B).
. Il Redentore, Venice (1577-92) (p. 743), is similar in plan, but there are side
chapels in lieu of aisles. In the fagade the principal and subsidiary Orders start
from the same base, and the aisles are fronted with half-pediments. This church
shows how impossible it is to judge a building from a geometrical drawing only,
for in a near view (p. 743J) the dome over the crossing is dwarfed by the long arm of
the nave, as in S. Peter, Rome.

BAROQUE
BALDASSARE LONGHENA (1598-1682), a pupil of Scamozzi and contemporary
with Bernini, was by far the most distinguished Venetian architect of the period.
He continued and developed the architectural traditions of the city.
S. Maria della Salute, Venice (1631-82) (p. 739A, B), groups up most effectively
with the Dogana (Custom House) (1676) on the Grand Canal, and is sufficient to
stamp the architect as a man of genius. The church is octagonal in form, with a
central space, 65 ft in diameter, with Corinthian columns in the angles (p. 7398),
and the spacious surrounding ambulatory and radiating chapels make it one of the
largest aisled, polygonal churches. The circular dome with high drum is connected
to the outer walls by scrolled buttresses which contribute much to the effect (p.
739A). The second dome with its flanking turrets over the wide chancel adds to the
picturesqueness of this majestic group, which, throned upon its measured steps
above the waters of the canal, is the apotheosis of the Baroque style in Venice.
The Palazzo Pesaro, Venice (1663-79) (p. 734A) was not finished in Longhena’s
lifetime and the top floor was added by Gaspari (1710). It is similar to the Palazzo
Corner della Ca’ Grande (p. 734c) of 126 years previously, but the columns are
fully detached and combined with minor Orders carrying the window archivolts.
Also, there is here a return to the traditional demarcation of the central group and
the flank windows of the main facade. The ground storey rustications and the too-
profuse sculptured ornament of the added top floor give a spiky effect.
The Palazzo Rezzonico, Venice (1667-) (p. 746B) again was finished after
Longhena’s death, the top floor being added by Massari in 1752-6. Except that the
decorative columns are single rather than coupled, it bears a still closer resemblance
to Sansovino’s Palazzo Corner della Ca’ Grande, having a regular disposition of
windows across the facade, and the same serene air. In this case there is an attached
Order on the ground storey too, the column shafts, as well as the walls, being
rusticated.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
(A comparative table of the essential differences between Gothic and Renaissance is
given on p. 661, and between Italian and French Renaissance on p. 799. The following
analysis concerns the regional distinctions in Italian Renaissance architecture insofar as they
continue to survive: in the Baroque period, architectural style becomes more uniform, and
the characteristics are given on p. 659.)

PLANS
Florence. Symmetry and compactness of plan, adapted to town rather than
country dwellings. Staircases, not axially placed, are enclosed by walls and roofed
by barrel vaults (pp. 681F, 685G). Churches are either of basilican type, planned for
748 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

domical-vaulted aisles and timber-roofed naves (pp. 676G, 679C) or have Byzantine-
type eastern end combined with extended western arm, planned for vaults over
arms and pendentived dome over crossing. Genoese palaces, planned on falling
sites, have axial stair approaches through rear arcaded courts (p. 690C), while some
churches are longitudinal and others are Greek-cross type fitted within a square
(p. 682D).
Rome. Palace plans become more formal and grand (pp. 705G, 710A, 7IID, 718E).
Curvilinear elements are introduced (pp. 710A, D, 7IID), and stairs may take a
circular or elliptical form, as in the Barberini, Corsini and Braschi palaces, and at
Caprarola (p. 711Cc). The Gest church (p. 704D) established a common type, but
centralized plans were also used for churches; the old Roman type of dome over a cir-
cular space (p. 700A) and the dome on pendentives over a square space (p. 704A, D)
were both used.
Venice. Palace plans compact and rectilinear, with court where space permitted,
from which staircases would then arise (p. 733F). Straight fronts to the canals were
the rule for palaces (p. 745E) and on the main entrance front there was normally a
deep central apartment on each floor, marked on upper floors by banded windows
(p. 734A, B, D). The villas of Palladio set new standards in free and gracious planning
(p. 742B, F). Early churches simple and aisleless (p. 735B, G), but developed plans
usually longitudinal, with Byzantine-type ‘centralized space’ at east end (p. 743H).
S. Maria della Salute unusual in having an ambulatory around its centralized plan,
and a picturesque aspiring composition (p. 739A). Church naves were planned for
vaults, domes or flat ceilings (pp. 735B, G, 743D, H).

WALLS
Florence. Walls are severe and frequently astylar, but varied surface treatment
supplies character. Tiers are masked by string courses and a great crowning cornice
is a notable feature (pp. 680A, E, F, 681B, 685B). Genoese and Milanese palaces show
an early breakaway in Proto-Baroque (pp. 686B, 724D).
Rome. In High Renaissance palaces, walls are frequently screened with pilasters
both single and coupled, on each upper storey (pp. 699A, 7IOB, F, H, 711A) and later,
the pilasters may be carried through two stories (pp. 718A, F, 72IA); but generally,
the Roman Baroque palace is astylar and only church facades are profusely orna-
mented with the Orders (pp. 724, 728B).
Venice. Walls usually have the Orders superimposed in tiers (pp. 734, 740A,
741A), and marble encrustation is common, medallions, lozenges and other motifs
of coloured marble often appearing as points of special interest in friezes or cen-
trally in panels (pp. 733C, E, 734B, D, F, 739C). From the time of Palladio and his
contemporaries, the giant Order frequently appears (pp. 742D, E, G, 743C, G).

OPENINGS
Florence. Arcades have arches resting directly on columns, with or without a piece
of entablature (pp. 676L, 679B, 681C). Doorways are small and severe yet imposing
(p. 749G, J). The doorways at Genoa have triangular and segmental pediments (p.
759D, E), while another treatment has a subsidiary architrave (p. 759J). Windows
are of three types: (a) ‘Arcade’ type with central column and round arches, as in the
Palazzi Riccardi (p. 681G), Strozzi (p. 685H), and Quaratesi (p. 749D); (6) ‘Archi-
trave’ type with cornice, as in the Palazzo Gondi, or with consoles, as in the Palazzi
Pitti (p. 749F) and Riccardi (p. 681E); (c) ‘Order’ type with columns and entablature,
as in the Palazzo Pandolfini (p. 756).
Rome. Arcades have arches supported on piers faced with columns or pilasters,
as in S. Maria della Pace (p. 753) and the Palazzo Farnese (p. 705F), based on the
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 749

SiH <i
fi ifr" bom

, mM
Mh ed
at CAPITAL AN PD. BRACKETS == ne
ei ri BADIA o: FIESOLE-Nt FLORENCE (CJ RAR RAR Ae
CAPITAL IN CORTILE ‘ PILASTER CAPITAL
PAL. GONDI: FLORENCE = S SPIRITO: FLORENCE

Dee (EB | “ino AND FOUNTAIN

Oiwnoow IN CORTILE MUS'FLORENCE PALAZZO PITTI: FLORENCE
PAL. QUARATESI!:FLORENCE NICHE:NAT*

ee h :

A
Ss]
:
i
R=
es] .
fi) 4
§ oy
(a | a
| UA Ae
"1n2y x
ij | i mim ft

WAM “] | ‘a
ot
] Ni a If

© DOORWAY,
S. CROCE :FLORENCE
 750 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

woos eo):
v
i aReaU eee aKe)
(ido cit
mt od 88K i acral

: Sea:
CANTORIA rae Aas HOLY WATER STOL
TABERNACLE B MUSEUM OF S MARIA DEL FloRE SIENA CATHEDRA
S. CROCE:FLORENCE FLORENCE

SAS mn TACIT
i Te
fT “el ee
|
PAGNIADICAS TELSAGIO- VANNT- PELANIMA =a
= il il! i
DEBENEFATOR! EOPERATORI DIDETT A-CONPANGNIA +e hi Bi
Tt a ad RE RBAT RA =

pena
Dye acie ec
(Eran PIECES CROC E PULPIT:S
:FLORENCE TTSTNM NOVELL.
FLORENCE

BRACKET 10 PULPIT == =DoRES

S, CROCE :FLORENCE: OGNSSANTI:FLORENCE. (J “SIENA
BALUSTRADE 1+ PULPIT
CATHEDRAL.
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 751

Colosseum fagade. Doorways are flanked by columns (pp. 699A, 753F, G), consoles
(pp. 699A, 703D), or rusticated blocks (pp. 705c, 753D). Windows have semi-
circular arches enclosed in mouldings forming a square frame with spandrels (pp.
699E, 753C), or are flanked by columns (p. 753A, B), or have architraves and side
consoles (p. 710G).
’ Venice. Arcades have round arches resting on columns (pp. 733C, E, 744H), or on
piers faced with columns (pp. 740A, 741B, 743A, 757H). Doorways are flanked by
columns and pilasters supporting cornice and semicircular or triangular pediment
(p. 757A, C) or are enclosed in rusticated. blocks (pp. 734A, 744B), while sometimes,
as at Verona, they have architraves and side consoles (p. 759L). Windows are large
with semi-Gothic tracery (p. 734B, F) or are flanked by columns (p. 757D), some-
times supporting round arches with carved spandrels (pp. 734A, C, 740D).

ROOES
Florence. Low, tiled, roofs are sometimes visible above cornices (pp. 680, 681B,
6858). Domes were favourite features in churches (pp. 676, 679). Raking vaults to
staircases and waggon or cross-vaults are general, both frescoed and coffered (pp.
676A, 681C, 690D).
Rome. Roofs are rarely visible (p. 699A) and often hidden by balustrades (p. 718A,
B, F). Domes on high drums and crowned with lanterns are usual in churches (pp.
7OOB, 704B, H). Vaults were either coffered in stucco or painted, after the style of the
newly excavated Baths of Titus (pp. 703A, J, 705H, 723F).
Venice. Roofs with balustrades are frequent (p. 740A). Vaulted ceilings of halls,
staircases, and churches were elaboratedly moulded in plaster and frescoed (p.
735C), while timber ceilings are a feature in palaces. Domes in churches are grouped
with towers (pp. 735F, 739A; 743B; F). In Milan and other north Italian cities the
low internal cupola was often covered by a lofty structure in diminishing stages, as
at the Certosa, Pavia (pp. 617F, 686A), and S. Maria delle Grazie, Milan (p. 698A, B).

COLUMNS
Florence. The Orders, not at first in general use for facades, frequently supported
the arches, both in ‘cortile’ (pp. 681C, 690D, 698H) and church arcades (pp. 676L,
679B).
Rome. The Orders, either single or coupled, were at first superimposed (pp. 6994,
710H), but later one great Order frequently included the whole height of the build-
ing (pp. 710J, 718B). They regulated not only the height of balustrades, but the
spacing and size of windows.
Venice. Projecting columns in successive tiers with entablatures, often broken
back to the wall, were used (p. 734), while buildings by Sansovino and Palladio
show a more correct and formal treatment (pp. 740A, 741, 742).

MOULDINGS
- Florence. The few and simple mouldings of string courses were slight in projection
so as to throw into relief the crowning cornice, designed on Classic models (pp.
681A, 685F), as are also the pedimented door-heads at Genoa (p. 759A, C). Mould-
ings of ornamental features—consoles, capitals, corbels, niches, and brackets—
exhibit refinement of line (pp. 682A, 749, 750), while coffered ceilings were of great
elaboration, as at Genoa (p. 759G).
Rome. Classic mouldings from ancient Roman buildings naturally served as
models which were closely followed (p. 700J), although new combinations were
introduced by Michelangelo and his disciples (p. 705A). The mouldings of balconies,
doorways, and tombs are all Classical in treatment (pp. 753; 754)-
752 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

Venice. Mouldings were influenced by local Byzantine and Gothic art, and were
extremely refined and original. Mouldings of pedestals, doorways, entablatures,
and capitals are frequently carved with intricate ornament (pp. 734E, G, 740B, D,
745» 758):
ORNAMENT
The special character of Renaissance ornament has been mentioned (p. 664).
Florence. Florentine ornament is well illustrated in the sculptured frieze (p. 750J),
coffered ceilings (p. 759G), pilaster (p. 759K), pilaster capitals (pp. 749C, 759H),
capitals (p. 749A, B), chimney-piece (p. 749H), consoles or corbels (pp. 749J, 750G),
niche (p. 749E), tabernacle (p. 750A), holy-water stoup (p. 750C), singing-gallery
(p. 750B), lavabos (pp. 750D, 759F), altar-piece (p. 750E), pulpit (p. 750F), balustrade
(p. 750J), angle lantern and link holder (p. 685A, Cc), and reliquary (p. 750H), many
of which were delicately carved with pagan motifs of infant genii, fruit, flowers, and
masks, while heraldic shields contrast with plain wall surfaces. The traditional school
of fresco painting by Cimabue and Giotto was influenced by the discovery of
ancient Roman paintings. The coloured bas-reliefs of Luca della Robbia and his
school are specially characteristic of Florentine art at this period.
Rome. Sculpture was refined in treatment and naturally followed Classical pre-
cedent. Roman ornament generally can be studied from the capital (p. 699C),
fountains (pp. 753H, 4F, H), the Triclinium (p. 753J), singing-gallery (p. 754G),
monuments (p. 754J, K, L), candelabra (p. 754C, E), and fonts (p. 754A, B), and the
Baroque treatment is seen in the Fontana di Trevi (pp. 730B, 754D), and the altar in
the Gest church (p. 704G). The unearthing of the Baths of Titus, with their
frescoes, gave an impetus to the traditional art of painting in tempera on plastic
surfaces, which was carried out on a large scale by Raphael, Giulio Romano, and
Michelangelo, until it reached its zenith in the Sistine Chapel, Rome.
Venice. Sculpture is both beautiful and exuberant and even competes with the
actual architectural features. The Colleoni Monument, Venice (1481) (pp. 606A,
757G), is one of the most famous in the world, with a lofty pedestal embellished with
columns, surmounted by the bronze equestrian statue by Verrocchio.
Sculpture was much influenced by the various preceding styles and by a Venetian
love of display, as seen in the statue niche (p. 757F), balcony (p. 757B),; monument
(p. 758D), chimney-piece (p. 757J), carved panel (p. 758E), balustrade (p. 758H),
altar (p. 758F), candelabrum (p. 758C), flagstaff standard (p. 758A), capital (p. 7588),
and carved ornament (p. 7586, J). The colour-loving Venetians clothed their walls
internally with large pictures of subjects both sacred and profane, especially of the
triumphs of their city; or else sheathed them in brilliant panels of many-coloured
marbles from the shores of the Adriatic.

REFERENCE BOOKS
GENERAL
ALBERTI, L. B. De re aedificatoria, or I dieci libri de l’architettura. Florence, 1485. English
trans. by J. Leoni, entitled Architecture in Ten Books. 3 vols. 1726.
ANDERSON, W.J., and STRATTON, A. The Architecture of the Renaissance in Italy. London,
1927.
ARGAN, G. C. L’architettura in Italia. Milan, 1957.
BRIGGS, M.S. Baroque Architecture. London, 1913.
BURCKHARDT, J. Geschichte der Renaissance in Italien. Stuttgart, 1912.
DURM, J. Baukunst der Renaissance in Italien. 1914.
FLETCHER, BANISTER. Andrea Palladio: his Life and Works. London, 1902.
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

ee
ig

| \DO} ECOND FLOOR WINDOW

A ES aS PAL. FARNESE : ROME.

eee W :EAs ROME

D ORWAY: PAL. GAGNATI DOORWAY : PALAZZO

MONTEPULCIANO SCIARRA :ROME

esTiTyT!

faa]

(Sy)

pl
oo
al

GypoonwaY si) ee TRICLINIUM OF

AL SACRATI FERRARA \CUFONTANA PAOLA: ae LEO Ill: ROME
 754 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE
Ste

rE |
mu
>
% |
| BS
FONT :SS.VINCENZO
A ED ANASTASIO: ROME Si

foie
iC ! y
CANDELABRUM SCULPTURED GROUP ON PARAPET © NDELABRUP
S.ANDREA DELLA FONTANA DI TREVI: ROME S.ANDREA DELLA
VALLE : ROME VALLE — ROME

ect

‘Noo rel siaene

Du

FONTANA DELLE FONTANA DE

TARTARUGHE :ROME TRITONE :ROME
CANTORIA: SISTINE eee
PALAZZO VATICANO :ROME

es)
xalk

Sz
[PH
-S ie

G2.
® zs
>.

NESS

J} HE BONS! MONT TOMB OF PIETRO RIARIO MONT TO PIETRO CES

S.GREGORIO MAGNO: ROME SS. APOSTOLI: ROME NARNI. CATHEDRAL
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 755
GROMORT, 6G. Italian Renaissance Architecture. Trans. by G. F. Waters, London, 1922.
JACKSON, SIRT. G. The Renaissance of Roman Architecture. Pt. 1, Italy. London, 1921.
KINROSS, J. Details from Italian Buildings. Edinburgh, 1882.
OAKESHOTT, G. J. Detail and Ornament of the Italian Renaissance. London, 1888.
RICCI, C. Architettura barocca in Italia. Turin, 1922.
SCOTT, GEOFFREY. The Architecture of Humanism. London, 1924.
SERLIO, S. I cinque libri d’architettura. English trans. by R. Peake, The Five Books of
Architecture by Sebastian Serly. 1611.
VASARI, G. Lives of the most eminent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects. 1897.
WITTKOWER,R. Art and Architecture in Italy; 1600-1750. Pelican History of Art, 1958.

FLORENTINE RENAISSANCE
CARLI, E. Brunelleschi. Milan, 1952.
GRANDJEAN DE MONTIGNY,A.H.V., et FAMIN; A. Architecture toscane. Paris, 1874.
RASCHDORFF, J.C. Toscana. Berlin, 1888.
RUGGIERI, F. Scelti de architettura della Citta di Firenze. Florence, 1738.
STEGMANN; D. von, und GEYMULLER, H. von. Die Architektur der Renaissance in Toscana.
12 vols. Munich, 1909.

THE RENAISSANCE IN MILAN, TURIN AND GENOA

BARONI, C. L’architettura da Bramante al Ricchino. Milan, 1941.
BRIZIO, A. M. L’architettura barocca in Piemonte. Turin, 1953.
CALLET, F., et LESUEUR, J. B. C. Architecture italienne: édifices publics et particuliers de
Turin et Milan. Paris, 1855.
CARDEN,R. W. The City of Genoa. London, 1908.
DURELLI, G. and F. La Certosa di Pavia. 1853.
GAUTHIER, M.P. Les plus beaux édifices de la ville Génes. 2 vols. Paris, 1818.
GROSSO, O. Portali e palazzi di Genova. Milan, 19—.
GUARINI,G. Architettura civile. Turin, 1737.
PARAVICINI, T. V. Die Renaissance Architektur der Lombardei. Dresden, 1878.
PASSANTI, M. Architettura in Piemonte. Turin, 1945.
PORTOGHESI, P. Guarino Guarini. Milan, 1956.
REINHARDT, T. Genua. Berlin, 1886.
ROVERE,L., VIALE, V., and BRINCKMANN,A.E. Filippo fuvarra. Milan, 1937.
RUBENS, P. P. Palazzi antichi e moderni di Genova. Antwerp, 1663.

ROMAN RENAISSANCE
BOROMINI, F. Opera della chiesa e fabbrica .. . di Roma. 1720.
BRIGGS, M.S. Baroque Architecture. London, 1913.
CHIERICI, G. Bramante. Milan, 1954.
COLASANTI, A. Case e palazzi barocchi di Roma. Milan, 19—.
DONATI, C. Carlo Maderno. Lugano, 1957.
FOKKER, T. H. Roman Baroque Art. 2 vols. Oxford, 1938.
FONTANA,G. Raccolta delle chiese di Roma. 4 vols. Rome, 1855.
LETAROUILLY, P. M. Edifices de Rome moderne. 4 vols. Paris, 1868.
—. Le Vatican et la basilique de Saint-Pierre de Rome. 2 vols. Paris, 1882.
MACCARYI,E. Il Palazzo di Caprarola. Rome, 1870.
PALLADIO, A. I quattro libri dell’ architettur.. Venice, 1570. The best English editions are
those by Leoni (1715) and Ware (1738).
PERCIER, C., et FONTAINE, P. F. L. Choix des plus célébres maisons de plaisance de Rome et
de ses environs. Paris, 1809.
PEROTTI,M.V. Borromini. Milan, 1951.
RICCI, C. Baroque Architecture and Sculpture in Italy. London, 1912.
ROSSI, D. de. Studio d’architettura civile della citta de Roma. 3 vols. Rome, 1720-1.
SCAMOZZI, O.B. Fabbriche ei disegni di Andrea Palladio. 4 vols. Vicenza, 1776-83
STRACK, H. Baudenkmaeler Roms des XV-XIX Jahrhunderts. Berlin 1891.
SUYS, T.F., et HAUDEBOURT,L. P. Palais Massimi a Rome. Paris, 1818.
756 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

VENETIAN RENAISSANCE
CHIERICI, G. Palladio. Turin, 1952.
CICOGNARA, CONTE F. L. Le fabbriche e 1 monumenti conspicui di Venezia. 2 vols. Venice,
1838-40.
FLETCHER, BANISTER. Andrea Palladio: his Life and Works. London, 1902.
HAUPT, A. Palast-architektur von Ober-Italien und Toscana—Verona. Berlin, 1908.
LEONI, G. The Architecture of Andrea Palladio. London, 1715, 1721, 1742.
PAOLETTI, P. L’architettura e la scultura del Rinascimento in Venezia. 3 vols. Venice, 1893.
PIOZZA,A.M.D. Palladio. Vicenza, 1943.
RASCHDORFF, O. Palast-architektur von Ober-Italien und Toscana—V enedig. Berlin, 1903.
SCHMIDT, 0. Vicenza. Vienna, 1898.
SEMENZATO,C. L’architettura di Baldassare Longhena. Padua, 1954.

=
;=
=
=
Re,

===
—

set
cy

Palazzo Pandolfini, Florence (1520-27). See p. 707

 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 757
a =.sil aaa
Bt
= = = \

LIN
=<

‘ig ia
!

m OO
2 | ! |
i |
ie wo !
i |
| i
zt =|
:ms
= ‘° ve)
‘

TSI Qa ows Hts !

4 my i :
i
Wael : |

Puile> ling
i: | Hil \

ON lies
"| Eat (LR
: e |ale (eaL | =
3) (tmnt i td

{ = eae
= i nu |iiul
'Z = = Ki
AAar
IROARUAR LEAL 5 sie Wine Mil
TORT]

a
DOORWAY _ BALCONY: PALAZZ0 DOORWAY . SCUOLA
S ZACCARIA: VENICE — FRANCHIN|; VERONA C S, ROCCO: VENICE
ae ee eS

CUNT

, L 7 \ a We '

a E |
WINDOW: PAL. (Etre ee iF O BRIDGE STATUE-NICHE:PAL
REGIO: VENICE NICE. CORNARO “VENICE

@ Ge

CN mR

< e CHIMNEY- PIECE

MONUMENT TO GEN. H,- DUCAL. PALACE
COLLEONI: VENICE THE LOGETTA
:VENICE VENICE
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE

A Cy See yy é
Bh)
mu, 7

(B)CAPTIAL . S.M. DEI BRONZE CANDELABRU

MIRACOLI °VENICE S.ANTONIO : PADUA
riey i
se e
aV%
|
1
|
|

|
|
l
1

:
|
|
!
i
eal
KOO
rm)
the
Tz. <i
{
I
Ea
OS
Se
OS
cy I
|
|

i
I
!
if
= IPS Hal ee \
ie
SS =ieya |

»
=

DHe MON? or P BERNARDO

FRARI CH: VENICE
(E)PANEL: S.M. DEI MIRACOLI: VENICE

x
\
\
| |
\
———
Hy |
i |
|

1 = |
pa IDS/S NORS ONE \

= iN su So Ang ee \ ee !

|
HiitI “3SISOS
: eee Sang
=&
a axe os UNTNMTAATTATTTT |:
el D)

as! i ||
| WON
El ge aS) H
—————

eleke
it Pil
it) j
\ |jal
ieee S43

PORTION or DOORWAY a ———— PORTION or VENDRAMIN MON!

ORFANI AlGESUATI: VENICE. BALUSTRADE :S.M EI MIRACOLI: VENICE. SS.GIOVANNI E. PAOLO: VENICE
 ITALIAN RENAISSANCE 759

JOORWAY: PA DOORWAY : PAL.

SAMBARO. Xv CAREGA: GENOA
aENOA

. ©) OW aS
W6 4 NX

4) sS Zz

COFFERED CEILING:VIL
a B DF

FE
IN ALBARO

GROUND |f4i
7

DOORWAY VERONA
GENOA
760 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

lore
aa
S|BO

A. Chateau d’Azay-le-Rideau (1518-27). See p. 773

B, Chateau de Chenonceaux (1515-23; bridge 1556-9; gallery over bridge 1576)

See p. 773
 Land over 1,500 ft. Re
° Mues 100
be —— pest ——— ye

SS Rouen
ayn NNCE
i Caens\, aN = rea
WO “Falaise OX, Paris
Brest Gg Versailles
B Sas
= ig r . Vitre a 5 Fontaine RK
< i p e Beaugency Orleans
Rs “opdays rambo
2 ¥ “O, Amboise
A2ay le A og Chendnceaux\?
ces
Richelieu 4

France in the sixteenth century

XXI. FRENCH RENAISSANCE

(fifteenth—nineteenth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. France had, since the Romanesque and Gothic periods (pp.
335, 529), become one united kingdom, with Paris as the centre, from which the
new Renaissance influence radiated to all parts of the country. This new geo-
graphical condition conduced to a homogeneous development within her extended
boundaries, in striking contrast to the variety displayed at this period in the inde-
pendent city-states of Italy. The distance of Paris from the centre of the Renaissance
movement in Italy helped to delay its adoption in France for some seventy-five
years or more.
GEOLOGICAL. We have already seen in considering the Romanesque and
762 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

Gothic periods (pp. 336, 530) that throughout France there was good building stone,
easily worked; so much so that Paris, in which many of the finest buildings were
erected under the influence of the now powerful court, is consequently a city of
stone, just as, under different geological conditions, London is a city of brick. Iron,
wrought and cast, came into use as a building material shortly after 1780.
CLIMATIC. The climate, as in previous periods (pp. 336, 530), asserted its in-
fluence on architecture in demanding a continuance of large windows, high-pitched
roofs, and lofty chimneys, which differentiated Renaissance architecture in France
from that in Italy, the land of its birth.
RELIGIOUS. The Reformation obtained little hold in France, and ecclesiastical
polity remained much the same until the end of the eighteenth century. The supply
of Gothic churches proved adequate for the needs of the population in the early
part of the period, and therefore, as in England, few churches were then erected.
From 1558 to the end of the century the country was distracted by religious wars
between Huguenots and Catholics, and the Massacre of S. Bartholomew in 1572
drove many of the best Huguenot craftsmen into England. This emigration was
further increased by the revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685. The chief in-
fluence on ecclesiastical architecture in France during later Renaissance times came
from the powerful order of Jesuits, which, having received Papal approval in 1540,
spread over Europe in the wake of the Reformation and built great churches in
France designed for preaching to large congregations, with the object of refuting
Reformation heresies. The Revolution of 1789 was antipathetic to religion, but
Catholicism thereafter reasserted itself with renewed vigour.
SOCIAL. Paris, as the capital of the newly consolidated kingdom of France and
as the centre of the brilliant court of Francis I, attained pre-eminence in art and
literature. This resulted in the adoption of one national architectural style which
emanated from Paris and the schools in the vicinity; while the valley of the Loire
became a highway along which, in response to new social conditions, the famous
chateaux of kings and courtiers sprang up and formed models for other parts of the
country. This influence was largely augmented by the presence of a number of
Italian artists at the court and in the so-called ‘schools’, established first at Amboise
by Charles VIII, and afterwards at Tours, Blois and, most importantly, Fontaine-
bleau. Notable among the Italian artists were the following, the length of residence in
France being given in parenthesis after each name: Giuliano da Sangall» (1495; a brief
visit only) (pp. 678, 717) and Fra Giocondo (1495-1505) (p. 732), neither of whom
has left much trace of his stay; Domenico da Cortona, known as Boccadoro (1495;
1549), pupil of Giuliano da Sangallo, a woodworker who only emerged as an archi-
tect in 1519; the great Leonardo da Vinci (1516-19), who died at Amboise in the
latter year; Giovanni Battista di Giacopo, known as I Rosso (1530-40) and Fran-
cesco Primaticcio (1532-70) (p. 707), both being highly important in introducing
Proto-Baroque or ‘Mannerist’ architectural practices, chiefly decorative, into
France; Benvenuto Cellini (1537, and again, 1538-45), celebrated goldsmith and
sculptor; G. B. Vignola (1541-3) (p. 708) and Sebastiano Serlio (1541-54), the
latter having a profound influence in France rather by his writings than his archi-
tecture. These, and other artists, aided by Italian craftsmen, did much to further
the spread of the Renaissance in the country. The kingly power was gradually
becoming absolute, owing largely to the policy of Cardinal Richelieu and his
successor, Mazarin, in the reign of Louis XIII (1610-43), so that Louis XIV (1643-
1715) could declare with truth ‘L’Etat c’est moi’. He was the great patron of the
later Renaissance in France, and the palaces of the Louvre and Versailles are
monuments of his lavish expenditure on architecture and the decorative arts. Under
Louis XV (1715-74) the accumulated evils of despotism, bad government, and the
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 763

ase
—_—

B. Chateau de Chambord from N. (1519-47). See p. 773

 764 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

A. The Chatelet, Chantilly (c. 1560). See p. 774

Vf FRANCIS |
CHARLES JX
KV HENRY IV
NY

LOUIS XIV KX
LOUIS XV sort \
SS

cov RN \N
2 pa
- < Begs
oe ; x aa
| KX

‘i ce
1a
ne a ae
S ES
ort
{COUR DU CHEVAL BLANC covB cis!
Ka orn DES ADIEUX ee : RN
7 i COUR
Kal HORSESHOE j=! ae SS woe
aa STAIRS |}
Ks i FONTAINE

FEET 20 O 100 200 300

fre
ey
JARDIN DES PINS a
a METRES 19 © 50 100

B. Palais de Fontainebleau: plan showing dates of erection

 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 765
selfishness of the aristocracy had already become pronounced, when Voltaire and
Rousseau voiced enlightened criticism in their writings, which prepared the way
for the Revolution of 1789, when all architectural development was arrested until
about 1794. In the interim, there was quite a little destruction and defacement of
existing monuments. Development was resumed thereafter, new trends showing
themselves in response to the changed social conditions. Patronage passed from the
hands of the aristocracy to the ruling class of the new régime, which had tastes of a
coarser and more pretentious kind. Ambitions mounted, however, and many new
architectural works were carried out: Napoleon I carried on the work of beautifying
Paris. The Restoration of the monarchy fostered fresh tendencies once again, but
while these were intensifying, the current practices in architecture continued to
prevail with diminishing support until about 1830.
HISTORICAL. The chief factor in the process of building up the Kingdom of
France was the struggle to expel the English, inspired by Joan of Arc’s leadership
(1429-31) and culminating in the expulsion of the English in 1453. A new national
feeling was then created, which, as in other countries under similar conditions, gave
a great impetus to architecture, and resulted in the erection of many fine buildings,
which have since been held worthy to rank as national monuments. During the
first half of the sixteenth century Italy became the battlefield of Europe, for in 1494
Charles VIII of France marched through Italy to claim the Kingdom of Naples, and
in 1508 Louis XII joined the League of Cambrai against Venice, when Florence
became the ally of France. Francis I also invaded Italy to substantiate his claim to
the duchy of Milan, but was defeated and taken prisoner at the battle of Pavia, 1525.
In these wars the French kings, while failing in their actual object, were brought
into contact with the older civilization of Italy and were thus drawn into the
Renaissance movement. Following the disturbances caused by the religious wars of
the second half of the sixteenth century, there began a long period of firm govern-
ment commencing with the reign of Henry IV (1589), first of the Bourbon dynasty,
which endured for some two hundred years. France then achieved an unprecedented
unity, power and splendour, establishing a prestige in Europe which was not
secured without civil and religious tribulations and military and diplomatic clashes
with her neighbours. The long reign of Louis XIV (1643-1715) marked the zenith.
The advent of Louis XV (1715) heralded a decline, culminating in the Revolution
of 1789; this being succeeded by republican governments soon in aggressive conflict
with England and the majority of the European states. Napoleon Bonaparte
emerged as an omnipotent national figure, establishing an Empire (1804-14) by
feats of arms; but, facing reverses and the defeat of his marshals in France, ab-
dicated and retired to the island of Elba. He returned again in 1815 to lead a brief
but brilliant campaign against his country’s foes, only to meet disaster at the hands
of Wellington at Waterloo in the same year. Bourbons (Louis XVIII and Charles X)
reigned again until 1830.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The architectural character of the Renaissance in Europe has already been de-
scribed (p. 656). The style in France, which took root about seventy-five years later
than in Italy, may be divided into three periods:
(a) The Early Period (1494-1589 or sixteenth century), comprising the latter part
of the reign of Charles VIII (1483-98), beginning with his campaign through Italy
against Naples, and the reigns of Louis XII (1498-1515), Francis I (1515-47),
Henry II (1547-59), Francis II (1559-60), Charles IX (1560-74), and Henry III
(1574-89). The special character of this transitional period lies in the combination
766 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

of Gothic and Renaissance features to form a picturesque ensemble, and is best

understood by noting how it differs from Italian Renaissance. Thus in Italy a return
to Classic forms took place, though there was variety in the disposition of revived
architectural features (p. 656); whereas in France there was a period of transition,
during which Renaissance details were grafted on to such Gothic features as flying
buttresses and pinnacles (p. 796A). In Italy the principal buildings were erected in
towns, such as Florence, Rome, Venice, and Genoa, as palaces for popes, prelates,
and nobles (pp. 690, 705, 734; 756); while the principal buildings in France were
castles in the country round Paris and on the Loire for the king and his courtiers
(pp. 760, 763, 767, 781). In Italy, moreover, the influence of ancient Rome is
apparent in the Classical treatment of detail and ornament, while the influence of
Rome was naturally less manifest in France than in Italy, and the influence of tradi-
tional Gothic craftsmanship was pronounced. Then, too, in Italy the predominant
characteristics are stateliness and a tendency to Classical horizontality (p. 699A),
but in France the salient features are picturesqueness and a tendency to Gothic
verticality (p. 763B). Early buildings of the period in Italy were principally churches,
in consequence of the comparatively small number erected in the Middle Ages,
although there are also many Italian palaces of this epoch. Early buildings in France
were principally chateaux for the nobility, as sufficient churches of the Middle Ages
already existed.
Even before 1494 there were one or two instances of Renaissance architecture
constructed in France, but they were wholly by Italians and evoked no French
response. Through the majority of the reign of Francis I (to c. 1535), the French
Renaissance was based upon the school of Amboise, which followed Lombard
precedents; new buildings sometimes were designed in the general sense by the
Italians, but mostly the Italians contributed the superficial effects to structures
in the charge of distinguished French master-masons. After c. 1535 the school of
Fontainebleau became the more prominent, and the Roman Renaissance provided
the chief inspiration. Already the High Renaissance stage had been passed in Italy,
and the character of architecture then in vogue was a moderately orthodox Classi-
cism mingled with variously extreme instances of the Proto-Baroque. Primaticcio,
in particular, carried the Mannerist decorative architectural arts of Rome via
Mantua to Fontainebleau (p. 707). In this second phase too, Frenchmen were at
length beginning to produce their own national version of the Renaissance style,
the chief personalities being Jean Goujon (c. 1505-c. 1568), sculptor and architect
Pierre Lescot (c. 1510-78); Philibert de l’Orme (c. 1512-70), a man of great in-
genuity in construction and planning; Jean Bullant (c. 1520-78); and Jacques
Androuet du Cerceau the Elder (c. 1520-85). It is significant that each of these
visited Rome at some time in his career, usually in its earlier stages.
(b) The Classical Period (1589-1715 or seventeenth century) comprising the
reigns of Henry IV (1589-1610), Louis XIII (1610-43), and Louis XIV (1643-
1715). The period is notable for the dignity, sobriety and masculine quality of its
foremost buildings, resulting from the subordination of plan, composition and
detail to the unity of the whole, and the clarity and simplicity with which the
elements were used. Ornament, though somewhat coarse, is vigorous and reasonably
restrained. Influences from Italy on the one hand and the Low Countries on the
other are for the most part tempered by French taste, and the Baroque is chiefly of
importance in imparting grandeur of ideas in architectural and civic design and in
garden planning, the latter art making great strides. Very few buildings, and those
mostly ecclesiastical, are readily recognizable as Baroque from their external effects,
and the extreme forms of Baroque are rare indeed; when they do appear, they
usually are due directly to Italian or Flemish inspiration. Though exteriors become
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 767

,
a> 2

, =

a |

Boye ath

units1uhsaieTarn aie
c. Palais de Fontainebleau estanN.: drawing by J. A. Du Cerceau
768 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

B. Palais de Fontainebleau: Galerie de Henri II (c. 1540, decorations c. 1552-).

See p. 774
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 769

Classical and straightforward, interior decoration remains rich and luxuriant. It is

here that foreign Proto-Baroque and Baroque influences play an important part,
though again, the outcome of the amalgam is characteristically French. In the
earlier part of the period brick is much favoured as a building material, usually in
conjunction with stone or stucco used for quoins and dressings and for chaines,
which in lieu of pilasters, rise vertically between the string-mouldings and cornice
so as to form wall-panels (pp. 782B, 7848), these often having central framed
ornaments or niches or being infilled with patterned brickwork. Windows grow
increasingly large, and ride up into the steep roofs as dormers, while stone mullions
and transoms tend to give place to wood. There is much play with rustication, on
the Orders themselves when these appear; sometimes the Orders enframe dormers,
as well as the windows aligned vertically below. Roofs at first mostly are steep and
treated in separate pavilion units, and the ‘mansard’ roof of two different slopes is
popular, but as the period develops, unified pitched roofs or flat roofs become in-
creasingly common. The Orders figure much more frequently in the second half of
the period, normally superimposed in the typical French manner, but with a little
recourse to the giant Order. The Orders become much more strictly Classical in
proportions and detail than formerly, and this relative simplicity of exterior design
accentuates the contrast with interior decoration, which is brilliantly profuse in
fanciful scrolls, nymphs, wreaths and shells, carried out in stucco and papier-maché,
forms of ornament also consistently applied to furniture and fittings. This was the
great age of Renaissance architecture in France. The principal architects of the
period are the accomplished Salomon de Brosse (c. 1562-1626), best known for his
Palais du Luxembourg; Jacques Lemercier (1585-1654), Frangois Mansart (1598-
1666) and Louis Le Vau (1612-70), the latter three largely responsible for the in-
ception of true Classicism; Frangois Derand (1588-1644), architect of the Society
of Jesus and designer of the church of SS. Paul and Louis, Paris; Claude Perrault
(1613-88), whose most famous work is the east front of the Louvre; André Le Notre
(1613-1700), France’s outstanding garden architect; Charles Lebrun (1619-90),
skilful interior designer; and Jules Hardouin Mansart (1646-1708), celebrated
particularly for his church of the Invalides, Paris, and the Chapel at Versailles, his
later output showing a Baroque tendency.
(c) The Late Period (1715-1830 or eighteenth century), comprising the reigns of
Louis XV (1715-74) and Louis XVI (1774-92) and the subsequent period of rapid
political change, embracing the ascendancy of Napoleon Bonaparte, concluding
with the reign of Charles X (1824-30). Architecturally, three stylistic phases may
be distinguished. The first two are usually identified with the names of the
sovereigns Louis XV and XVI, but in fact overlap considerably; the third is known
as that of the ‘Empire’, approximately from 1790-1830. In the first phase there is a
descent from the Classical grandeur of the previous, Louis XIV, era, towards a
relative intimacy of effect, particularly marked in domestic planning and in interior
decoration. Very many modest residences and town ‘h6tels’ were erected in which
comfort and convenience were considered far more important than chilly dignity.
Rooms were planned for independent approach rather than in sequence, now being
interlocked in compact arrangements with many devices of circular, oval, curvi-
linear or polygonal shape to facilitate compression and produce diverting visual
effects. Double-depth or deep, squarish plans became normal. Internal corners of
apartments sometimes were rounded, and occasionally walls followed sinuous
curves on plan, this type of planning being the especial forte of J. A. Meissonnier,
whose work in general was that of an extreme form of Baroque known as Rococo, a
term applicable to much of the interior decoration of the day. Though profuse,
interior ornament is in the main cheerful, light and delicate, following a variety of
2B H.O.A.
770 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

differing ‘styles’ or modes of composition and expression. Yet externally, except in

church architecture, where near-Baroque instances occasionally occur, architecture
became more simple but at the same time less Classically pure, the Orders often
being substituted by scratchy chaines of rustication and parched ornament in
domestic buildings, while windows grew larger still, often absorbing the greater
part of the wall. About the middle of the eighteenth century a romantic tendency
made itself felt, leading to a return to the sober Classicism of Louis XIV’s time and,
more importantly, to a growing respect for the monuments of antiquity, stimulated
by discoveries at Herculaneum (1719) and Pompeii (1748) and other sites in Italy,
Asia Minor and Greece. Measured drawings and ‘restorations’ of ancient remains
appeared in increasing volume. The puristic reaction was anti-Baroque and anti-
Rococo, yet was more effective in cleansing exterior architecture of superfluities
than in materially reducing the richness of interiors, which became austere and re-
fined rather than simple, while new decorative motifs were drawn from widely
divergent sources; from the art of neighbouring countries, the Orient, Egypt, or
from France’s own antecedents as well as from Classical antiquity. Classicism, how-
ever, chiefly gained the day in the ‘Empire’ phase, when a frigid formality was the
keynote, Graeco-Roman coalescing with Egyptian motifs to produce a distinctively
French national decorative style. Externally, it was Roman character that was chiefly
favoured, only slightly tinctured with the Greek; in France the Greek and the Gothic
Revivals never achieved the popularity that they did in early nineteenth-century
England. Constructively, cast and wrought iron were exploited from the late eight-
eenth century, a dome and bridges having been erected in the material before 1810.
Among the notable architects of the Late period are Jacques Jules Gabriel (1667—
1742); Germain Boffrand (1667-1754); Juste Auréle Meissonnier (1693-1750),
Italian born, notorious for his eccentric Rococo decorative style; Jean Nicolas
Servandoni (1695-1766), also Italian, designer of the S. Sulpice, Paris, facade;
Jacques Francois Blondel (1705-74), more famous than his namesake, N. F.
Blondel, of almost a century previously, as a writer and teacher, author of Cours
d’architecture, an influential theoretical work; Jacques Germain Soufflot (1713-80),
whose studies of Roman and Greek monuments in Italy produced their effects on
his Panthéon, Paris; Etiénne Louis Boullée (1728-99) and Claude Nicholas Ledoux
(1736-1806), each responsible for several fine houses and fertile of progressive
ideas; Jacques Denis Antoine (1733-1801), designer of the Hétel des Monnaies,
Paris; Jean Francis Chalgrin (1739-1811), best remembered for his scheme for the
famous Arc de Triomphe; Bernard Poyet (1742-1824) author of the frontispiece to
the Chambre des Députés, Paris; the inseparables Charles Percier (1764-1838) and
Pierre F. L. Fontaine (1762-1853), joint designers of the Arc du Carrousel, Paris,
and virtual inventors of the ‘Empire’ decorative style; and Pierre-Alexandre Vignon
(1763-1828), known for his Madeleine church, Paris.

EXAMPLES
SECULAR ARCHITECTURE
The Chateau de Blois (1498-1524 and later) (pp. 763A, 771), begun in the thirteenth
century (p. 555), was continued (1498-1504) by Louis XII in an addition to the
east wing which shows very little Renaissance influence, and by Francis I shortly
afterwards (1515-24), being finally completed (1635-8) by Francois Mansart for
Gaston d’Orléans in the reign of Louis XIII. The buildings belonging to these
successive periods are grouped around an irregular quadrangle (p. 771B, E), with
central entrance, enriched with statuary, through the Louis XII block. The facades
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 771

CHATEAU DE BLOIS

W i
= d ZN i
a
st
ut o\
lip
N
\

STAIRCASE TOWER
(FRANCIS 1)

ZA \S™ CENTURY
HO
S SS SS
LOUIS XII(1498-1504) ENTRANCE
FRANCIS I(I515 - 1524)
8 GASTON DORLEANS
(1635 - 1658) PLAN
50. 0 50 100 150 200F!
ni © 10 20
30 40 50 60M=

i os -
(sros-Eve VIEW = (RESTORED)
 CHATEAU DE CHAMBORD

aye!
es
iS:
ea
ie!
fo
50,.,,.9 50 190
AGG bn,
150 200FEET
a ee
iB)
=“
4
a * T

gy
BRE
\

in
iS

=
Gay

DOUBLE STAIRCASE a1
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE dks
of the time of Francis I have windows with panelled instead of moulded mullions
(Pp. 771C), ornate crowning cornices, and carved roof dormers and chimney stacks
(p. 771D), which together make a pleasing and characteristic combination, further
enhanced by the famous spiral staircase of Francis I in its open tower (p. 771C), in
which the letter F and the Salamander, emblems of Francis I, are introduced as
heraldic decoration among the carving on the balustrades and vault bosses. The
staircase (p. 771A) has a beautiful architectural treatment, founded on the Mediaeval
corkscrew stair (p. 558), similar to a spiral shell. The chimney-pieces (p. 771F),
with columns, niches, and carving are ornate, and show that internal fittings were
elaborated more than in the Gothic period. The part by Gaston d’Orléans was
designed by Francois Mansart, and its stately formality forms a contrast with the
Early Renaissance work of the time of Francis I (p. 7718).
The Chateau de Bury (1520) (p. 771), a few miles from Blois, but now in ruins,
consisted of a large square court fronted by a screen wall, one storey high, with
internal colonnade and terminated by circular towers. The central entrance is con-
tained between minor circular towers. The courtyard is flanked by two-storeyed
wings containing servants’ apartments on one side and offices and stabling on
the other, connected with the three-storeyed ‘corps de logis’—the block forming the
residence of the family. Beyond this main building was the walled garden with the
chapel at the centre of the further side facing the garden entrance of the house. In
French country houses of this period, of which the Chateau de Bury is typical, the
internal court, originally designed for security, was retained; whereas in England,
after the time of Henry VII, the closed court had become an exception. This de-
scription applies also to French town houses even up to recent times, with modifi-
cations dependent on site and local conditions.
The Chateau de Chambord (1519-47) (pp. 763B, 772), designed by an Italian
architect, Domenico da Cortona—though much modified by French masons—is
the most famous in the Loire district. It is semi-fortified in character and has a plan
reminiscent of a Mediaeval ‘concentric’ castle, being made up of two rectangles one
within the other, but with the facade of the smaller on the same line as that of the
outer court, which thus protects it on three sides, while the fourth is protected by
the moat (p. 772C). This inner block or ‘donjon’, 220 ft square, corresponds to the
keep of an English castle, and has four lofty halls on each floor, finished by elliptical
barrel vaulting (p. 772G); at the junction of these halls is the world-famous double
spiral staircase, by which people can ascend and descend simultaneously without
being visible to each other. It is built up in a cage of stone (p. 772G), crowned with
a storeyed lantern which forms the central feature of the exterior (pp. 763B, 772A; F).
There is much waste of space, as rectangular rooms are formed in the circular
towers. This remarkable pile has many Gothic features clothed with Renaissance
detail, and a vertical Gothic effect is produced by wall pilasters with unique carved
capitals (p. 803C, F), and angle towers with domes or with conical roofs (p. 772A);
while the high-pitched roof with ornate dormers (p. 803H) and lofty chimneys (p.
772B, E) make the variegated skyline of this Early French Renaissance building
(p. 763B). It may be contrasted with the palace at Caprarola by Vignola (p. 708).
The Chateau de Chenonceaux (1515-23) (p. 760B) stands on piles in the River
Cher, and was originally a simple rectangular block with typical entrance doorway
(p. 803G), and steep roof crowded with the conical tops of angle turrets, dormers
and chimney stacks, but was picturesquely extended (1556-9) by Philibert de
Orme by a five-arched covered bridge reaching across the Cher, to which an upper
gallery was added (1576) by Jean Bullant in a much more ornate style.
The Chateau d’Azay-le-Rideau (1518-27) (p. 760A) is an attractive building,
built on an island, with similar characteristics to the original at Chenonceaux, yet
774 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

with the features much more sedately disposed. It retains a heavy machicolated
cornice of Mediaeval type.
Other chateaux in transitional style are those of Ecouen (1531-8), to which the
north wing was added (c. 1555) by Jean Bullant, and three mostly carried out by the
master-mason, Pierre Chambiges (d. 1544); S. Germain-en-Laye, La Muette,
and Challuau, all much of the same date (1539-49) but of which only S. Germain
survives. There are also Ancy-le-Franc (c. 1546), designed by Serlio and much
modified in the course of erection, the Chatelet, Chantilly (c. 1560) (p. 764A), in
Jean Bullant’s typical Proto-Baroque manner, and Verneuil-sur-Oise (1565-c.
1590), an extraordinarily perverse building by the elder Du Cerceau.
The Palais de Fontainebleau (1528-40) (pp. 764B, 767, 768), by the master-
mason Gilles Le Breton for Francis I, has subsequent alterations by Primaticcio
(1568) and others which account for its irregular plan. Unlike the Chateau de Blois,
the exterior is remarkably ineffective in composition, and the palace depends for its
attraction on the courts (pp. 764B, 767C), formal gardens, terraces, lakes, and
radiating vistas, while the chief interest lies in the architectural features of the
interior (p. 803A, B, D, E) and in the sumptuous saloons (p. 768A, B) decorated by
Rosso, Primaticcio and later masters. The type of mural decoration practised here
by the Italians, of boldly-modelled stucco varied with painted panels, had tremen-
dous repercussions in Western Europe, particularly in the case of the modelled
strapwork originated by Rosso in the Galerie de Francois I*". The gallery is itself
the earliest ‘long gallery’ surviving of those numerous examples found in the early
Renaissance of France, England, Scotland and elsewhere.
The Palais du Louvre, Paris (1546-1878) (pp. 775-7), continued in course of
construction from the time of Francis I to Napoleon III in the nineteenth century,
and thus exhibits a complete history of the progressive stages of French Renaissance
art carried out in successive periods (p. 775E). The Louvre, together with the
Tuileries, constituted one of the most imposing palaces in Europe, and enclosed an
area of over 45 acres. Pierre Lescot was employed by Francis I to design a palace in
the new style on the site of the old Gothic chateau which occupied the south-west
quarter of the present court, and he commenced the west side of the Renaissance
palace (1546) (p. 775E). The facade of this early design consists of two storeys with
Corinthian and Composite pilasters surmounted by an attic storey, and is enriched
with beautiful sculptured detail by Jean Goujon (pp. 775A, B, 776A). Catherine de’
Medici continued Lescot’s design round the south of the court, and conceived the
idea of connecting the Louvre and the Palais des Tuileries by a gallery along the
Seine, a scheme which was not completed till some 300 years later. Henry IV, who
was the last monarch to live in the Louvre, instructed Du Cerceau to erect (1600-9)
the gallery facing the Seine, in which pilasters including two storeys were sur-
mounted by alternately triangular and segmental pediments (p. 790c), remodelled
under Napoleon III (1860-5). Louis XIII, with Cardinal Richelieu, enlarged the
original scheme, and in 1624 the north and east sides of the old chateau were pulled
down. Lemercier then commenced the present court, which, measuring 400 ft
square, is four times the area of the Mediaeval court, but he only completed (1624-
54) the north-west part, including the Pavillon de l’Horloge, which became the
centre of the enlarged facade on the west. Louis XIV, with Cardinal Mazarin,
commissioned Louis Le Vau to complete the north, east, and south sides of the
enlarged court (1650-64), and with his minister, Colbert, employed Claude Per-
rault to erect (1667-74) the eastern external colonnade, after consideration of
designs by several other notable French architects and even of two famous Italian
Baroque masters, Carlo Rainaldi (p. 729) and the great Lorenzo Bernini (p. 725)
the latter travelling to Paris (1665) specially for the purpose of presenting his
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE HS

THE LOUVRE
its)

Tht

AVILLONbeLHORLOGE
wal

REFERENCE TABLE
THE LOUVRE | THE TUILERIES
[1546 - 59 ____ {THE TUILERIES
P. LESCOT tee fasORIGINALLY
{1566 - 1600 sapehiaae:
ey Lscleny ea (Rte ORME
ies 3{C.1566 & C.1570 xx) {1570
- 72
3} BCHAMBIGES. ral? BULLANT
1S66 -99 1600-09
ZA METEZEAU rz++ iDU CERCEAU :
1664-80
LE VAU& D'ORBAY’
{1600 - 09
DU CERCEAU
5 [1624 -54 gay {1084-67
| JAC. LEMERCIER | SSS{L. LE vau
q [1650 -64. 1806 -13
SSULLE vau |SERCERS PONTE
7 {1667 -74 wala
CL. PERRAULT H.M, LEFUEL,
1811 1873 - 78
Cpa LLON TURGOT | PERCIERE FONTAIN are LEFUEL
1850 - 57
oe) rel

RUE 192...9_190_290
=-50 390
400. 490 5390
690.790
E MARSAN VISCONTI &LEFUEL
FEET
DEPART gun 20% 0 0 200 METRES
/WALL OF
PHILIP AUGUSTUS
Pl PAV. DE! eae A.D.1I90-121I0
18) ROHAN DU OUR DE _——
2)
He MINISTRE] — |CAISSES Lh ;=) 75)
rt
a 4 6 ; = Se
Sw

ee
eee
eat
| ut ‘
PAVILLON
i
-PAVILLON
SS
~—PAVILLON PAVILLON )\ I[
2 =e
5) AE

ata aj TURGOT RICHELIEU COLBERT MARENGO 4

4 : ZD cour! Du
u DU: gf ')| EIPLACE DU
CARSROUSELEY ei eS jiLACE («) PAV. SULLY
LOUIS a
ty rN EA <N/APOLEONZ0E HORLOGEmy
LC
tee 5!| PAVILLON PAVILLON _—PAVILLON
.
:
>= J= 9 ------
MOLLIEN DENON DARU
ea eee 5 al
Z|
I} a

a COUR COUR
LEFUEL VISCONTI

MMMM ty

ENTRANCE
GATEWAY DU LOUVRE
776 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

See p. 774

B. The Louvre, Paris: east facade (1667-70). See p. 779

 FRENCH RENAISSANCE Tiel

A. Palais du Louvre, Paris: Galerie d’Apollon (decorated by Le Brun 1662).

See p. 779

B. Palais des Tuileries, Paris (destroyed) : drawings by J. A. Du Cerceau made in 1579.

(Above) view from W.; (below) view from E. See p. 779
 778 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

A. Hotel de Ville, Beaugency: B. Maison Milsand, Dijon (c. 1561).

facade (1526). See p. 779 Upper part of facade. See p. 780

c. Hotel d’Assezat, Toulouse: courtyard D. Hotel Lamoignon, Paris (1584).

facade (1555). See p. 779 See p. 780
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 779
schemes. The selected design by Perrault owes not a little to Le Vau, who was
associated with him in the project. This eastern facade (p. 776B) is of a much more
monumental character than the court facades. It is 600 ft in length, and consists of a
solid-looking basement which supports a colonnade of coupled Corinthian columns,
stretching between the pedimented centre-piece and the side wings, instead of the
usual and more effective pavilion blocks. A pilaster treatment is carried round part
of the north and south external facades. As Perrault’s design was higher than the
portions already erected, a third Order was now substituted for the attic storey on
the east side and on the eastern half of north and south sides of the court, which, as
completed with the three storeys of Orders (p. 775B), contrasts with the portion
with two storeys and an attic as designed by Lescot. The courtyard of the Ospedale
Maggiore, Milan (p. 698G, H), with its open arcades, is the only one in Italy that is
comparable to the completed court of the Louvre, which has arcading in the French
version on the wall surfaces.
In 1675 the work was suspended, as Louis XIV was directing his energies to his
palace at Versailles, and very little appears to have been done to the building until
Napoleon I employed Percier and Fontaine to continue the Order to the third
storey on the western half of the north and south sides of the court, and a small
portion at the north-east angle of the Place Louis Napoléon. Between 1806 and 1813
the same architects commenced the north wing from the Pavillon de Marsan to the
Pavillon de Rohan, to connect the Louvre to the Palais des Tuileries, but this wing
lost its significance when the latter was destroyed in 1871.
The later nineteenth-century history of these twin palaces may be conveniently
added here. Napoleon III conceived the idea of effecting a satisfactory junction
between the Louvre and the Tuileries, and in order to mask the converging sides
of the connecting wings he employed (1850-7) Visconti and Lefuel to erect the
building known as the ‘Nouveau Louvre’ on the north and south of the Place Louis
Napoléon (p. 793B). Lefuel refaced (1860-78) the Pavillon de Flore and the adjacent
wing towards the Seine, and also the Pavillon de Marsan and a small portion
adjacent, and at the same time the facing of the north wing fronting the Rue de
Rivoli was taken in hand. The Pavillon de l’Horloge (pp. 775A, 776A), designed by
Lemercier, is a fine composition, obviously derived from the high towers of the
Mediaeval period, and gave the keynote for the subsequent Pavillon Turgot (p.
775C) and the Pavillon Richelieu (p. 775D).
The sumptuous interiors (p. 777A) for which the Louvre is famous, are replete
with decorations by all the best painters of the day.
The Palais des Tuileries, Paris (1564-1680) (pp. 775E, 777B), was commenced
for Catherine de’ Medici by Philibert de Orme, who only erected a domical
central pavilion, flanked by low wings (1564-70). A wing was added (1570-92) by
Jean Bullant, and further extensions were begun by Du Cerceau the Younger (1600-
9), but not completed till 1680 by Le Vau and D’Orbay. The Palace was rich in
historical associations, especially in connection with the overthrow of the French
monarchy in 1792, and from the time of Napoleon I, who erected the Arc du Car-
rousel to serve as a monumental entrance, it was the constant residence of the
French rulers, till its destruction in 1871. There is a small portion of the facade still
preserved in the Tuileries gardens. : 7
There are also throughout France numerous Early Renaissance buildings, such
as the House of Agnés Sorel, Orleans (c. 1520), the later portion of the Hotel de
Bourgtheroulde, Rouen (1501-37) (pp. 554A; 559)> the H6tel de Ville, Orleans
(1503-13) and a much humbler one of very similar design, the Hotel de Ville,
Beaugency (1526) (p. 778A), a beautiful instance of municipal architecture. More
mature in character are the Hétel d’Assezat, Toulouse (155 5) (p. 778C), by an able
780 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

local architect, Nicholas Bachelier, an advanced design of tiered, paired columns

embracing shallow, windowed arcades; the Maison Milsand, Dijon (c. 1561) (p.
778B), by Hugues Sambin, its facade bearing an abundance of surface ornament;
and the Hotel Lamoignon, Paris (1584) (p. 778D), by Baptiste du Cerceau, in-
stancing the use at this time of the giant Order.
The account given above of the Louvre and the Tuileries has carried us beyond
the Classical period, to which we now turn.
The Palais du Luxembourg, Paris (1615-24) (p. 781E; F), was erected for Marie
de’ Medici by Salomon de Brosse, the most able architect of the century, in a bold
and simple style designedly echoing Ammanati’s rusticated garden facade to the
Palazzo Pitti, Florence (p. 680D), but is superior to it. The plan (p. 781£) and com-
position admirably typify the French hotel, consisting of a one-storeyed entrance
screen with ‘porte-cochére’, two-storeyed side wings for service and stabling, and
the three-storeyed ‘corps de logis’, forming a court, 240 ft by 190 ft. The palace is
now used as the Senate House. De Brosse also built the Chateau de Coulommiers
(1613-) (ruined), of similar character and plan and almost equally attractive, and the
Chateau de Blerancourt (1614-19) (destroyed), which lacked wings to the forecourt.
The Chateau de Richelieu (1631-7), south-west of Tours, a vast scheme by
Lemercier, survives only in a few small elements, but there still exists the walled
town of Richelieu (p. 782A) by Lemercier which the Cardinal at the same time
caused to be built in replacement of the former village. The ‘gridiron’ plan of
streets and squares was filled out with appropriate buildings and houses of brick with
stone dressings. The town, though small, always has been over-large for its functions.
The Chateau de Maisons, near Paris (1642-6) (p. 78IA—D), is one of the most
pleasantly harmonious of all the chateaux. It was designed by Francois Mansart
on asymmetrical E-plan with central entrance and twin oval-shaped side vestibules.
It is notable externally for the effective use of the Classic Orders and the high roofs,
with prominent chimney stacks, of the three pavilions, and internally for the refine-
ment of detail of the balustraded stairs, carved chimney-pieces and ornamental
ceilings. The same fine quality as at Maisons is notable in the Orleans wing at Blois
(p. 763A) which Mansart had added to the Chateau a little earlier (1635-8). Before
this again, he had built the Chateau de Balleroy (1626-36) (p. 7828), an excellent
composition in brick with stone dressings.
The Chateau of Vaux-le-Vicomte (1657-61), by Louis Le Vau, with its mag-
nificent formal gardens, is one of the most spectacular in France. There are no
wings, only a balustrade, to define the forecourt, and the apartments are consoli-
dated in a double-depth arrangement in a symmetrical composite block, of which
the transverse axis is strongly accentuated by a colonnaded entrance vestibule on
the forecourt side leading directly to a grand oval saloon dominating the garden
front, capped with a dome and lantern consorting awkwardly with the steeply-
pitched roofs of the broad angle turrets. Flat pilasters rise through the two main
storeys, enframing large windows differentiated to stress the ‘piano nobile’.
The Palais de Versailles (1661-1756) (pp. 783, 784A) was built for Louis XIV
by Le Vau, who designed a palace round the old hunting chateau (1624-6) erected
by de Brosse for Louis XIII. Louis XIV later employed Jules Hardouin Mansart
to extend the palace north and south, so as to form a building of over a quarter of a
mile long. Other portions were added (1756) by Gabriel for Louis XV. The park
facade (p. 783A), has a rusticated ground storey supporting an Order of pilasters,
high attic and balustrade, producing a monotonous effect with unbroken skyline.
The sumptuous apartments form in themselves a veritable museum of the decora-
tive art of the period. The magnificent “Galerie des Glaces’ (p. 783B), by Mansart,
is 240 ft by 34 ft and 43 ft high, and may be compared with the Galerie d’Apollon
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 781

CHATEAU DE MAISONS: NEAR PARIS

SS eerie ese ae

CADENTRANCE FACADE

METRES FEET
307100

90

780

+70

| a s emia te) Tei i Tips! 7 Nt. cea

ri WJ 4 © Su, 2, A ew 2 paket
Wurm 50 __190__150_190Fg] “S ji A ier Quella) Ji ps
O10 20 30 40 SOmm, + val o a hi < | \% / EF
BS 4 | Z__Vf Mer iz h por es
Bo a | in: ee |
i
By i | = 2
; a E ime FE x
r] i | TL ee = 2
i 1 | Ata fi ae
= é|
ioe oe ona (aL ie =
ee : Saeae er ae
etal! >) ORIGINAL eo AL 4
PLAN wrEXTERIOR (ORIGINAL DESIGN) FROM N.
782 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

A. Town of Richelieu (1631-7). See p. 780

B. Chateau of Balleroy (1626-36). See p. 780

 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 783

A. Palais de Versailles: park facade (1661-1756). See p. 780

Mahe

B. Palais de Versailles: Galerie des Glaces (1678-84). See p. 780

ee OE an 8 ee er i ec Po

c. Palais de Versailles: the entrance facade

784 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

A. Palais de Versailles: aerial view from the park (1661-1756). See p. 785

B. Place des Vosges, Paris (1605-12). See p. 785

 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 785
at the Louvre (p. 777A). Decorated by Le Brun in 1680, its walls are ornamented
with Corinthian pilasters of green marble, supporting an entablature surmounted
by trophies, and a fine ornamental vault with painted panels representing the
apotheosis of “Le Roi Soleil’. This royal residence is typical of the period to which it
belongs, both in the magnitude of its lay-out and in the enormous expenditure in
money and labour which it involved. The magnificent formal gardens laid out by
Le Notre, on axial lines cleverly manipulated to give vistas of avenues and water
canals, are liberally adorned with fountains, terraces, and arbours, set off with
statues and vases in the Antique style.(p. 788D, F). This ostentatious palace and
pleasure garden was at once the expression of the irresponsible extravagance of
“Le Grand Monarque’ and the aggravation of popular discontent.
Among the very many important urban dwellings constructed during the Classi-
cal period, especially in Paris, seat of the highly-centralized government of the
country, are those built around the Place des Vosges, Paris (1605-12) (p. 784B),
perhaps by Claude Chastillon, in a comprehensive scheme of private ‘hdtels’
fronting the arcaded square, forming an excellent example of the early (Henry IV)
brick and stone style; also, the Hétel de Sully, Paris (1624-9) (p. 786a), by Jean
du Cerceau, dignified in scale and proportions but over-elaborated with the coarse
ornament typical of the day; the Hétel Lambert, Paris (1640-) (p. 786B), by Louis
Le Vau, exhibiting the Classical character and restraint of the later phase of the
period; and the Place Vendéme, Paris (1698-) (p. 787A), by J. H. Mansart,
another group of private dwellings organized into a fine, unified Classical scheme,
comprising a giant Order over a rusticated arcaded basement. Triumphal arches
include the single-arched Porte S. Denis, Paris (1671-4) (p. 786c), by Nicholas
Fran¢ois Blondel and the sculptor Michel Anguier, while among public buildings
there is the Collége des Quatre Nations, Paris (1662), by Louis Le Vau,
Classical in detail but Baroque in its bold conception.
In the Late period, chateaux and town houses at first follow the preceding
trends, whilst showing an increasingly simple yet less pure external style, ornament
being concentrated at nodal points. Keynotes are intimacy of scale; compact plan-
ning, leading to an abandonment of the courtyard approach in chateaux; and the
development of many varieties of rich and delicate interior decoration. About mid-
century, Antiquarianism begins to show positive and widespread effects.
The Petit Trianon, Versailles (1762-8) (pp. 788A, 789A), erected by J. A. Gabriel
for Louis XV, who presented it to Madame du Barry, is the most superb piece of
domestic architecture of the century. It has a gracious air, resulting from the clarity
of its ordonnance and the sedate proportions. Though wholly contemporary in
expression, it recalls ancient Roman architecture at its best. The south front (p.
788A) has a basement treated with the smooth-faced rustication of the day, while the
ashlar of the upper floors is ornamented with flat, Corinthian pilasters rising through
two stages between architraved windows differentiated in height to accentuate the
‘piano nobile’. As the plan is nearly square, the four facades are similar, except that
there are no pilasters on the eastern front, and on the western, they are substituted
by columns. The building is related to an exquisite formal-garden setting by quad-
rant wing-walls and terraced staircases. The saloon (p. 789A) also is typical of the
period, with its panelled walls, large mirrors, double doors, consoled chimney-
piece, coved ceiling, and elaborate chandelier, while the chairs and the table with
its Hermes legs complete this interesting interior.
The H6tel de Brunoy, Paris (1772), by E. L. Boullée, and the Hétel de Salm,
Paris (1780: destroyed), by C. N. Ledoux show most strongly the archaeological
reversion to ancient precedents, though still at this time many town residences
continued to follow French national traditions in design.
 786 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

B. Hétel Lambert, Paris: court (1640-). c. Porte S. Denis, Paris (1671-4).

See p. 785 See p. 785
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 787

A. Place Vendéme, Paris (1698-—). See p. 785

3. Civic scheme, Nancy: Place Stanislas looking N. to Place du Gouvernement (1750-7).

See p. 791
 788 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

Se Se eters 78'62 = 2 = eer ee

a] (a feng C o A

g = Ssoe

eT) eT) a fei

fees Hs cis Hy
ne ad : == | 9
I T a ||| al ——s
cig samt) a = Wie
Pe ived eae = is lie i .
H
oy Ea (a C i OO a rei
Sis falieaie ca | A b |
\ ann [pete a it ae a ie cos i “i
i
nl iM
nel
All
See
+—Thal HH
Cpe)
lui | 7 ! om
|
OM
quit at J

aa _ Tal
Ba
ot
a
a fal

a a Oc
ZA :

Pe ee LUCARN eseoree vane

HOTEL pesINVALIDES HOTEL ves INVALIDES
PARIS

e We Tee es i iB
aa iy ES Mu UAT
‘ae
A PL
cL
Wy de Eat ee
5
/ 1

(D) MARBLE VASE TM iigipaznannre nn uve

MARBLE VASE
VERSAILLES |) oTELRUE pu CHERCHE-MIDI: PARIS VERSAILLES
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 789

ih ae
Me |
i) Wi]

(A)SALON: THE PETIT TRIANON:

af spe eo
= oo )
iMas ii
{ Ba] 44 re Wey

i Ui WW|tiSle
ZY ai (oN TE S ae,d
how G t
Hel <einy
Lal OR AOR = ——
VO OSeeOT E

Y ( 1
lo
maptgn a
ot al
be
im
Gr
UG Wh
ie
Li a a
=e i bi esl ae
iF a)
‘ary
eh
El
all he
lL
ay ri O

AN AES
7 MWh s
2 zH Da | i wo
Sey |), | Seana,
PANN a | |3 es
|\ / i il |oun (i ani
>

Ss
Reena
ae
BS|
eed

[i \ EU =S
Za8
Of
eat
Se
ol

I \ ASS

B) TOMB OF CARD'S DIAMBOISE. TOMB OF LOUIS XII

ROUEN!) CATHEDRAL _.) | ‘Coe benis CATHEDRAL __
 790 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

B. Hotel des Monnaies, Paris: centre block _c. Palais du Louvre: gallery facing Seine b:
(1771-5). See p. 791 Du Cerceau (since refaced) and Pavillon di
Flore (1600-9). See pp. 774, 791
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 791

The Place Louis XV, now Place Stanislas, Nancy, a city formerly the capital
of Lorraine, formed part of an ambitious civic scheme laid out (1750-7) (p. 787B)
by the architect Emmanuel Héré de Corny (1705-63), linking with two small
‘hotels’ built earlier by G. Boffrand and with the Governor’s Palace so as to form a
series of squares of varying shape and character. The Place Stanislas, nearly
square, is surrounded by public buildings which on the north side turn outwards
to bridge a moat and frame a vista passing successively through a triumphal arch
and the long Place de la Carriére, the latter flanked symmetrically by Boffrand’s
two hétels and rows of simple terraced houses, to close on the Place du Gouverne-
ment and Governor’s Palace lying transversely at the northern end. Hemicycle
screens bind the facade of the Governor’s Palace to the northern ends of the
terraced houses, and the Place de la Carriére is attractively laid out with alleys of
trees and embellished with balustrades and statues. The principal buildings have
that simple ordonnance yet rich detail which is found at an earlier time in the rest
of France.
The Place de la Concorde, Paris (1753-70), by J. A. Gabriel, has twin palaces
on the north side (p. 790A), now turned to other uses, which in their impressive
monumental character evidence the sobering influence of archaeological research;
as also do the Ecole Militaire, Paris (1752-), by the same architect, the Hétel des
Monnaies (Mint), Paris (1771-5) (p. 790B), by J. D. Antoine and the Palais de
Justice, Paris (rebuilt 1776), by J. D. Antoine and others.
The Chambre des Députeés, Paris, south of the Place de la Concorde, received
its dodecastyle (twelve-columned) portico (1807; architect, B. Poyet) (p. 794A) in
the final (Empire) phase of the Late period. This fagade shows the uncompromising
Classical severity common in important monuments at that time. The whole com-
position is based on Roman principles, and comprises a broad flight of steps, flanked
by statuary, preceding a temple-like pedimented front standing forward of plain
wings decorated only with slight angle pilasters and isolated ornamented panels.
The windowless walls are textured with plain-faced rustication.
At the Louvre, Paris, as mentioned on p. 779, the architects Percier and Fontaine
erected the wing to the north of the Place du Carrousel (1806-13) (p. 775E), of
which the design was in the nature of an antiquarian exercise since it followed
closely that of the west end of the south wing of the same building, facing the Quai
du Louvre, built by Du Cerceau in 1600-9 (pp. 775E, 790C) but subsequently re-
faced. Percier and Fontaine also were the designers of the Arc du Carrousel (1806)
(pp. 775E, 779 793B), standing nearby, this more definitely archaeological since it
fairly closely reproduced the Arch of Septimius Severus, Rome (p. 224), and at the
imperial residences were responsible for much restoration and interior decoration
in the ‘Empire’ style, of which they were the principal creators. Another arch,
having a greater fame, is the Arc de Triomphe de Il’Etoile, Paris (p. 793A)
(1806-36), by Chalgrin and others, a more original design and less obviously related
to ancient models.

ECGLESPASTICAL-ARCHITECTURE
The earliest indications of Renaissance in France, as in England, occur in sepul-
chral monuments, pulpits, portals, and fittings of existing Gothic churches, such
as the Tomb of Louis XII (1515) in S. Denis Cathedral (p. 789c), the Tomb of
the Cardinals d’Amboise, Rouen (1522) (p. 7898), the portals of La Trinité,
Falaise, the Chateau de Vitré pulpit (p. 794c) and the apsidal chapels of S.
Pierre, Caen (1528-45) (p. 794B).
S. Etienne du Mont, Paris (1517-60) (p. 795A, B), has nave piers crowned with
792 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

Doric-like capitals supporting ribbed vaulting, and there is an unusual ambulatory

above the nave arcade. The famous Jubé or rood screen (c. 1545) (p. 795A), prob-
ably by Philibert de l’}Orme, has double staircases with ornate balustrades of
Renaissance detail. The screen was extended across the aisles in 1606. The centre
of the facade, added 1610-25, has an entrance doorway framed with Composite
columns, supporting an entablature and sculptured pediment. Above is a circular
window with quasi-Gothic tracery, crowned with a steep-pitched gable to the nave,
while beyond is a lofty tower.
S. Eustache, Paris (1532-89) (p. 796A), not completed till 1654, may have been
designed with the aid of the Italian-born Domenico da Cortona (p. 762). It is
planned like a five-aisled Mediaeval church with apsidal end, high roofs, window
tracery, flying buttress, pinnacles, and deeply-recessed portals, all clothed with
Renaissance detail, and is a remarkable evidence of how the Mediaeval plan
lingered on into the Renaissance period. The west front dates from 1772-87.
S. Gervais, Paris (1616-21) (p. 795C), a facade added to the Late Gothic church
by Salomon de Brosse, has three tiers of coupled columns of the Doric, Ionic and
Corinthian Orders arranged to give the direct straightforward expression which is
typical of this architect’s work. It is the earliest wholly Classical church facade of
importance of the French Renaissance.
SS. Paul and Louis, Paris (1625-34) (p. 796B), by Francois Derand, built as
the church of the Jesuit College, has the type of plan and richness of effect usually
associated with Jesuit churches. Like S. Gervais, it is unusual, however, in having
three tiers of Orders in its facade, which in the multiplication of its lines and features
and abundant ornament is as nearly Baroque as is achieved in France, save for a
few special exceptions. The dome is one of the earliest in Paris.
The Church of the Sorbonne, Paris (1635-42) (p. 796c), designed for Cardinal
Richelieu by Lemercier, bears evidence of the architect’s long training in Rome,
being much in the manner of the late Proto-Baroque there, yet having the restraint
typical of the French Classical period as a whole, ornament being effectively sub-
ordinated to the comprehensive architectural effect. The plan has a double-axis
symmetry, the crossing crowned with a fine dome, 40 ft in diameter. The facade
has superimposed Orders, only the lower being in the round, and finishes above
with an unbroken pediment, while the aisles are linked to the nave by extended scrolls.
The Church of the Val de Grace, Paris (1645-67), begun by Francois Mansart,
formerly attached to a monastery, now forms part of the Military Hospital. Le-
mercier took over the work when Mansart was dismissed in 1646, and the design
of the upper part is due to him. It is for this reason that the exterior (p. 797A) has
some resemblance to the Church of the Sorbonne, though it is bolder and more
successfully composed. It has a fine projecting portal, by Mansart, and the aisles
are connected to the nave by vigorous scrolled consoles, while in the distance rises
Lemercier’s massive and ornate dome, retained by sixteen buttresses faced with
pilasters and capped with inverted consoles above the serrated entablature. The
interior, with wide nave flanked by piers faced with Corinthian pilasters, vaulted
roof and dome (56 ft diameter), and the saucer-domed aisles, undoubtedly influenced
Sir Christopher Wren in his design for S. Paul’s, London (p. 906).
S. Sulpice, Paris (p. 797B), was commenced in 1646 but the scheme was re-
fashioned by Le Vau in 1655, while others took a hand before the body of the
church was finished in 1745. It is a church of vast size, with no less than eighteen
chapels, and with domical vaulting borne by Corinthian columns. The famous
facade (1733-49) (p. 797B), designed by Servandoni, is 205 ft wide and forms a
great two-storeyed narthex screen with superimposed Doric and Ionic Orders
flanked by towers, the northernmost having been finished by Chalgrin in 1777-88.
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 793

A. Arc de Triomphe de l’Etoile, Paris (1806-36). See p. 791

Pavillon Pavillon Pavillon Pavillon Pavillon

de Rohan Turgot Richelieu Colbert Sully
+ + \ t +

Site of Palais des Tuileries

B. Palais du Louvre, Paris: from the Pavillon de Flore (1546-1878). See p. 779
794 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

A #1 ni
a
TT

DDGe Seed ae:

B. S. Pierre, Caen: apsidal chapels c. Chateau de Vitré: external pulpit

(1528-45). See p. 791 (16th cent.). See p. 791
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 795

A. S. Etienne du Mont, Paris (1517; facade 1610-25): showing jubé (c. 1545; screens
across aisles 1606—). See p. 791

3. S. Etienne du Mont, Paris (1517- c. Church of S. Gervais, Paris (1616-21).

1560; centre of fagade 1610-25). See p. 792
796 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

A. S. Eustache, Paris (1532-89). See p. 792

B. Church of SS. Paul and Louis, Paris c. Church of the Sorbonne, Paris (1635-42).
(1625-34). See p. 792 See p. 792
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 797

|net
. Church of the Val de Grace, Paris (1645- B. S. Sulpice, Paris (facade 1733-49; ex-
1667). See p. 792 cept N. tower 1777-88). See p. 792

c. The Panthéon, Paris: interior looking Dp. The Dome of the Invalides, Paris
towards apse (1757-c. 1790). See p. 799 (1680-91). See p. 799
798 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

A. The Panthéon, Paris (1757-c. 1790). See opposite page

B. The Madeleine, Paris (1806-42). See opposite page

 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 799
The Dome of the Invalides, Paris (1680-91) (pp. 797D, 800A-Cc), by J. H.
Mansart, completed the scheme of the Hétel des Invalides undertaken by Bruant
during the years 1670-7, and is one of the most impressive Renaissance domes in
France (p. 797D). It has an internal diameter of 90 ft 9 ins, and is placed over the
centre of a Greek-cross plan, resting on four piers in which openings lead by steps to
four angle chapels (p. 8008) which fill in the angles of the cross, making a square of
198 ft externally. It has a high drum with coupled columns and lofty windows, and
the dome proper is triple in construction (p. 800c). The inner dome, 175 ft high, has
a wide central opening, through which are seen the painted decorations of the middle
dome, lighted by windows at its base. The external dome is framed of timber
covered with lead, and crowned by a high lantern and cross, rising to a height of
350 ft. The construction differs considerably from that of S. Paul’s, London (pp.
906, 912), where an intermediate brick cone supports the external stone lantern.
The Panthéon, Paris (1757-90) (pp. 797C, 798A, 800D-F), erected from designs
by Soufflot, has a fine portico with unusual arrangement of columns leading to the
main building, which is a Greek cross on plan (p. 800D). The four piers which support
the central dome were originally so slight as to threaten the stability of the structure,
and were afterwards strengthened by Rondelet. The dome, 69 ft in diameter, is
triple in construction (p. 800E), as in the Invalides, but has an outer dome of stone
covered with lead (p. 798A). The interior (p. 797C) owes much of its elegance to the
unusually slender piers, the fine Corinthian columns, and the large clear-story
windows, invisible externally (p. 800F), surmounted by the domical vaulting. The
general effect is enhanced by the coloured frescoes of foremost French artists. The
exterior (p. 798A) is striking by reason of its magnificent hexastyle portico of
Corinthian columns, thrown into relief by the unbroken, windowless walls, whose
only decoration is a continuous entablature with carved festoons. The graceful
dome is somewhat marred by the appearance of weakness in the free-standing
columns round the lofty drum—a defect avoided by the unerring genius of Wren
in designing the dome of S. Paul’s Cathedral (p. 906).
The Madeleine, Paris (1806-42) (p. 798B), designed by Vignon in imitation of
an octastyle peripteral Roman temple, 350 ft by 147 ft, has a ‘cella’ or nave divided
into three bays, covered by saucer domes with central openings for lighting the
church, which has a most impressive interior, while the apse at the sanctuary end
has a semi-dome. The imposing exterior depends largely for its effect upon its
island site, which is further accentuated by the podium, 23 ft high, on which the
building stands, and by the magnificent rise of the approach up the wide expanse
of steps. The Corinthian columns of the grand surrounding peristyle are built up
in thin drums, the joints of which somewhat confuse the lines of the fluting. This
peristyle supports an entablature in which the architrave is formed of voussoirs
instead of a series of horizontal lintels, and the principal pediment has a sculptured
tympanum.
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
(A comparative analysis of essential differences between Gothic and Renaissance archi-
tecture is given on p. 660. The architectural character of Italian and French Renaissance
architecture has been considered (pp. 671, 765), and a Comparative Table of the two styles
is here given.)
ITALIAN RENAISSANCE FRENCH RENAISSANCE
PLaNs. Severe Classic disposition ren- PLANS. The irregularity peculiar to Gothic
dered necessary by the narrow streets of buildings was occasionally retained as
Florence and Rome and the confining suitable to the exigencies of the country-
waterways of Venice (pp. 685G, 745E). side (p. 771).
 800 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

DOME OF THE jINVALIDES: JARS

FEET+METRES
150+

40
1254

ha ey
100130 avis Wie (ae
Pn Se S

bo AMES el er
751 1 Meio] E\GN NG

5 MeyS|ea) TENS
50++ =

2545
» :
aH i
“$c oe

: He 7@......!

i
i] IR0 Vi

tall ee| ed
oT mC NGTUBNAL SECT

THE PANTE EGR

50i _190_150__200_250FEET FEET.METRES
o "0 20 30 40 50 60 70METRES 100)30

THRO’ NAVE AT 2
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 801
ITALIAN RENAISSANCE FRENCH RENAISSANCE
A ‘cortile’ or central open court is generally The typical town-house plan has a court
surrounded by a colonnade or arcade enclosed on one side by the ‘corps de
supporting the main walls to give ampler logis’, flanked on either side by lower
space for the important rooms of the wings and cut off from the street by a
‘piano nobile’ (pp. 681, 705, 733). screen wall (p. 781E, F).
WALLS. A city palace, as in Florence, WALLS. A country chateau is seen on all
Rome, and Venice, is principally seen sides, and picturesque grouping from
from the street, and the architectural every point of view was therefore sought
features were often only applied to the © (pp. 763B, 772A). The gables and promi-
street facade. Straight facades, varied by nent stone dormers of the early period
Orders, arcades, and windows, were (pp. 763B, 772, 803H) gradually gave place
crowned by a deep cornice (pp. 685, 734, to pedimented and balustraded facades
756). Attics are rare, but an open top (pp. 776A, 781A). Pavilions crowned with
storey (belvedere) is a feature. Brickwork steep independent roofs mark the centre
was used in large masses with ashlar and ends of facades (pp. 775C, 781A, F).
facings, also stone and marble, while Stone was the chief material, sometimes
ornament was confined to windows or combined with red brick (p. 7824).
Orders. Later buildings are often faced
with stucco (p. 680F).
OPENINGS. Arcades, both in cortile and OPENINGS. Arcades were not usual, owing
piazza, continued in use, as indeed had to the northern climate. Doors of the
been the custom since the time of the early period often show Mediaeval in-
Romans, affording shelter from the fierce fluence and are much elaborated (p.
rays of the southern sun. Symmetry, 803G), but later are frequently treated
rather than convenience, determined the plainly (p. 804F, Kk). Gothic mullions and
position of doors and windows (pp. 681, transoms continued, though changed in
705), round which ornament was con- detail (pp. 763B, 771C, 803H). Windows
centrated, thus throwing these features were often superimposed, but with the
into prominence. In Baroque palaces a use of the Orders horizontal lines of the
return was often made to the astylar entablature prevailed (pp. 776A, 804D, K).
treatment, when elaboration of detail Symmetry was so much considered that
marked door and window frames. The when there was a mezzanine floor with
attic was unusual and the top win- windows (p. 804K), similar windows
dows were often set in a deep frieze or were added in the upper part of main
between consoles supporting the main apartments adjoining. The attic was a
cornice (p. 740A). favourite feature, often with circular
windows (‘ceils-de-bceuf’), as at the
Hotel des Invalides, Paris (p. 788B, C).
ROoEs. Flat or low-pitched roofs are usual Rooks. High roofs are usual with dormer
and roofs play no part in the design of windows and lofty chimney stacks which
buildings in narrow streets where they give a picturesque skyline from a dis-
could not be seen, and even chimneys tance (pp. 763B, 77ID, 772B, E). The
were masked, except at Venice (pp. 680, ‘mansard’ roof (see Glossary), which gave
734,756). In the early period tiled roofs more internal space, was favoured; while
extended over the great cornice, but pavilions with independent roofs assumed
were hidden in many later buildings by the importance of towers (pp. 767A; 775;
the balustrade (pp. 718, 740A). Domes 776A, 781A). Domes were employed in
gave skyline to churches (pp. 679, 698, churches of the later period (pp. 796Cc,
704, 720, 739A). 797A, D).
CoLuMNSs. Pilasters, whether plain or CoLuMNS. Pilasters, lozenge-panelled or
carved with foliage, were used for their carved with foliage, were used to orna-
architectural importance as ‘Orders’ and ment quasi-Gothic features, as at Cham-
panel decoration was often omitted (pp. bord, where slate in the panels gives
699, 706D, 718, 742D). variety (p. 803G, H).
An ‘Order’ often included two or more A separate ‘Order’ was usually given to
storeys, while in churches a single Order each storey, according to the practice of
2c H.O.A.
802 FRENCH RENAISSANCE
ITALIAN RENAISSANCE FRENCH RENAISSANCE
is the rule, as introduced by Palladio (pp. Vignola (pp. 763, 767; 775, 776A, 781A;
706D, 718, 743). 783A).
MOULDINGS. Mouldings of heavy crown- MOULDINGS. Gothic influence pervaded
ing cornices followed Roman models, the early period and combinations of
although showing much originality. Classic and Mediaeval mouldings were
String courses between stories have only often used. Some cornices have unusually
slight projection to give value to the top small members, while later mouldings
cornice, but the details of each Order gradually developed a distinctive charac-
were used in full (pp. 749, 753, 758). ter (pp. 803, 804).
ORNAMENT (pp. 749, 750; 754; 758, 759). ORNAMENT (pp. 77I1F, 783B, 803, 804).
Fresco and modelled plaster were much Gothic wood panelling continued into
employed and in quite a few cases the two the early period, and was often splendidly
were combined, as in the arabesques of carved with arabesques, as at Blois;
Raphael. Frescoes were, however, some- whereas in later work the scale suggested
times out of scale with the architecture, by the material was gradually lost.
and therefore deficient in decorative Heraldry was much used in the early
value. Later stucco work suffered in the period (p. 771C, D, F). The Raphael style
same way and Venice has some extra- of decoration, introduced by Italian
ordinary examples of its abuse. Interiors artists, as at Fontainebleau (p. 768), has
generally in the later period were unduly continued to influence French art. Tapes-
regulated by the features of Classic temple try and hangings were superseded by the
architecture without relation to require- Louis XIV style of wood, papier-maché,
ments. Sculpture tended increasingly to and stucco decoration in white and gold,
encroach upon the architectural lines of which was also applied to furniture and
buildings, particularly in the Baroque every accessory, and thus gives fitness
period, when, however, considerable and unity to the interiors. Sculpture
originality is displayed, especially in the acquired increasing importance, and
fountains of Rome (pp. 753, 754). Char- figure sculpture of great excellence ap-
acteristic ornament is seen in panels (p. pears in harmonious relationship with
758E, H), capitals (pp. 749A, B, C, 758B, architecture. Other ornament is seen in
759H), balconies (pp. 734G, 753C, D, F, G, panels (p. 803D, E), capitals (p. 803A, B, C,
7578), chimney-pieces (pp. 749H, 757]) F), balconies (p. 804B), vases (p. 804C),
consoles (pp. 749B, 750G), ceilings (p. keystones (p. 804A, H), consoles (p. 804E),
759G), monuments (pp. 754], L, 7576; walls and ceilings (p. 804G), fountains (p.
758D), and entablatures (pp. 758G, J, 804]), and entablatures (p. 804L).
759A; C).

REFERENCE BOOKS
ARNOTT, J.A., and WILSON, J. Le Petit Trianon, Versailles. Edinburgh, 1907.
AUBERT, M., and VERNIER, G. L’ Architecture francaise. 1941.
BERTY, A. La Renaissance monumentale en France. 2 vols. Paris, 1864.
BLOMFIELD,R. A History of French Architecture 1494 to 1661. 2 vols. London, 1911.
—. A History of French Architecture 1661-1774. 2 vols. London, 1921.
BLONDEL, J. F. L’ Architecture francaise (known as the ‘Grand Blondel’). 4 vols. folio.
Paris, 1752-6.
BLUNT, A. Francois Mansart. London, 1941.
—. Art and Architecture in France, 1500-1700, Pelican History of Art, 1953.
BRIERE, G. Le chateau de Versailles: architecture et decoration. 2 vols. Paris, 19—.
CONTET;, F., et VACQUIER, J. Les vieux hétels de Paris. 20 vols. Paris, 1913.
DALY. Motifs historiques d’architecture et de sculpture. 2 vols. Paris, 1870.
—. Motifs historiques: decorations interieures. 2 vols. Paris, 1880.
DESHAIRS, L. Le Petit Trianon et le Grand Trianon. 2 vols. Paris.
DU CERCEAU,J.A. Les plus Excellents Bastiments de France. 2 vols. Paris, 1868-70.
GANAY,E. de. Chateaux de France. Paris, 1948-50.
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 803

Ny a (@ !

FRONT VIEW
CAP. PALAIS ve FONTAINEBLEAU

PANEL: PALAIS be
FONTAINEBLE.

Al |Baten |_ & TCAP CHATEAU

my jae =\2 3 |ve CHAMBORD
en
3 Exwad 5 al :
S23 G

Qe
k————
ROOF

ELEVATION
SECTION

ca ee
es Sat
ORMER WINDOW:CHATEAU pe CHAMBORD
ENONCEAUX 5
 804 FRENCH RENAISSANCE

¥
SOLE (Louis xv) PARIS
jf sale Oe gee ee
RIS __ ze = SE

IS 4Z) i E :
1 SZ

TLE ones / # cae yi

=== oiG Saas B | Hl:
l ;

PLAN DOOR «-WINDOW (Louis Xv) PARIS =

FOUNTAIN (outs xv) PARIS CORNICEe BALUSTRADE ou
 FRENCH RENAISSANCE 805
GEBELIN, F. Les Chateaux de la Loire. Paris, 1927.
—. Les Chateaux de la Renaissance. Paris, 1927.
—. Le style Renaissance en France. Paris, 1942.
GEYMULLER, H. von. Die Baukunst der Renaissance in Frankreich. (Handbuch der
Architectur). 2 vols. Stuttgart, 1898-1901.
Grands Palais de France: (1) Palais du Louvre et des Tuileries, 4 vols.
(2) Versailles, par Pierre de Nolhac, 2 vols.
(3) Les Trianons. par P. de Nolhac, 4 vols.
(4) Fontainebleau, par Louis Dimier, 2 vols.
(5) Le Palais Royal, 2 vols.
GROMORT, G. Histoire abrégée del’ architecture de la Renaissance en France. Paris, 1930.
GUEDY, HENRI. Le Palais du Louvre, Paris. Paris, 19—.
GUERINET, A. L’ Architecture francaise: extérieures, intérieures. 12 vols. Paris, 19—.
GURLITT, C. Die Baukunst Frankreichs. 2 vols. 1900.
HAUTECOEUR,L. L’ Architecture francaise de la Renaissance a nos jours. 1941.
—. Histoire del’ architecture classique en France. Paris, 1943.
JACKSON, SIRT. G. Renaissance of Roman Architecture. Pt. 111, France. London, 1923.
KRAFFT et RANSONNETTE. Plans . . . des plus belles Maisons . . . contrues a Paris, etc. Paris,
c. 1810.
LAVEDAN,P. French Architecture. Original French edition, 1944, trans., Pelican, 1956.
MARTIN, C. La Renaissance en France. 2 vols. Paris, 1910-12.
PALUSTRE, L. La Renaissance en France. 3 vols. Paris, 1879-85. (Not completed).
PFNOR,R. Le Palais de Fontainebleau. 3 vols. Paris, 1859-67.
PLANAT, P., et RUMLER;E. Le style Louis XIV; XV; XVI. 3 vols. Paris, 1911-14.
ROSENAU,H. Boulee’s Treatise on Architecture. 1953.
ROUSSEL, J. Monographs on Fontainebleau, Blois, and Versailles et Trianons. Paris, 19—.
ROUYER,E. La Renaissance de Francois I 4 Louis XIII. Paris.
—., et DARCEL, A. L’art architectural en France. 2 vols. Paris, 1863-6.
SAUVAGEOT, C. Palais, chateaux, hétels et maisons de France. 4 vols. Paris, 1867.
VACQUIER, J. Les anciens chateaux de France. 11 vols. Paris, 19=—.
VERDIER,A., et CATTOIS, F. P. L’architecture civile et domestique. 2 vols. Paris, 1858.
VITRY, P. Hétels et maisons de la Renaissance francaise. 3 vols. Paris, I91I-I2.
WARD, W.H. Architecture of the Renaissance in France, 1495-1830. 2 vols. London, 1926.
—. French Chateaux and Gardens in the Sixteenth Century. Illustrated by facsimiles of
original drawings by J. A. du Cerceau. London, 1909.
 Land over 1,500 feet

Q Miles foo

Germany in the Renaissance period

XXII. GERMAN RENAISSANCE

(sixteenth—nineteenth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. The central position in Europe of the country inhabited by the
Teutonic peoples enabled it to receive Renaissance art from Italy on the south and
from France on the west; while, as the states in this great tract of country were
independent, there could be no central and unifying influence as in France. The
distance from the headquarters of the new movement resulted in deferring its intro-
duction till some 125 years later than in Italy. The states of Prussia, Hanover,
Saxony, Bavaria, Wtrtemberg, and Baden, together with Silesia, Bohemia and
Austria, were widely scattered as to latitude and longitude, and were distinguished
by different geographical conditions of seaboard, rivers, and mountains, and this
differentiated the architecture of the various districts, as in previous periods (pp.
353, 583).
GEOLOGICAL. The geological conditions naturally remained the same as during
Romanesque and Gothic times (pp. 354, 583). Timber, brick, and stone continued
to give their own character to the architecture, according to their local use; thus
moulded and ornamental brickwork was used in great variety in the alluvial plains
of the north, while varieties of stone and timber are used according to locality and
produce consequent differences.
CLIMATIC. As in previous periods (pp. 354, 583), climate affected architecture,
and the revived Classic forms were modified from those in use in Italy to suit a
more northern temperature; thus windows still continued to be large, roofs to be
 GERMAN RENAISSANCE 807

steep to throw off snow, and chimneys, necessary for heating in a cold climate, to be
prominent features.
RELIGIOUS. Martin Luther (1483-1546) towers above all others as the domina-
ting figure of the Reformation in Germany, and the day in 1517 on which he nailed
to the church door in Wittenberg his famous theses against indulgences inaugurated
a revolution in the religious life of Germany which culminated when Luther pub-
licly burnt the Bull of Excommunication issued against him by the Pope. Luther’s
choice of High German for the translation of the Bible led to its adoption as the
basis of the literary language of Germany; and it is significant that this literary aspect
of the Reformation coincides with the Renaissance ‘Humanist’? movement in Ger-
man universities. A decree of the Diet of Speyer (1529), forbidding ecclesiastical
changes, called forth the protest from Luther and his adherents which originated
the name of Protestant. This was followed in 1530 by the Confession of Augsburg
and by the Schmalkaldic League of Protestant princes and cities for mutual defence
against the House of Hapsburg. The stress and turmoil in religious thought of this
period of upheaval allowed little opportunity for the erection of new churches, but
it resulted in the transformation of those of previous periods to meet the needs of
the reformed religion, in the ritual of which preaching became a powerful factor,
and necessitated that increased space for seated congregations which brought about
the introduction of galleries. Thus the reformers adapted old churches, while
Catholics had no need to build new ones. The strife between Protestants and
Catholics and dissensions between Lutherans, Zwinglians and Calvinists were
finally followed by the counter-Reformation, which was reinforced by the arrival
of the Jesuits in Germany and by the counter-blast to Protestantism of the decrees
of the Council of Trent (1563).
SOCIAL. Germany was at this time composed of divers margravates, palatinates,
electorates, duchies, ecclesiastical states, and imperial cities, subject to the different
reigning houses of Hapsburg, Hohenzollern, Wittelsbach, and Wettin. It is there-
fore manifest that there could not be the same cohesion as in France, but much
diversity and rivalry in social life and institutions, which also made for a correspond-
ing diversity in artistic development. The Middle Ages had come to an end. The
Holy Roman Empire was no longer predominant. Feudalism began to disappear;
gunpowder changed military methods, and bands of mercenaries often replaced
feudal troops. There were also various internal influences at work, such as the power
of the great trading towns of the Hanseatic League, the position of the Guilds in
civic government, and the attempt of the peasants to secure their freedom. The
principal Renaissance factor was the influence of the universities, notably of Heidel-
berg, the chief seat of the Humanist movement. This was further strengthened by
the invention of printing, while in the eighteenth century the literary works of
Winckelmann, Goethe, and others aroused interest in the architecture of ancient
Greece.
HISTORICAL. The succession of Charles V (Charles I of Spain) to the pos-
sessions of the Houses of Castile, Aragon, and Burgundy, as well as to the Low
Countries, marks the beginning of German Renaissance. In 1516 he gained the
two Sicilies, and on the death of Maximilian in 1519 he became, as Emperor,
the most powerful ruler of his day. Various invasions by the Turks between
the years 1529 and 1562 further complicated matters in Germany, increased the
difficulties of the House of Hapsburg, and were inimical to architectural activities.
The wars of Charles V and the Catholics against the Protestant princes (1547-55)
were brought to an end by the Peace of Augsburg, which allowed each state to set
up what religion it pleased, but made no provision for individuals who were of diff-
erent religion from that of the prevailing government. This resulted in persecutions
808 GERMAN RENAISSANCE

and culminated in the famous ‘Thirty Years’ War’ (1618-48) between Catholic
and Protestant princes. Frederick, the Elector Palatine, son-in-law of James I of
England, Christian IV of Denmark and Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden fought on
the Protestant side. France also took part in the war under Cardinals Richelieu and
Mazarin, and when the Peace of Westphalia (1648) brought the long struggle to an
end, the war had ruined the position of Germany, depleted her population, and left
France the leading nation in Europe. These wars not only arrested the development
of architecture during the period of their actual prosecution, but also retarded
building activities for some time after the conclusion of peace. In the latter part of
the seventeenth century many German princes allied themselves with Louis XIV,
until the rise of the House of Hohenzollern, when the Elector Frederick III was
crowned Frederick I, King of Prussia (1701). His son Frederick II (‘the Great’)
raised Prussia to predominance among the German states, a position which it lost
in the Napoleonic era but regained after 1815.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The general character of Renaissance architecture in Europe has been dealt with as
a whole, with regard to those features which are common to it in all countries (p.
656). The style was introduced into Germany at first through France and the Low
Countries, as the Alps were a considerable barrier to easy transmission from Italy,
appearing only about 1550, roughly one hundred and twenty five years after the
inception in Italy, the parent country. Approximately, the successive periods were:
(a) Early Renaissance (1550-1600), chiefly consisting of the introduction of Renais-
sance elements into Gothic buildings or of additions to them, though some examples,
such as the Heinrichsbau, Heidelburg, are of great size; (b) Proto-Baroque (1600-
1660), in which Italian architects themselves carried the Renaissance from north
Italy to Switzerland, Austria and Germany, while native architects began success-
fully to emulate them and produce national versions of the style; (c) the Baroque
(1660-1710), in which architects, principally of native origin but who often had
received part of their training in Rome or elsewhere in Italy, brought German
architecture to a splendid culmination; (d) the Rococo (1710-1760), an extension of
the Baroque period wherein architecture and decoration show great refinement
and technical mastery but less vigour and force; and (e) the Antiquarian (1760-
1830), in which there is a progressive return to ancient classical models, the Greek
Revival being a manifestation within and somewhat beyond the period 1790-1830.
Broadly speaking, the greatest works of the German Renaissance lie in the hundred
years 1660-1760, i.e., the Baroque period, including the Rococo. In no other part
of Europe outside Italy was there so joyous and picturesque a flowering of Renais-
sance architecture, and indeed, the Baroque of Austria and neighbouring Bavaria
and Bohemia appears as a natural, superlative, culmination of the Italian Renais-
sance, intimately related to and an outgrowth of the Baroque of Rome and Lom-
bardy. The German Baroque thoroughly permeated town and countryside, much
as did Georgian architecture in England. It suited the people, peasant and patrician
alike, in its intensely visual appeal; the rich profusion of ornamentation in church
interiors was not wilful display but told the Bible story much as hieroglyphs, mural
reliefs or stained glass had carried the religious message in other times and climes.
Church and palace interiors sometimes may appear over-ornate, even gaudy, to
western eyes, but the opulent magnificence that frequently resulted was a
direct response to social, religious and political circumstances, and just as
spontaneous as the gaiety universally manifested in peasant art. Ornamentation
was deliberate and purposeful, and had a greater part to play in ecclesiastical,
 GERMAN RENAISSANCE 809

HIRIDELBERG CASTLE

tliat

“Talli
Le
Peat

REFERENCE. | li.
Sas oS
DATES OF
|

TABLE ERECTION
DICKER THURM
WA \508- 1544
ENGLISCHER BAU
FASSBAU
FRAVUENZIMMERBAU
1520 - 1535
= RIEDRICHSBAU
ZEUGHAUS
1524
sLOCKENTHURM
SAALBAU 1528 4 1547
4EINRICHSBAU
~UDWIGSBAU 1531 - 1541
4 POT HEKERTHURM
JEKONOMIEBAU 1549
<RAUT THURM
SRUCKENHAUS
1556 ~ 1563
THORT HURM
2UPPRECHTSBAU
=] 1583 - 1592
SELTENLEER
3IBLIOTEKBAU
(MM 1601 -1607
2ONDELL
eet wlGle
) 1gO
T
[2234 VARIOUS DATES

FRIEDRICHSBAU
810 GERMAN RENAISSANCE

B, The Loggia, Waldstein Palace, Prague (1621-30). See p. 812

 GERMAN RENAISSANCE 811

particularly Jesuit, buildings than in secular architecture, which was relatively

plain, except in the case of mansions and country residences, where it was appro-
priate to gracious living. Notable Baroque architects were Johann Bernhard
Fischer von Erlach (1656-1723), also a sculptor and writer on architectural history,
who trained under Carlo Fontana (p. 726) in Rome and worked principally in
Vienna, and Jakob Prandtauer (1660-1726), designer of the monastery at Melk, an
architectural masterpiece (p. 819B, Cc). A generation later came a group of almost pre-
cisely identical age: the brothers Asam (Cosmas Damian, 1686-1739, and Egid
Quirin, 1692-1750), gifted fresco painters and stuccoists who also practised as
architects; Balthasar Neumann (1687-1753), the most brilliant of the group; Lukas
von Hildebrandt (1688-1745), who began as a military engineer but whose build-
ings nevertheless are cheerfully lively in mien; the Dientzenhofer family, native to
Bavaria, six persons, working principally in Prague, and of whom Christopher and
Kilian Ignaz (1689-1751) were perhaps the most distinguished; and Johann Michael
Fischer (1692-1766), second in ability only to Neumann among south German
architects.

EXAMPLES
(West German historical buildings suffered severely in the 1939-45 war. Some of the
examples to be named were lost or severely damaged, as will be stated. In some cases they
have since been repaired or rebuilt.)

SECULAR ARCHITECTURE
Heidelberg Castle (1531-1612) (p. 809) well exemplifies progressive developments
of the Early Renaissance in the various additions to the Mediaeval castle (p. 809B).
The later of them suffer from over-ornamentation. There is a great watch tower
(1531-41) and an irregular court around which are grouped the Renaissance build-
ings (p. 809A). The Saulbau (1549) in the north-east corner shows Gothic features
mingled with those of the incoming Renaissance: this is relatively plain (p. 809D).
The Heinrichsbau (1556-63), long ago fallen into a ruined state, has superimposed
Ionic and Corinthian pilasters and half-columns, two-light windows showing
Venetian affinities, and symbolic statues in niches (pp. 809C, 824A, C). The Fried-
richsbau (1601-7), on the north side, is more mature in design, again showing
borrowings from early Venetian Renaissance in the round-headed traceried windows
of the ground floor and the two tiers of pedimented two-light windows above them,
while two picturesque windowed and scrolled gables and a steep roof indicate some
slight retention of native Mediaeval traits (p. 809D). Niches containing statues of
the Counts Palatine are distributed on each of the tiers (pp. 809D, 8248).
The Rathaus, Heilbronn (1535-96) (p. 810A) (severely damaged), is an
attractive and quaint building still essentially Gothic in character. Its arcade of
stumpy columns encloses a market, and side steps lead up to the upper storeys;
while a central panel bears the signs of the zodiac and a clock with figures and a
bell; the steep roof has three stages of dormer windows and an open turret.
The Gewandhaus, Brunswick, the body of which is Gothic, has an eastern
facade (1592) (p. 813B) illustrating typical north-German early Renaissance charac-
teristics, introduced via the Low Countries rather than directly from Italy. An
arcade of three-centred arches is surmounted by three storeys of Ionic, Corinthian
and Composite three-quarter columns, and above rises an immense gable of four
storeys of Hermes pilasters, so much used in Elizabethan architecture, framed in
by the customary side-scrolls of the stepped gables of the period.
The Rathaus Portico, Cologne (1569-71) (p. 813E) (destroyed) designed by
812 GERMAN RENAISSANCE

W. Wernickel, was an exquisite structure remarkably advanced for its day, showing
marked north Italian traits. An arcade of semicircular arches with free-standing
Corinthian columns was surmounted on the first storey by slightly-pointed arches
flanked by Composite columns, while Gothic tradition was also evident in a ‘rib-
and-panel’ vault within. The crestings and steep roof similarly showed mixed
Mediaeval and Lombard Renaissance ideas.
The Pellerhaus, Nuremberg (1605) (p. 813D) (destroyed), one of the finest
examples of the earlier Renaissance in the city, was of Proto-Baroque design ex-
ternally, the influence of the stucco medium being clearly apparent in the busy
ornament lavishly used is its upper parts. The main dispositions, however, were
still of the native type, resembling Belgian practice rather than Italian, tiers of large
windows rising into a stepped and scrolled gable ornamented with pinnacles and a
sculptural centre-piece at the apex. The basement and the pilasters of the lower
two window tiers were rusticated, while the gable windows were divided by Hermes
pilasters.
The Zeughaus, Danzig (1605) (p. 813A) (destroyed), a good example of the
brick architecture of the north, showed kinship with Belgian Early Renaissance,
and was indeed designed by a Flemish architect, Anton van Obbergen. The tall,
mullioned-and-transomed windows were of the plain early type, ornament being
confined to doorways and to local features, except on the third storey, broken into
scrolled and pinnacled gables and enlivened with strapwork decoration.
The Rathaus, Bremen (facade 1612-) (p. 813c) is mainly Gothic (1405-10).
The chief frontage has a light arcade, large windows, central and side scroll gables
and many statues.
The Loggia, Waldstein Palace, Prague (1621-30) (p. 810B) by Antonio and
Pietro Spezza, is of Italian design, like the palace as a whole. Paired Tuscan-Doric
columns support the triple arches of the porch in a gracious scheme showing expert
knowledge of the classical elements. The fenestration is Proto-Baroque, as are the
subsidiary details, while the stucco decorations are the work of the famous Genoese
architect, Bartolomeo Bianco (p. 688).
The Troja Palace, Prague (1679-96) (p. 814A), by J. B. Mathey, is a fine in-
stance of the Baroque period, a restrained design of a single giant Order, the lines
of the Composite pilasters being carried into the entablature as far as the bed-mould
of the cornice. The central intercolumniation is wider than the rest. While the
facade proper has a Palladian dignity and simplicity, a profusion of rich sculptural
detail is concentrated about the upper and lower portals and the double, horse-
shoe, staircase giving access to the ‘piano nobile’.
The Palace of the Hungarian Guard, Vienna (1710-12) (p. 825A) by J. B.
Fischer von Erlach, is one of a considerable number of works by this celebrated
architect. A giant Order of paired Composite pilasters stands over a horizontally-
rusticated basement storey; the decoration is rich, but is not allowed anywhere to
intrude upon the main elements of the architectural composition. While the model-
ling of the chief masses is vigorous, the modelling of the detail is finer and shallower
than in typical Baroque architecture, and in fact tends towards the Rococo ex-
pression. Other notable secular buildings by Fischer von Erlach are the Clam
Gallas Palace, Prague (1701-12), the Ministry of the Interior, Vienna (1716)
and the Schwarzenberg Palace, Vienna (1705-20), while he collaborated with
Lukas von Hildebrandt in the design of the Ministry of Finance, Vienna (1702-
TO).
The Kinsky Palace, Vienna (1709-13) (p. 813F) (half-ruined), by Lukas von
Hildebrandt, is very representative of this architect’s style. The windowed frieze
in the main entablature is an interesting feature.
 GERMAN RENAISSANCE 813

A. The Zeughaus, Danzig (1605). B. The Gewandhaus,

See p. 812 Brunswick (1592).
See p. 811

i ont

c. The Rathaus, Bremen (1612). p. The Pellerhaus, Nuremberg

See p. 812 (1605). See p. 812

E. The Rathaus, Cologne: Renaissance F. The Kinsky Palace, Vienna

portico (1569-71). See p. 811 (1707-13). See p. 812
814 GERMAN RENAISSANCE

c. The Schloss, Karlsruhe (1751-6). See p. 817

 GERMAN RENAISSANCE 815

A. The Brandenberg Gate, Berlin (1789-93). See p. 817

:
3
a
Fete

B. The Neumtnster, Wurzburg c. The Frauenkirche, Dresden

(1710-19). See p. 818 (1726-40). See p. 818
816 GERMAN RENAISSANCE

A. The Upper Belvedere, Vienna (1721-4). See p. 817

B. The Theatine Church, Munich (1663-90). See p. 817

 GERMAN RENAISSANCE 817

The Belvedere, Vienna (1693-1724), a summer residence, is one of Hilde-

brandt’s most famous works. It has an upper (1721-4) (p. 816A) and a lower palace,
and splendid gardens stretching between.
The Zwinger, Dresden (1711-22) (p. 814B) (badly damaged), by M. D. Pop-
pelmann (1662-1736), is one of the most curious and bizarre constructions of the
German Renaissance, built as a resort for the princely court for pageants, festivals
and tournaments, structures of one and two storeys being arranged around an open
enclosure. The entrance is particularly extravagant, seething with a congestion of
columns, pilasters, fragmented entablatures and incoherent ornament, crowned
with a bulbous, crested ‘helm’.
The Schloss, Karlsruhe (1751-6 and later) (p. 814c) (badly damaged) has a fan-
shaped plan which determines the arrangement of the whole town, laid out earlier
in the century with thirty-two streets radiating from it.
The Brandenburg Gate, Berlin (1789-93) (p. 814c) (damaged), by C. G.
Langhans, is in Greek Revival style and imitates the Propylaea at Athens (p. 142);
it illustrates the Antiquarian trend of the later part of the century notable in Europe
as a whole. The Glyptotek, Pinacothek and Propylaea, all in Munich, and the
Walhalla, Regensburg, were designed by Klenze (1784-1864); the New Theatre, the
Museum and the Polytechnic School, Berlin, by the architect Schinkel (1781-1841).

ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE
There were few new churches in the sixteenth century. S. Michael, Munich (1583-
97) was one of the earliest to show Renaissance features: already by this time Italian
architecture was on the verge of the Baroque.
The Marienkirche, Wolfenbiittel (1608-23) is an essentially Gothic structure,
adorned with quite unassimilated Proto-Baroque detail concentrated strongly in
stepped and scrolled gables ranged together on the two long sides.
The Church, Biickeburg (1613) (p. 819A) has an extravagantly ornate Proto-
Baroque west front, but the windows still are Gothic: the interior has Corinthian
columns supporting a pointed arcade and rib-and-panel vault.
The Cathedral, Salzburg (1614-28) by Santino Solari, an Italian, and the
Jesuit churches at Dillingen (1610-17), Mindelheim (1625-6), Vienna (1627-31)
and Innsbruck (1627-40) were among the first to be expressed wholly in the
Renaissance manner.
The Theatine Church, Munich (1663-90) (p. 8168) is an instance of the devel-
oped Baroque style. It is based upon the church of S. Andrea della Valle at Rome.
The west facade has two tiers of Orders, the aisles being linked to the nave by swept
buttresses, while twin western towers rise through three storeys of Orders to oddly
coarse scroll-buttressed helms. The features are not as vigorously modelled as in
contemporary Italian Baroque, nor is the focal emphasis on the west door so strongly
marked. A lanterned dome over the crossing completes the impressive scheme.
The Monastery, Melk (1702-14) (p. 819B, Cc) by Jakob Prandtauer, is one of the
most striking monuments of the Baroque period. The abbey buildings mount in
stages at the crest of a steep-sided rocky ridge, riding high above the wood-fringed
river Danube; western towers with helms of intriguing profile serve as foil to the
softly-moulded contours of the crowning dome. The grand effect arises principally
from the disposition of the building-masses on the rising site. Ornament is used
sparingly in the most effective locations, and the abbey main buildings are relatively
severe. There are other great monasteries at S. Florian (1686-1715), near Vienna,
to which Jakob Prandtauer contributed after 1708, and Klosterneuburg (c. 1750),
where the church is an old foundation of 1136.
Brevnov Monastery Church, Prague (1710-15) (p. 820A) by Christopher
818 GERMAN RENAISSANCE

Dientzenhofer is a splendid illustration of what Baroque architects could achieve

without recourse to elaborate ornamentation. This modest building has most of the
Baroque qualities, showing play with richly curved forms in plan, elevation and
detail, varied expressions of condition and spacing of the Orders and the vigorous
modelling of masses which distinguishes the Baroque proper from its later mani-
festation, the Rococo.
S. Nicholas, Prague (1703-52) (p. 821C, D), the finest Baroque church in the city,
has a nave designed by Christopher Dientzenhofer (1703-11) (p. 821D) of which the
interior has all the dramatic power of which the style was capable. Giant clustered
pilasters are set diagonally to form an arcade embracing aisle and clerestory in such
wise as to produce an undulated vault which, with the help of its painted decoration,
seems less to contain than to free the upper space and open up the heavens. Most
of the architectural lines are curvilinear; the voids seem to interweave, the lesser
into the greater, and the whole effect is one of swirling movement totally different
from the serene static character of Palladian architecture.
The Neumiinster, Wiirzburg (facade, 1710-19) (p. 815B) is a truly Baroque
design in its concave modelling, clustered and variously-disposed Orders and
vigorous and dramatic effect.
Karlskirche, Vienna (1716-37) (p. 820B), by J. B. Fischer von Erlach, is this
famous architect’s masterpiece, finished after his death. In some respects it re-
sembles S. Agnese, Rome. The hexastyle entrance porch leads up to a mighty dome,
and the nave facade has quadrant links with scroll-topped, symmetrical angle
pavilions beyond mighty replicas of Trajan’s column at Rome (p. 228). The com-
position is grand and impressive, yet this instance of Fischer von Erlach’s later
architecture is quieter and shallower in modelling than his earlier work, thus par-
taking more of the Rococo than the true Baroque quality.
The Church of the Holy Ghost, Munich (1724-30) (p. 821A, B) by J. G.
Ettenhofer, itself a rebuilding of an earlier hall-church, was extended westwards by
three bays in 1885 and the west front re-fashioned after the former design. The
Rococo interior is essentially the work of the brothers Asam.
The Frauenkirche, Dresden (1726-40) (p. 815c) (destroyed) was the
prime example of eighteenth-century Protestant church architecture. It had a
highly centralized plan, contained within a square of 140 ft side. The stone dome
was oval, about 75 ft across, and so excessively stilted as to appear slightly
onion-shaped. The strong modelling and pyramidal arrangement made a powerful
composition.
S. Paulin, Trier (1732-54) (p. 825B) by Balthasar Neumann, is one of a num-
ber of fine works by this distinguished architect. It is an aisleless church, high in
proportions, with a helm-topped axial western tower and an eastern apse. Internally
(p. 825B) it is aglow with colour and lively with the play of form; clustered pilastered
piers, some with sinuous cornices, contrast effectively with the relatively plain
walls, while the compartmented domical vaults are enriched with refined stucco-
work and brilliant frescoes. The columned and coroneted baldachino, the elabo-
rately fretted woodwork and metalwork of the fittings, all contribute to the general
unity of effect.
S. John Nepomuk, Munich (1733-5) by the brothers Asam, a small church
designed and built by the architects at their own expense, is a very representative
example of the Rococo phase of Baroque architecture.
S. Michael, Berg-am-Laim, Munich (1738-51) (pp. 8224, B), by J. M. Fischer,
has a west front typical of many of the period, a bow-fronted, convex-faced nave
being flanked by tall, staged and helm-crested western towers. The Abbey Church,
Ottobeuren (1748-67), by the same architect, has a similarly-arranged west front,
 GERMAN RENAISSANCE 819

A. The Church, Biickeburg (1613). B. The Monastery, Melk (1702-14).

See p. 817 See p. 817

c. The Monastery, Melk: interior of church

820 GERMAN RENAISSANCE

B. Karlskirche, Vienna (1716-37). See p. 818

 GERMAN RENAISSANCE 821

HGGEnG
foo
L]
cet

A. Entrance front B. Interior

The Church of the Holy Ghost, Munich (1724-30). See p. 818

c. Entrance front p. Interior (1703-11)

S. Nicholas, Prague (1673-1752) . See p. 818
822 GERMAN RENAISSANCE

A. West front B. Interior

S. Michael, Berg-am-Laim (1738-51). See p. 818

c. West front D. Interior

The Church, Vierzehnheiligen (1743-72). See p. 823
 GERMAN RENAISSANCE 823

as also has the pilgrimage Church at Vierzehnheiligen (1744-72) (p. 822c, D) by

Neumann, and S. Gallen Cathedral (1755-86) in neighbouring Switzerland, by
Peter Thumb.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. The internal courtyard of the Mediaeval period is progressively less
favoured, except where demanded in town houses, dwellings, large and small, being
increasingly planned for the maximum enjoyment of external light and air. Church
plans, as in Italy, vary between the longitudinal and centralized types, with the
latter gaining in favour, particularly in the Baroque period.
WALLS. Wall surfaces, whether in brick, stone or stucco, commonly were re-
lieved by Orders to each storey (pp. 809C, D, 813B, D, E), though there was some
recourse to the giant Order in the Baroque period (pp. 813F, 820A). The traditional
steep gables, stepped and scrolled (p. 813A, B, D), continued in the early period but
were generally eliminated thereafter. In Baroque churches, walls locally curved on
plan were quite often employed to diversify the building masses (pp. 815B, 820A,
821A, C, D, 822A).
OPENINGS. Arcades occasionally appear in the early period (p. 813Cc, E) but
are not a favourite feature. Windows remain large, and at first are mullioned as in
the Gothic period (p. 809C, D), and at this time may appear in ornamental roof
gables (p. 824£). Ornamental surrounds to windows are crude in the early period
(p. 824G), but are attuned to the design as a whole as experience ripens, following a
similar development to that in Italy. Doorways commonly are made a special point
of elaboration in secular architecture (pp. 813F, 814A), but are not so strongly
emphasized in church west facades as in the Baroque of Italy (pp. 815B, 821A).
Rooks. Large steep roofs with many storeys that were a feature of the Gothic
period continue into the Early Renaissance (p. 810A), but lose quite a little of their
importance later on, the pitch becoming flatter or the roofs half-concealed behind
parapets (pp. 813F, 814A, 825A).
COLUMNS. The Orders were freely employed as decorative adjuncts at all times
(pp. 809C, D, 813B-F), at first with novel designs for the capitals (p. 824D, F) but
afterwards with orthodox detail (p. 8168). Clustered columns or pilasters or com-
binations of both were a feature of Baroque architecture (p. 821A—D), and some-
times pilasters were diagonally aligned (p. 821D). In Baroque buildings generally,
the Orders were used for decorative effect rather than with due concern for their
structural significance.
MouLDINGS. Mouldings were characterized by boldness and vigour rather
than refinement in the early period (p. 824) and sometimes show the survival of
Gothic practices, even to the retention of interpenetration of mouldings, but as
time elapsed these were discarded in favour of the more correct profiles of the
Italian Renaissance.
ORNAMENT. Sculpture of a fanciful and grotesque character ran riot in the mid-
sixteenth century (p. 824H), especially at Heidelberg Castle, where Italian influence
mingles with the native Gothic tradition (pp. 809C, D, 824A, B, C). Proto-Baroque
sculptural ornament was more orderly, but still often excessive and involved, com-
prised largely either of strapwork or naturalistic motifs of sinuous or convoluted
foliage tending to impair the clearness of the architectural lines (p. 813D). The
Orders still were not fully understood, Gothic elements occasionally surviving (pp.
813C, 819A). In the Baroque and Rococo periods ornament was brought fully into
subjection, and all the visual arts, sculpture, stucco decoration, fresco painting and
wood and metal work were used in complete harmony one with the other (pp. 819C,
 824 GERMAN RENAISSANCE

mae
ay

c—w,0>
\
parts
Vissi

KE

Cece
Hatt
(Bh
Tat
(TG Lb
e2 bys
:
A ni e ee eel igo 27 Lg ~
WINDOWS «-NICHE wit DIANA:
HEINRI BAU, HEIDELBERG CASTLE (B)
CHS c WINDOWS « NICHE. -
CHARLES THE GREAT: a SATURN: HEINRICHSBAU,
FRIEDRICHSBAU, , HEIDELBERG CASTLE
HEIDELBERG CASTLE Spel)

‘ a ay
=

— — = + == uy
PTA Oa A DU RO AE RT \ 7I

nA ae
= wt x

ex TR MRT cot, remap

FOUN Tsiy = Jif aE AR SAMARITAN eine: ste

‘eS
C.

J DOORWAY
L/S, MICHEL: MUNICH
 GERMAN RENAISSANCE 825

821B, D, 822B, D), ornament becoming more refined but less robust as time passed
(pp. 810B, 814A, 819C, 822B).

REFERENCE BOOKS
BENZ, R. Deutscher Barock. Stuttgart, 1949.
BOURKE, J. Baroque Churches of Central Europe. London, 1958.
BRIGGS, M.S. Baroque Architecture. London, 1913.
FREY, D. fohann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, Vienna, 1923.
FRITSCH, K.E. 0. Denkmaeler Deutscher Renaissance. 4 vols. Berlin, 1891.
GRIMSCHITZ, B. Johann Lukas von Hildebrandt. Vienna, 1923.
HAUPT, A. Baukunst der Renaissance in Frankreich und Deutschland. 1923.
LAMBERT, A., und STAHL, E. Motive der Deutschen Architektur. 2 vols. Stuttgart, 1890-3.
LANCHESTER, H. V. Fischer von Erlach. London, 1924.
MENCL, V. Onze cent années d’architecture en Tchécoslovaque. Prague, 1957.
ORTWEIN, A. Deutsche Renaissance. 9 vols. Leipzig, 1871-88.
PFNOR,R. Monographie du Chateau d’Heidelberg. Paris, 1859.
PLICKA, K. introduction by BRIGGS, M. S. City of Baroque and Gothic. London, 1946.
POPP, H. Die Architektur der Barock und Rokokozeit in Deutschland. Stuttgart, 1924.
POWELL,N. From Baroque to Rococo—an Introduction to Austrian and German Architecture
from 1580-1790. London, 1959.
SITWELL, S. German Baroque Art. London, 1927.
WOLFFLIN, H. Renaissance und Barock. Munich, 1907.

a
Se Mees Fate

A. Palace of the Hungarian Guard, B. S. Paulin, Trier (1732-54).

Vienna (1710-12). See p. 812 See p. 818
826 BELGIAN AND DUTCH RENAISSANCE

A. The Town Hall, Enkhuizen (1686-8). See p. 835

B. The Royal Library, The Hague (1735). See p. 835

 : Land over 600 feat Groningen

Miles 50 L)

Q Enkhuizen

Zuider

ice aac < Zee

Haarlem . Amsterdam
SEA
r) leva
ey rm
The Hagues
Ne 9 Rotterdant rs

Xe,
SE OS Ss
Z EA L‘A-N>,D ie
eS *Breda %

Antwerp B a
° Bruges
Lierree ~ /°
e Furnes Ghent

ines® ¥ |Scherpen- < e

PL A NDE! OR Ss aeits heuvelvo 7S Cologne«
Brussels fe WwVaUr a 2. die fiaivatets
bys
e ca)
°
o> Le

age
hy
v

Somme

The Low Countries in the seventeenth century

XXIII. BELGIAN AND DUTCH

RENAISSANCE
(sixteenth-nineteenth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. The Netherlands is a term which formerly embraced the whole
of the Netherlands (Holland) and Belgium. The physical similarity of the low-lying
parts did not result in the maintenance of a firm political unity, chiefly owing to the
intrusion of external powers, to which Belgium was the more susceptible, being
828 BELGIAN AND DUTCH RENAISSANCE

related to Spain up to 1700, and afterwards to Austria and for short periods to
France, while Holland formed a republic from 1588-1795. Belgium enjoyed the
greater prosperity in the sixteenth century and Holland in the seventeenth, both
declining in the eighteenth. The movement of power and commerce from the
Mediterranean to the Atlantic and northern seas of Europe placed the Low
Countries in a favourable central position to share in the new sea power, trade,
world exploration and colonial expansion; at the same time they were directly in
the path of conflicts between the major powers. The period opens with Antwerp,
following the decay of Bruges due to the silting up of her waterways, as the richest
city and greatest port in northern Europe. After the establishment of the Dutch
Republic (1588) the ports of Zeeland, the Zuider Zee, and especially of Amsterdam
and Rotterdam, rose to supremacy. Through them and through constant warfare
the Dutch developed as an energetic and courageous seafaring nation, with exten-
sive trade and colonial possessions. In the seventeenth century the Dutch began
their great engineering feats of draining and reclaiming land, of building polders,
dykes and canals, and erecting windmills for pumping water, for all of which they
have long been famous.
GEOLOGICAL. Stone and marbles, because they were readily available, and
brick continued to be the chief building materials of Belgium, together with the
timber of the Ardennes which the craftsmen used with such skill and flourish,
especially in the exuberant mature architecture of the seventeenth century. In
Holland, bricks made from her clay soil largely created her relatively sober national
architecture, and by the seventeenth century the influence of this was felt in Eng-
land, Denmark and Sweden. The ever-present proximity of water and the clear,
cool light deriving from it gave qualities to Dutch architecture which have been
made familiar by the paintings of Vermeer, de Hoogh and others.
CLIMATIC. In addition to the remarks on p. 570, it should be noted that there
are two main climatic zones in the Low Countries, the one relating to the highlands
of eastern Belgium and Dutch Limburg, which share the characteristics of con-
tinental France and Germany, and the other to the low-lying parts of the Flemish
and Dutch coastal areas. The architecture of Holland is greatly influenced by its
sea-girt, river intersected and low-lying, fen character, where the frequent driving
rains, the winds and clear light produced a simplicity of facade and large windows,
with compositions conceived in terms of planes rather than sculptural form. Such
circumstances apply less strongly to lowland Belgium, and scarcely at all to its
eastern parts.
RELIGIOUS. The ideals of Luther and Calvin were received early in the Low
Countries, where many accepted them, especially in the north and east, but, since
Charles V and Philip II, rulers during the greater part of the sixteenth century,
regarded the Catholic Church and the State as indivisible, Protestants were per-
secuted. However, the revolt and war against the Spanish was, in the end, as much
a war between the interests of the burghers and those of the ruling aristocracy as it
was a question of religion: indeed the Protestant Prince of Orange led armies which
included a minority of Catholics. Most of the Dutch living south of the Rhine and
Meuse remained Catholic, though without political power. Belgium remained
almost wholly Catholic and followed the lead of Rome in church building, wherein
as elsewhere, the Baroque style was favoured by the Jesuits. The Dutch, after first
adapting and even copying the old churches and setting an enormous pulpit half-
way along the side of the nave, arranging pews to face it, experimented with a
variety of central plans which were developed to suit the reformed religion and
national taste. Some were sufficiently important to be the probable basis for certain
of Wren’s churches.
 BELGIAN AND DUTCH RENAISSANCE 829

B. Guild Houses, Grand’ Place, Brussels (1690-1752). See p. 832

830 BELGIAN AND DUTCH RENAISSANCE

SocIAL. During the sixteenth century, power and wealth in the Low Countries
were mainly in the south (Belgium), the Court residing at Brussels or Malines,
while trade was concentrated on Antwerp. After the independence of the Dutch
provinces (1588) the interests and histories of Belgium and Holland diverged. For
Belgium a crushing blow came in 1648, when Antwerp, the great art centre of
northern Europe and city of Rubens, lost control of the Scheldt and her trade
rapidly dwindled. The result was catastrophic, since there were no other good ports
in the south. For a short time, within the period of Austrian Rule in the eighteenth
century, prosperity revived, but Belgium remained poor compared with Holland, a
country of landed nobility, burghers and peasants.
As the prosperity of the south waned, the fortunes of the north grew and reached
a climax in the ‘Golden’ seventeenth century, with the Dutch Republic as a great
European power; the power of wealth through trade—though seldom political
power—was largely in the hands of the burgher class, principally of the provinces of
Holland and Zeeland. Yet although a Republic, its rulers were Princes with a Court
and aristocratic ministers looking to France for a lead in taste and fashions. The
burghers followed the Court in its patronage of art, and their houses were richly
decorated and furnished, giving a lively market for the many artists of this great
period of Dutch art. The prosperity of the seventeenth century did not last and, by
comparison, the next century was one of consolidation, and later, of stagnation.
At the end of the eighteenth century the power of the Dutch middle class triumphed
briefly, as it did in Belgium too, but almost at once (1794-5) both countries tem-
porarily lost their independence to France; they were then united from 1815-30,
at which latter date Belgium became a separate monarchy.
HISTORICAL. Through the marriage of the Emperor Maximilian with Mary of
Burgundy all of the Low Countries from Groningen to the Somme became a Haps-
burg domain. Hence, on the abdication of Charles V in 1555, both Dutch and
Belgians came under the fanatically rigid rule of Philip II of Spain (1556-98). A
long and bitter revolt, led by William the Silent, Prince of Orange (1533-84), was
ruthlessly opposed by the Duke of Alva’s forces, but in 1588 the northern Dutch
provinces, with Zeeland, declared their independence, and this was recognized by
France and England in 1596.
The seventeenth century in Belgium was not a peaceful one, and, with the decay
of Antwerp’s trade in mid-century her prosperity suffered greatly. In the eighteenth
century, Spanish authority was followed by a period of French rule (1700-06), and
under the Treaty of Utrecht (1713) the country passed to Austria. Later, it became
involved in the struggle against Louis XV’s ambitions (1740-48), only to be re-
turned to Austrian rule. In 1789 there was an internal revolt, and soon after came
occupation by the French Revolutionary Forces (1794), this a prelude to her
absorption into Napoleon’s Empire.
Holland, though equally plagued by wars in the seventeenth century, became a
great naval power and maritime trading nation with overseas colonies. So great was
this prosperity that it survived almost to the end of the next century, despite
further major wars, and finally, a middle-class revolt. The shrunken and ram-
shackle Batavian Republic which followed received French acquiescence in 1795
(consolidated 1798), but expired in 1806 when Napoleon decided to make his
brother Louis, King of Holland, and in 1810 Dutch independence was eclipsed for
a while when Holland became a French province.
The Kingdom of the Netherlands, including Belgium, Holland and Luxembourg,
was created in 1815 with William I of Orange as its head. The rule of the Dutch king
was unwise, and the situation so disadvantageous to the Belgians that they revolted
and became a separate kingdom in 1830; Luxembourg too was made independent.
 BELGIAN AND DUTCH RENAISSANCE 831

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The general character of Renaissance architecture in Europe has already been de-
scribed (p. 656). The Early Renaissance becomes notable in the Low Countries
about 1515, at first in the southern zone, which continued to enjoy a prodigious
prosperity, the factors at work on this Belgian architecture producing that same
rich and often extravagantly ornate expression, and that same zest for ornamenta-
tion, that had created the Brabantine Gothic. To some extent the nature of this
style can be explained by the circumstance of the distance from the Italian source,
and Spanish, French and German influence during transmission, but its strong
individuality is mainly due to national conditions and characteristics. It is rich
externally and internally, is rarely grand in scale and, as befits the northern clime,
windows in domestic work are even larger than the French and may occupy almost
as much space as wall. Architectural details progressively assume a more authentic
Italian character, but methods of composition and decoration are in a variety of
ways unique. The Early Renaissance was centred on Flanders and Brabant, and at
first, pseudo-classical detail was applied to Gothic forms. The Parma Palace (now
the Palais de Justice) at Malines (1503) was perhaps the first instance in Northern
Europe; but more typical is the Old Chancellery, Bruges (1530-35) (p. 833A).
Several Italians were then working in the Low Countries, Donato di Boni on the
fortifications of Antwerp (1543) and Tommaso Vincidor at Breda Castle (1536).
Antwerp was the chief centre, with its great school of painters and sculptors who
were often also architects. There, Pieter Coecke van Aalst (1502-50) published
translations of Alberti and Serlio, and Cornelius Floris (or de Vriendt) (1504-75)
established a style with his Town Hall (p. 829A). This style was widely spread by the
books of Hans Vredeman de Vries (1527-1606) throughout northern Europe. The
Early Renaissance of Belgium continued to the end of the sixteenth century,
though owing to political reasons little was done in the last thirty years. The
northern provinces (Holland) followed the southern lead, but at a little distance of
time, since they were as yet economically less robust, but from the first, Dutch
architecture was simpler and more restrained. It was the books of Vredeman de
Vries and the example of the Antwerp Town Hall that guided Lieven de Key (1560-
1627), Flemish refugee, in designing the buildings in Holland that first soundly
established the Renaissance there (p. 839G).
For the seventeenth century and later it is essential to speak separately of Bel-
gium and Holland. Belgium progressed with its individualistic interpretation of the
Italian Proto-Baroque flourishing at that time, to a style which may be described as
Baroque, though it is more profuse and less bold and grand than its Italian counter-
part; apart from Jesuit and other church architecture which affords a closer parallel.
The best period of the Belgian version of the Baroque falls in the first half of the
seventeenth century, after which it loses some of its virility though none of its
exuberance; and with the eighteenth, shows in its decoration the influence of Aus-
trian and French Rococo, while from the mid-century it took the Antiquarian turn
notable also in Italy, France and England. Towards the end of the same century,
occasional Greek Revival manifestations appeared. Meanwhile, Dutch architecture
took a substantially different course. Lieven de Key and Hendrik de Keyser (1565-
1621) developed the early Dutch style, usually plainer than the Belgian, until c. 1625
when it matured in a ‘Palladian’ phase of considerable dignity and quality, the prin-
cipal exponents being Jacob van Campen (1595-1657) and Pieter Post (1608-69).
The Palladian phase passed about 1670, merging easily into another of some twenty
years’ duration of positive austerity, external decoration being almost wholly ex-
cluded. Next, Daniel Marot (1661-1752), a Huguenot refugee, introduced the
832 BELGIAN AND DUTCH RENAISSANCE

masculine style of Louis XIV to the Dutch court, effective in influencing interior
decoration rather than architecture proper, and thenceforward French fashions
continued to be followed, though with sober external expression and bold and
effective planning. As in France and England in the eighteenth century, plain
exteriors often belie lavish but tasteful interior decoration. Minor and provincial
architecture remained more strongly Dutch. Eighteenth-century architects of note
were P. de Swart (1709-72) in Holland and J-P. van Baurscheit the Younger (1699-
1768) in Belgium.

EXAMPLES
BELGIAN SECULAR ARCHITECTURE
The Chancellery (Maison de l’Ancien Greffe), Bruges (1535) (p. 833A), a town
house, has seemingly precocious Baroque qualities which are in fact due to the
perpetuation of the Flamboyant Gothic spirit. It has a two-storeyed facade with
quasi-Doric Orders, mullioned and transomed windows, and central gable with
side-scrolls, crockets and figures.
The Musée Plantin-Moretus, Antwerp (1550) (p. 833C), once the house of
Christopher Plantin, printer to Philip II, is more authentically Classical, and in its
extent and character illustrates the opulence and social status of a highly successful
Flemish burgher.
The Town Hall, Antwerp (1561-66) (p. 829A), by Cornelius Floris (or de
Vriendt), the most distinguished architect and sculptor of the century in the
Netherlands, as already mentioned (p. 831) is an important prototype of Belgian
Early Renaissance, signalling the conclusion of the experimental stage. It has super-
imposed Orders between closely-spaced large windows, a rusticated basement
storey and a galleried upper storey. While in the main straightforward and plain,
its centre-piece is highly characteristic of the phase, with its freely manipulated
classical detail and generous use of plastic ornament.
The Guild Houses, Grand’ Place, Brussels (p. 829B), erected by various guilds,
Archers (1691), Shipmasters (1697), Carpenters (1697), Printers (1697), Mercers
(1699), Butchers (1720), Brewers (1752), Tailors and Painters, are late Belgian-
Baroque and Rococo fantasies which with their serried gable fronts and large
window areas follow types established by the late-sixteenth century Guild Houses
in the Grand’ Place, Antwerp (p. 829A), and indicate the wealth of Flemish
and Brabantine guilds of craftsmen and tradesmen.
The Hotel d’Ansembourg, Liége (1740) (p. 833B), now a museum, is an
example of French fashions in Belgium, while the Town Hall, Lierre (1740) (p.
833D), by J-P. van Baurscheit, is similarly an instance of the Rococo period.
The Place Royale, Brussels (late eighteenth cent.) (p. 834B), together with the
Rue Royale, by Barnabé Guimard, a Frenchman, show the Antiquarian trend in
evidence at this time. Guimard was also the designer of the church of S. Jacques
sur Coudenberg (1773-6) in the Place Royale (p. 834B).

DUTCH SECULAR ARCHITECTURE

The Town Hall, Leyden (1594) (p. 839D, G), by Lieven de Key, a religious refugee
from Antwerp, owes something of its inspiration to Antwerp Town Hall, but is
especially noteworthy as an example of the strapwork, fretwork and other petty
ornament (p. 839G) typical of the Early Renaissance in the Netherlands generally,
and popularized there as in Germany and Elizabethan and Jacobean England (p.
 BELGIAN AND DUTCH RENAISSANCE 833

A. The Old Chancellery, B. The Hotel d’Ansembourg, Liége (1740).

Bruges (1535). See p. 832 See p. 832

c. The Musée Plantin- D. The Town Hall, Lierre (1740).

Moretus, Antwerp (1550). See p. 832
See p. 832

E. The Trippenhuis, Amsterdam F. The Mauritshuis, The Hague (1633).

(1662). See p. 835 See p. 835
2D H.O.A.
834 BELGIAN AND DUTCH RENAISSANCE

B. The Place Royale, Brussels (c. 1776). See p. 832

 BELGIAN AND DUTCH RENAISSANCE 835

869) by the books of Vredeman de Vries, principally those appearing in 1565 and
1568. The Butchers’ Hall, Haarlem (1602), also by de Key, again has the profusion
of pseudo-Classical detail normal to the Netherlands Early Renaissance.
The Mauritshuis, The Hague (1633) (p. 833F), built by van Campen and Pieter
Post for Prince Maurice of Nassau, instances the Dutch Palladian phase in its
flattened temple-like front in a harmonious facadal treatment of brick and stone.
Buildings of this class may have influenced Hugh May’s Eltham House, Kent (p.
906), and hence the tradition which succeeded it in Georgian England. The Cloth
Hall, Leyden (1640), by Arent van ’s-Gravensande, is a further example of Dutch
Palladianism.
The Royal Palace, Amsterdam (originally the Town Hall) (1648-65) (p. 834),
by Jacob van Campen, is a major example of Dutch civic architecture on an un-
usually large scale. Its style is Palladian in the sense that it is of clear, simple ordon-
nance with no important departures from strict Classical rule and that there is no
intrusion of ornament on to the architectural lines. There is, however, a greater
freedom in the design of an open cupola-turret over the central, shallowly-project-
ing pavilion of the two-tiered pilastered facade, standing on a low basement storey,
and the crowning pediment has an infilling of petty sculpture.
No. 460, Singel, Amsterdam (1662), by J. Vingboons, is representative of a
type of tall, narrow house in that city, usually adorned with the Classic Orders, in
the development of which first de Keyser and then the Vingboons played an impor-
tant part. The Trippenhuis, Amsterdam (1662) (p. 833E), also by J. Vingboons,
is a larger example of such houses for the merchant class.
The Town Hall, Enkhuizen (1686-88) (p. 826A), by Stevin Vennecool, repre-
sents the later stage of the Palladian phase, achieving a soft plastic quality despite
its being almost completely devoid of decoration.
No. 8, Lange Vijverberg, The Hague (1715) (p. 840), by Daniel Marot, a
Frenchman, is of undecorated, Italianate character inclining to the Baroque, but
the building now used as the Royal Library, The Hague (1735) (p. 8268), also by
Marot, shows in its Rococo ornament the influence of French taste upon the Dutch
court.
The Town Hall, Groningen (1774-92, built 1802-10), by J. O. Husley, belongs
to the Antiquarian phase.
BELGIAN ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE
The Church at Scherpenheuvel (near Louvain) (1607) (p. 837c), by Wenzel
Coeberger, was the earliest centrally-planned and domed church in the Low
Countries, and is among the exceptions in Belgium to the basilical ‘altar’ churches
normal there. Its style is Proto-Baroque.
S. Pierre, Ghent (1629-1749), S. Michel, Louvain (1650-70) (p. 837A) and the
tower of S. Charles, Antwerp (1620), all by Pieter Huyssens, who belonged to the
Jesuit Order, typify the Catholic Baroque style in Belgium. In its west facade, with
its superimposed Ionic and Composite columns, broken pediments and enormous
side scrolls masking the aisle roofs, S. Michel shows a close approach to the Baroque
of Rome, except that its portal is mean and less focal than it would be there, while
the banded Orders show some French influence and the ornament has native,
Netherlands, characteristics.

DUTCH ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE

The West Church, Amsterdam (1620-30), by Hendrik de Keyser, is Classical in
decoration though its form is based on Gothic precedent adapted to Protestant
needs. Its dominant tower (1638), with that of the South Church (1614) also by
836 BELGIAN AND DUTCH RENAISSANCE

Keyser, are among the best examples in Holland of the adaptation of the native
Gothic tradition to classical themes and elements, this development beginning with
de Key’s towers (p. 839D, E), which have an affinity with those of Wren’s City
churches (p. 913). The North Church, Amsterdam (1620), a further church by de
Keyser, has a Greek Cross plan typical of the Dutch, central-space ‘pulpit’
churches.
The New Church, Haarlem (1645-9) (p. 8378), by van Campen, has the
Greek-Cross-in-square plan popular in Holland, the arms of the cross being covered
by wooden barrel vaults meeting at a cross vault, the corner squares by flat ceilings
—a scheme similar to S. Martin’s, Ludgate, London (p. 914) by Wren. The Baroque
elongated church normal to Belgium is occasionally represented in Holland, as in
the New Church, The Hague (1649-56) (p. 837D), by P. Noorwits and B. van
Bassen, the plan being made up of two interlocking squares with six projecting
apsidal bays.
The East Church, Middelburg (1647-67), by Frans Drijfhout and Pieter Post,
centrally-planned, has some resemblance to the Scherpenheuvel church in the
Belgian zone; the Marekerk, Leyden (1639-49), by ’s-Gravensande, though
smaller, is more original and refined.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. At first the Mediaeval church plan was retained, but adapted by Protestants
to new forms of worship. In Belgium, from the early seventeenth century, the Jesuit
and other Baroque types were used, while in Holland a variety of centralized or
semi-centralized plans on a small scale were the subject of Protestant experiment.
Civic buildings and large houses used the central block and balanced wing forms,
while the medium-sized house and smaller civic buildings were usually in simple
square or rectangular forms; town houses had narrow street fronts but were of great
depth, often with inner courts and light-wells.
WALLS. Walls, usually decorated with Orders, were in stone in the Belgium
inland areas, and for major buildings nearly everywhere, but in Holland and coastal
Belgium brick, with stone dressings, was the chief material. Gables, stepped or
enriched with scrolls and other devices (pp. 829A, B, 833A, C, 838C) were common, and
often had projecting beams for hoists. Due to the dull northern climate, window
areas were large and tended to dwarf the Orders; in town facades, especially in
Holland, the ratio of window to solid was high, and made possible by foundational
piling solely under the side walls, so that the street front was little else than a screen.
OPENINGS. Arcades were unusual, due to lack of strong sunlight, but appeared
under Italian influencein the early period, for example at the Musée Plantin—Moretus
(p. 833c) Antwerp, and Breda Castle. Doorways were tall and richly decorated
(p. 838E, D), often with huge fanlights; entrances had steps,and perrons were common.
The large, tall and narrow windows were of the transom-and-mullion type, except in
Holland after the middle of the sixteenth century when the sash window (perhaps
a Dutch invention) was introduced—it fell into comparative disuse by the end of
the next century.
COLUMNS. The early use of the Orders was characterized by the grotesque
distortions favoured by Floris and de Vries (p. 838k), until the true Renaissance
Orders became common after the second quarter of the sixteenth century; in Bel-
gium they produced a sculptural-plastic effect, but often in Holland the effect was
very flat.
MOULDINGS. As in Mediaeval times the mouldings tended to be heavier than in
Italy, probably to compensate for the lack of strong shadows. Nevertheless, fine
 BELGIAN AND DUTCH RENAISSANCE 837

| S. Michel, Louvain (1650- B. The New Church, Haarlem (1645-9).

1670). See p. 835 See p. 836

c. The Church at Scherpenheuvel D. The New Church, The Hague (1649-56).

(1607). See p. 835 See p. 836
 838 BELGIAN AND DUTCH RENAISSANCE

CO OO
[Po{RR@PP
PRT fea]
DOOR Fat ______
2S
a «3 |

THE MUSEE |i
PLANTIN | !
ANTWERP||
By DOORWAY: ANTWERP
y
5)
YF. \ = ~OOOr =
=—{F cr pan
=

¢ / =) Sy
= i . = 4 \ 7

CAPITAL FROM THE

MONUMENTorGUILLAUME
DE CROY, LEGLISE DES
CAPUCINS : ENGHIEN

oH EE
PLANTIN: ANTWERP
BELGIAN AND DUTCH RENAISSANCE 839

z = ©

FINIAL urine

nr
SPIRE HH
NEW CHURCH ea
HAARLEM =F
Re
Dit
Senge i

S11.
840 BELGIAN AND DUTCH RENAISSANCE

A. Staircase B. Landing on second floor

No. 8, Lange Vijverberg, The Hague (1715). See p. 835

craftsmanship, mostly originating from Antwerp, produced excellent work in stone,

marble, wood and metals throughout the Netherlands.
ORNAMENT. In Belgium, the Catholic religion encouraged richness in decora-
tion, and gave ample opportunity for its display in churches, where the altars and
fittings were extravagantly ornate. In Dutch Protestant churches—often in contrast
with their general sobriety—screens, benches (p. 838A), pulpits, organ cases and
stained glass were richly designed. In houses of all sizes, great prosperity was re-
flected in the richness of the interiors in all periods; in Holland, often again in
contrast with the plain exteriors. Chimney pieces (p. 838F, K) in the Early Renais-
sance were major fields for ornate extravagance, but during the sixteenth century,
taste, though often still exuberant, saw that ornament was more widely and evenly
distributed—in plaster ceilings, panelling, painted walls and ceilings, staircase
balustrades (p. 838H), and fittings.

REFERENCE BOOKS
BURKE, G.L. The Making of Dutch Towns. London, 1956.
EDWARDS, T. Belgium and Luxembourg. London, 1951.
FOCKEMAANDREAE,S. J. and others. Duizend faar Bouwen in Nederland. Vol. ii. Amster-
dam, 1957.
GEYL,P. The Revolt of the Netherlands, 1555-1609. London, 1958.
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, ARTS AND SCIENCES. Guide to Dutch Art. The Hague, 1953.
NIJHOFF, M. La Belgique monumentale. The Hague, 1915.
OZINGA,M.D. De Protestansche Kerkenbouw in Nederland. Amsterdam, 1929.
PLUYM, wW. van der. Vijf eeuwen Binnenhuis en Meubels in Nederland. Amsterdam, 1954.
SITWELL, S. The Netherlands. London, 1948.
SLUYTERMAN,K. Old Interiors in Belgium. The Hague, 1908.
—. Ancient Interiors in Belgium. The Hague, 1915.
VRIEND, J.J. De Bouwkunst van ons Land. Amsterdam, 1949.
YERBURY, F.R. Old Domestic Architecture in Holland. London, 1924.
YSENDYCK, J.J. van. Documents classiques del’ art dans les Pays-Bas. 5 vols. Antwerp, 1954.
 = oy ; pour?
; Segovi
“gy Salamanca®

Spain in the seventeenth century

XXIV. SPANISH RENAISSANCE

(sixteenth—nineteenth century)

See p. 1126 for Spanish architecture in the Americas.

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. Spain, in the Mediaeval period (p. 635), could well be geographi-
cally considered as ‘the Peninsula’ and merely as a country in the extreme south-
west of Europe. It was far otherwise in the Renaissance period, when her prestige
and power had been increased and extended by the discovery of the New World,
which, together with the vast hereditary possessions and the military conquests of
the Spanish monarchy, established Spain as the leading country in Europe. Her
dominions, under the Emperor Charles V, included the Netherlands and parts of
Germany, till, after eighty years of strife, they shrank again in Europe under the
Peace of Westphalia (1648). But there remained those partly tropical lands,
the Spanish colonies of South America—Mexico, Peru, and Chile—which were so
naturally allied in many aspects with the sunny Spain of Europe. In these exotic
lands Spanish architects had the widest scope for the exercise of their flamboyant
genius.
GEOLOGICAL. In continuation of previous practice (p. 635), granite was much
used, as in the Escorial where its hard severe nature had much to do with the grim
842 SPANISH RENAISSANCE

aspect of that building; while stone and the semi-marbles in which the country
abounds were in general use. Brick was employed with stone in bonding courses,
mainly in former Moorish centres, such as Toledo, and the iron ore of the northern
mountains gave an impetus to the development of decorative ironwork, such as the
‘rejas’ (p. 862).
CLIMATIC. The climate varies, as stated in Chapter XVIII (p. 636), from severe
winter cold on the high central table-lands to tropical summer heat in the south, and,
owing to the general sunny character of the Peninsula, there is a prevalence of small
windows, flat roofs, and open ‘patios’, or courtyards. In many of the new Spanish
colonies in America, the climate was not unlike that of Spain, and was thus
favourable to the reproduction there of similar architectural features to those of
Spain. The effects aimed at by the Baroque style were peculiarly adapted to the
clear air, intense sunlight and strong shadows of Spain and many parts of Spanish
America.
RELIGIOUS. The Reformation obtained no hold whatever in Spain, for the
religious and racial struggle between Christianity and Islam formed a bond of
union amongst all Christians, and so left little opportunity for Christian internecine
strife. The final expulsion of the Moors, after the fall of Granada (1492), resulted
in a revival of ecclesiastical building, and many fine Renaissance churches were
erected in the hitherto Moorish districts. Spain was the birthplace of Ignatius
Loyola, the founder of the Society of Jesus, which received Papal recognition in
1540, and the religious zeal of this order is responsible for many magnificent
Baroque churches and convents throughout the country.
SocIAL. Goths from North Europe and Moors from North Africa were potent
elements in the mixed population of Spain, and these warring influences are
visible in the architecture. The marriage (1469) of Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella
of Castile—designated ‘The Catholic Sovereigns’ by the Holy See, 1497—began
that fusion of the different states which resulted in the consolidation of the King-
dom of Spain. In 1512 Ferdinand conquered the Kingdom of Navarre, which was
incorporated with Castile, and thus the whole of Spain was joined under one rule,
and during the annexation of Portugal (1580-1640) the Spanish Kingdom covered
the whole peninsula. Under the despotism of Philip II Jews and heretics were
persistently persecuted. Under Philip III (1598-1621) the Moriscos (Moorish con-
verts to Christianity) were driven out of the country, and this proved a great loss,
both in handicrafts and commerce, to Southern Spain, for their industry had largely
contributed to its prosperity. After the invasion by Napoleon, internal revolutions
followed which have not been favourable to architecture.
HISTORICAL. In the latter part of the fifteenth century the power of Spain
gradually increased until, under the Emperor Charles V (1516-56), it became the
chief power in Europe. The Turkish occupation of the Levant, which closed the
usual trade routes to the East, had promoted that spirit of maritime enterprise in
Spain and Portugal which led to the great discoveries of new lands in the West and
thus brought increased riches to the Peninsula. In 1487 Diaz discovered the Cape of
Good Hope; in 1492 Columbus discovered the West Indies, and in 1497-9 the con-
tinent of America, bringing consequent riches to Spain. In 1497 Vasco da Gama
carried Portuguese trade to India. The extent of the Spanish dominions in Europe
was due to a succession of marriages, as a result of which the Emperor Charles V
reigned over Spain, the Netherlands, Sardinia, Sicily, Naples, Franche-Comté,
Milan and Germany, and he added by conquest Mexico, Peru, Chile, and Central
America, before he abdicated (1555) the most powerful Emperor since Charlemagne.
This vast empire was held together by his skill in government and by the excellence
of the Spanish army, of which the infantry was the finest in Europe. Philip IJ
 SPANISH RENAISSANCE 843

B. The Casa de las Conchas, Salamanca (1512-14). See p. 846

 844 SPANISH RENAISSANCE

A. The University, Salamanca (facade 1514-38. Casa de Ayuntamiento, Seville: detail of

1529). See p. 846 facade (1527-64). See p. 846

c. The University, Alcala de Henares (1537-53). See p. 846

 SPANISH RENAISSANCE 845
checked the power of the Turks in 1571 by winning the great naval battle of
Lepanto, but his harsh and despotic rule alienated the Netherlands; while the ex-
pedition against England ended in the defeat of the Armada in 1588. Provinces
were gradually lost, until in 1659 the power of Spain was shattered by the Peace of
the Pyrenees. The war of the Spanish succession (1701-14), terminated by the
Peace of Utrecht, resulted in the loss of Gibraltar as well as of the Spanish dominions
in Italy and the Netherlands. At the commencement of the nineteenth century
Napoleon’s invasion led to an outburst of national resistance, when, with the power-
ful aid of the armies of Great Britain under Wellington, the French were finally
driven out of Spain after the battle of Vittoria (1813), and during the Peninsular
War the Spanish colonies in America had revolted and were eventually recognized
as independent.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
Renaissance Spain was heir to two civilizations, Muslim and Christian, and not her-
self possessing much political and cultural unity, particularly in the Christian
regions, tended to conservatism while being at the same time locally susceptible to
external influences. Hence, although in general the Renaissance advanced by stages
similar to those in other European countries, there was considerable diversity in the
manner of expression and in the rates of progression in different parts of the country.
Individualism was strongly marked. Keeping these matters in view, the Renaissance
may be divided into four tolerably distinct phases, determined by the characteristics
predominant in the different periods.
The Early Period (1492-1556), which begins with the fall of Granada, is notable
for the grafting of Renaissance details on to Gothic forms, and was influenced by
the exuberant fancy of Moorish art. Thus there had been produced by this time a
style as rich and poetic as any in Europe, commonly known as the Plateresque
(plateria=silverwork), from the minuteness of its detail and its similarity to silver-
smiths’ work which itself had received a great impetus through the importation of
precious metals from the New World. The Plateresque is extremely florid and
decoratively involved, and has its fundamentally Gothic versions, carrying on until
mid-sixteenth century, as well as those in which Renaissance detail substantially
appears.
The Classical Period (1556-1650) was marked by a closer adherence to Italian
Renaissance art, and under the influence of the sculptor Alonso Berruguete (c.
1488-1561) and the notable architect Juan de Herrera (c. 1530-97), who had visited
both Flanders (1547-51) and Italy (1551-9), for a while took a more classical and
austere turn.
The Baroque Period (1650-1750) was characterized by a reaction from the correct
and frigid formalism observed by Herrera and his followers. As in the earlier phases
of the Renaissance there was no single version to which all designers of the day
adhered, but several, and among them one which is considered as being peculiarly
Spanish in its extraordinary virility, opulence and disregard of strict classical rules.
While the earlier Baroque examples show some relationship to Lombard, Central
Italian or Neapolitan precedents, a fantastically extravagant expression, the ‘Chur-
rigueresque’, developed in the late seventeenth century and continued to mid-
eighteenth; due to a family of architects led by José de Churriguera (1665-1725),
though he was not himself the most extreme of the exponents of the style. There
were also followers, including the brilliant Narciso Tomé, active between 1715-42,
whose work, however, is mainly sculptural. The Spanish Churrigueresque is well
seen in the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela (west front, 1738-49) (p. 85 8B)
846 SPANISH RENAISSANCE

several buildings at Seville, at Valladolid, and above all at Salamanca. The style
inspired many buildings in the Spanish colonies. French and Italian fashions in-
truded strongly into Spain in the eighteenth century.
The Antiquarian Period (1750-1830). As in general in Central and Western
Europe, architecture turned more and more towards ancient classical models at
this time.

EXAMPLES
SECULAR ARCHITECTURE
The Palace, Guadalajara (1480-92) (destroyed, 1936) (pp. 647, 843A) and the
Collegio de San Gregorio, Valladolid (1488-96) have patios with Moorish,
Gothic and Renaissance detail of the transition period.
The Casa de las Conchas, Salamanca (1512-14) (p. 843B) takes its name from
the curious treatment of its facade, which is covered with carved scallop shells. The
windows are few in number; the small lower ones are guarded with grilles of
elaborate Moorish ironwork, while the upper ones have carved panels in lieu of
balconies and are enriched with heraldic carvings.
The University fagade, Salamanca (1514-29) (p. 844A) is a masterpiece of
Plateresque design, of admirable craftsmanship and embodying, within a Gothic
frame, a number of Italianate motifs such as amorini, panelled pilasters infilled
with arabesques, portrait roundels and candelabra as well as the arms of Ferdinand
and Isabella and of Charles V, all embedded in a wealth of surface ornament of
Moorish inspiration.
The Casa de Ayuntamiento, Seville (1527-64) (p. 844B), designed by Diego
de Riano (active 1517-34), has a symmetrical front of two and three storeys fully
ornamented with the Orders, spaced into bays by single or paired pilasters or on
the upper storeys by attached columns treated as candelabra. The design is very
reminiscent of Italian Lombard architecture, of mixed Early and Proto-Baroque
character, but has the excessive elaboration stamping it as Plateresque.
The University facade, Alcala de Henares (1537-53) (p. 844C), by Rodrigo
Gil de Hontanon (c. 1505-77), whose earlier work was Gothic, has the characteristi-
cally ornate centre-piece and paucity of windows, except for an arcaded third-storey
window series bracketing the greater part of the front. The main, first-floor, win-
dows have side scrolls, excessive enframements and iron grilles (p. 860D), while the
angle treatment and pinnacles strike a Gothic note. Nearby is the Archbishop’s
Palace, its staircase and fine ‘patio’ being by Alonso de Covarrubias (1488-1570),
the patio having spreading bracket capitals.
The Casa de Miranda, Burgos (1543) (p. 847B) has a noted two-storey patio
with bracket capitals to the columns, so usual in Spain.
The Casa Polentina, Avila (c. 1550) (p. 854B) also has an attractive patio, the
columns on each of two storeys carrying bracket capitals and richly-carved archi-
traves, and having heraldic shields above the capitals.
The Alcazar, Toledo (c. 1537-53) (pp. 848A, 854A), a castle of mixed Moorish
and Gothic character, was remodelled by Alonso de Covarrubias for Charles V. It
was largely destroyed in the Civil War (1936-9). The well-designed patio (p. 848A)
had superimposed Corinthian columns in light arcades of the Early Italian type,
the arches standing upon the column caps, and like the facade which formed a new
front to the old castle (p. 854A), was not richly sculptured, since the material was
granite. The central entrance was flanked by Ionic columns surmounted by statues,
and the elaborate overdoor had a panel carved with the arms of Charles V. The first
storey windows of the facade, with iron balconies, were set off by plain walling,
 SPANISH RENAISSANCE 847

A. Palace of Charles V, Granada (1527-68): detail B. Casa de Miranda, Burgos (1543).

of facade. See p. 851 See p. 846

c, Palace of Charles V, Granada: central court

848 SPANISH RENAISSANCE

B. Casa de los Guzmanes, Leon (1560). See p. 852

 SPANISH RENAISSANCE 849

B. Tavera Hospital, Toledo: patio

850 SPANISH RENAISSANCE

ae

A. The Casa Lonja, Seville: the patio (1583-98). See p .852

B. The University, Valladolid: facade (1715-). See p. 852

 SPANISH RENAISSANCE 851
while the top storey had an unusual rusticated treatment, with a small Order on
pedestals, surmounted by a flat balustraded roof.
The Palace of Charles V, Granada (1527-68) (p. 847A, C), adjoining the
Alhambra (p. 1233), was designed by Pedro Machuca (active 1517-50) and continued
after his death by his son Luis. It equates with the Italian High Renaissance in
character, and is thoroughly classical in spirit. It is a square mass of building about
200 ft each way, enclosing a fine, majestic open circular patio. The external facades
are two storeys in height, the lower of which has rusticated Doric columns, except
in the centre-piece, where they are fluted, and the upper has Ionic columns (p. 847A).
In both storeys there are circular windows above the main ones, to light mezzanine
floors, their place being taken by sculptured panels on the centre-piece. It is built in
golden-coloured stone. The circular patio (p. 847c) is a grand architectural con-
ception, 100 ft in diameter, with superimposed Doric and Ionic colonnades, and
forms the chief feature of this monumental building, which, however, was never
completed for occupation.
The Tavera Hospital, Toledo (1542-79) (p. 849), designed by Bartolomé de
Bustamente (c. 1500-70) is again strongly Italianate and unusually restrained for
Spanish Renaissance architecture. It has a rectangular plan, 350 ft long, and a
powerfully severe facade, with vigorously protruding rusticated quoins at the angles
of the building and around the sparse windows, in addition to channelled rustica-
tions covering the two principal storeys as a whole (p. 849). There is, however, the
usual Spanish centre-piece, rising through three tiers. The patio (p. 849B), with its
two storeys of graceful arcades, Ionic over Doric, is as classically faultless as any
Florentine Renaissance cortile, apart from the varied span of the arches.
The Escorial (1559-84) (pp. 853, 859A, B, 861A), about thirty miles from Madrid,
was commenced by Juan Bautista de Toledo (d. 1567) for Philip II, but in 1572
Juan de Herrera was given charge of the work. This austere group of buildings on a
lonely site, 675 ft by 685 ft, consists of monastery, college, church, and palace with
state apartments (p. 853B). The grand entrance in the centre of the west front
opens into the ‘Patio de los Reyes’, which, lying between the great courts of the
monastery and the college, forms the atrium of the church, the latter measuring
330 ft by 210 ft. To the right of the atrium is the monastery, with its four courts,
each 60 ft square, surrounded with arcades in three storeys, beyond which is the
‘Patio de los Evangelistas’. To the left of the atrium is the college, with its four
courts, and beyond this the great court of the palace is connected with the state
apartments, which project behind the church and make the plan into the form of a
gridiron. The church is similar in type to S. Maria di Carignano, Genoa (p. 688),
and shows Italian influence on the work of Herrera, but the Spanish character is
seen in the position of the choir over a vaulted vestibule at the west end, which
shortens the long arm of the Latin cross, so that the main building is a Greek cross
on plan. The simple church facade (p. 859A) has noble Doric columns, surmounted
by granite figures of the Kings of Judah, and the windows between the statues light
the raised choir within. The interior (p. 859B) is cold, but impressive by reason of
its simplicity, and the granite walls are in strong contrast to the frescoed vaults,
while the magnificent reredos, with its quiet blending of colour, further emphasizes
the general subdued effect. This world-famous pile owes much of its character to the
yellowish-grey granite of which it is built, both within and without, a material which
imposed restraint upon the architect, and may indeed have accorded with the
ascetic taste of Philip II. The external facades, five storeys high (p. 853A), are in
_ great blocks of granite, of such a size that the door architraves are in one stone, 10 ft
high, and there is no attempt at window grouping, as in the Alcazar facade (p. 8 544);
and openings generally are devoid of ornament. The external effect of the Escorial
852 SPANISH RENAISSANCE

is remarkably dignified, with its plain facades and angle towers, the whole group
culminating in the great western towers of the church and its central dome, 312 ft
in height. The impressiveness of this group of buildings, grand in its severity (p.
861A), is enhanced by the lonely austerity of its mountain background.
The Casa de los Guzmanes, Leon (c. 1560) (p. 848B) is a representative build-
ing of the Classical period, the architectural elements being used with discretion
and restraint. The special Spanish note is struck by the angle pavilions—normal to
domestic architecture—the columned doorway flanked by statues, small windows
protected by iron grilles, and continuous arcaded upper storey in the deep shadow
of wide-spreading eaves.
The Casa Lonja, Seville (1583-98) (p. 850A), from designs by Herrera, shows
in its patio of Ionic-over-Doric arcades, in which the attached Orders enframe
the arches in the Roman manner, the cold academic character widespread at this
time.
The Hospicio Provincial, Madrid (1722-) provides in its portal (p. 857A), de-
signed by Pedro Ribera (1683-1742), an instance of the Churrigueresque version of
the Baroque. In secular architecture externally, it was often solely upon portals that
this kind of almost riotous elaboration was concentrated, as again too, though with
greater discipline, in the facade of the University, Valladolid (p. 850B), begun in
1715 by Narciso Tomé. The Palace of the Marqués de Dos Aguas, Valencia
(1740-4) (p. 857B) shows a later development in which the tortuous and involved
ornament around the openings has something of the character of a viscous
efflorescence.
The Royal Palace, La Granja, near Segovia (1719-39) (p. 857C) has an eastern
or garden facade built by foreign architects, the centre part (1735-9) from the
designs of the Italian, Filippo Juvarra (p. 695); and this, having a giant Corinthian
Order embracing the two main floors, has most of the qualities associated with
Italian Baroque architecture. The splendid gardens were laid out between 1727-43.
The Royal Palace, Madrid (1738-64) by the Italian, Sacchetti, similarly is in
classical heavy Baroque style, having little distinctive Spanish character.

ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE
S. Estéban, Salamanca (1524-1610) is mainly a Gothic building, influenced by
Moorish art, but has a rich Plateresque western front: a great arch, with superim-
posed pilasters, half-columns and baluster shafts, encloses sculptured figures of
saints in high canopied niches carried right across the elaborate facade, which is
further enriched with heraldic shields and finished off with a truncated pediment.
Burgos Cathedral (pp. 637, 641A, 652B) is conspicuous externally by its magni-
ficent central tower, added 1539-67, with quasi-Gothic windows and lofty angle
pinnacles emphasizing the old Gothic tradition which lingers throughout. Internally,
four massive circular piers, built after the collapse of the previous Gothic piers in
1539, support pointed arches, elaborate squinches, high octagonal drum, and the
open-work vault or ‘cimborio’. The Escalera Dorada (1519-23) in the north transept
is a unique Plateresque feature of the interior.
Granada Cathedral (1528-63 and later) (p. 858c, D), undertaken by Diego de
Siloe (c. 1495-1563), is one of the grandest Renaissance churches in southern Spain,
and a remarkable example of the Plateresque period. The interior (p. 858D) is a
translation of Seville Cathedral into the Renaissance style, and the great piers of the
nave (completed between 1667-1703) are faced with the Classic Orders, while the
radiating piers, supporting the dome of the circular “Capilla Mayor’, show an in-
genious and novel treatment. The Capilla Real, to the south of the transept, is late
 SPANISH RENAISSANCE 853

MA DIRIUD

SCALE OF FEET SCALE OF METRES

4 pO 30 190 150 lO pene p29

30 49 59 a4

== — 159.0 — — =
GREAT COURT
OF THE PALACE

PALACE
=|

COURT

=
525410)
=

——-118!0% --
PATIO i -]
Ousrecss DE LOS es es rer 4
COREPEGE REYES LIBRARY |MONASTERY]Rerectory [
@Punenace = = 2 ft goer yee 4

— |COURT | COURT = COURT }

ieee PLAN fbcel aioe
E Aare Fa : 8

Cle 5 eq ENTRANCE fi TOWERS

COLLEGE, = Le ee SS MONASTERY LL Lk y
ENTER. MeN ZA DEL MONASTERIO — ENTRANCE
854 SPANISH RENAISSANCE

— Biratio: THE CASA POLENTINA:A

<M
 SPANISH RENAISSANCE 855

Gothic (1504-21) and earlier than the Cathedral itself. It is entered through a
magnificent wrought-iron ‘reja’ and contains the famous tombs of Ferdinand and
Isabella and other kings and queens of Spain. The unfinished west front shows a
change of design, due to Alonso Cano (1601-1667) and erected 1667-1703: it is an
instance of Baroque architecture, a type in which the use of the Orders is largely
evaded (p. 858Cc).
Jaen Cathedral (1540-) is mainly of the Classical period but has an impressive
Baroque west front and towers (1667-88) (p. 859c); Malaga Cathedral (1528-)
continued in building into the eighteenth century, though without considerable
departure from the early design.
Valladolid Cathedral (1580-) begun on the plans of Juan de Herrera, the
Spanish Palladio, was never finished to his designs or it would have been just about
as large as Seville, and among the largest cathedrals in the world. Nevertheless
Herrera’s design had great influence on other cathedrals in Spain and Spanish
America. It was finished at a much reduced size in 1730-3, the upper part of the
west front (p. 859D) being by Alberto Churriguera (1676-1750), whose style is here
a vigorous Baroque, instead of having the intricacy usually found in the work of the
Churriguera family of architects.
El Pilar Cathedral, Saragossa (begun 1677; extensively altered 1753-66) (p.
861B) has a rectangular plan similar to that of Herrera’s Valladolid, with a fine
enclosed western ‘coro’. The exterior, as seen across the River Ebro, forms an
imposing pile, of many domes, the two angle towers having been completed in
modern times and the other two yet awaiting completion. The principal material
is orange-brown brickwork, and the roofing is finished in colour-patterned tilework.
Moorish influence is apparent.
The Sacristy of la Cartuja (Charterhouse), Granada (1727-64) (p. 858A) is
famous as an extreme instance of Churrigueresque architecture, designed by F.
Manuel Vasquez. The windows are at a high level and leave the walls free for the
bizarre fretted plasterwork enclosing picture-panels and inlaid doors and cup-
boards.
S. Francisco el Grande, Madrid (1761-84), built on the model of the Pantheon,
Rome (p. 197), to contain the tombs of famous Spaniards, and the facade of Pam-
plona Cathedral (1780-83), severely formal in design, illustrate the Neo-Classical
revival in the Antiquarian period.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
(A comparative analysis of essential differences between Gothic and Renaissance
architecture is given on pp. 660 ff.)
PLANS. In churches, wide naves are usual, and general largeness of scale is preva-
lent in the later rectangular churches, which are sometimes without aisles. A ‘cim-
borio’ (lantern or dome) is common at the crossing (p. 853B); transepts and apsidal
chancels are usually shallow, and the ritual choir remains west of the transepts, as in
many Spanish churches of the Gothic period. The patio (pp. 8484, 849B), or
Spanish version of the Roman atrium and Italian cortile, is universal in houses, and
is given even greater seclusion, doubtless due to Moorish influence; thus in Toledo
only occasional glimpses of the patio can be obtained through doorways in jealously
enclosing walls. Staircases, as in the transept of Burgos Cathedral (p. 852), are often
on a grand scale. The spacious patio and broad staircase in the Casa Infanta, Sara-
gossa, and the Alcazar, Toledo (p. 848A), make as picturesque and fanciful a group
as any in Spain.
WALLS. Walls were usually of stone; granite was employed for the Escorial and
856 SPANISH RENAISSANCE

in Madrid, while brickwork bonded with stone was used in the Moorish districts of
Saragossa and Toledo. The arabesque parapets, as in the Palacio de Monterey,
Salamanca, and the projecting timber cornices of the Saragossa palaces are both
equally characteristic. The typical walls are plain below, with few openings, except
the elaborate doorways, probably due to Moorish precedent, while the upper
windows are accentuated by a wealth of ornament. The top storey is frequently
designed as a continuous arcade (p. 848B), which with its deep shadow gives an
impressive finish to the building. This served as an evening resort, much as did the
flat parapeted roofs of the East. The internal walls of the great saloons of the early
palaces are of plain stonework, ten or more feet in height, hung with tapestry. The
steeples attached to the Cathedrals of Santiago de Compostela, Granada, Jaen (p.
859c), Malaga, Saragossa, and Carmona, are some of the many varieties of this
feature to be found throughout Spain.
OPENINGS. Arcades were treated with lavish decoration, especially in the patios,
as at Avila (p. 8548) and at Burgos (p. 847B), where they give special character to
this central space. Doorways were important features, and, following Moorish
tradition, were designed on a grand scale, as at Toledo and elsewhere (pp. 343, 844,
850B, 857A), probably due to the prominence given to gateways in Oriental countries.
Windows are framed in richly carved stonework, and are flanked by small columns
on corbels, and finished by a highly ornamental head (p. 860D). Ground-floor
windows are frequently protected by those beautiful iron grilles for which Spanish
craftsmen are renowned (p. 843B).
Rooks. As in all hot countries, roofs with wide-spreading eaves are flat or of
low pitch, and gables are rare (p. 843). Domes, both circular and octagonal, were
used for churches (p. 861), and towers are frequently topped with domes or spires
of fanciful design, such as the angle towers of the Escorial (p. 853). The large
saloons in palaces sometimes have an internal upper gallery round the walls, carried
on a projecting timber cornice of fanciful design, and suggestive of Moorish in-
fluence, as in the Audiencia, Valencia.
COLUMNS. Columns derived from the Roman ‘Orders’ were of varied types,
with elaborate shafts, especially in the Plateresque style (p. 844A, B). They were
either twisted or of baluster shape (p. 860D), frequently with wide-stretching bracket
capitals, which acted as corbels to support the architrave, and were suggestive of
forms used in timber work (pp. 126C, 847B). Later, owing to the influence of
Herrera, columns of Classical correctness prevailed (pp. 847A, C, 850A, 859A), until
replaced by the fanciful forms of the Baroque style, in which columns and entab-
latures were freely used as sculpturesque elements (p. 850B).
MOULDINGS. Throughout the earlier period mouldings reflect the Gothic
tradition; they are small and refined, owing to the influence of the silversmiths’
craft, and Moorish plasterwork, with its fineness of detail, seems to have served as a
model for mouldings. Great richness was often produced by bringing the mouldings
forward over the capitals, and this fluttering effect of many mitres gives great
liveliness (p. 860).
ORNAMENT (p. 860). Ornament derives its special character from the mingling
of Gothic, Moorish, and Renaissance elements in elaborate craftsmanship. ‘Retablos’
in alabaster, wood, or stone, peopled with life-size figures in architectural frames,
are without doubt the finest decorative adjuncts to church interiors, where they
often fill the width of the choir and rise to a great height, as at Burgos and elsewhere
(pp. 641D, 859B). The tombs of Spanish grandees, rich with heraldic devices and
portrait busts, offered opportunities for the display of the national love of ostenta-
tion (cf. p. 651E). Choir stalls are ornate, with carved misericords, baluster-shafts,
elbow-rests, and canopies, as at S. Marcos, Leon, and Valladolid. The great
 SPANISH RENAISSANCE 857

A. The Hospicio Provincial, Madrid: portal B. The Palace of the Marqués de Dos
(1722-). See p. 852 Aguas, Valencia (1740-4). See p. 852

Sh
ol

c. The Royal Palace, La Granja, near Segovia: garden facade (1735-9)

See p. 852
 858 SPANISH RENAISSANCE

A. The Sacristy, la Cartuja (Charterhouse), B. The Cathedral of Santiago de Cor

Granada (1727-64). See p. 855 postela: facade (1738-49). See p. 845

c. Facade (1667-1703) D. Interior, looking W.

Granada Cathedral (1528-1703). See p. 852
 SPANISH RENAISSANCE 859

Seta

A. Facade of church B. Nave looking E.

The Escorial, near Madrid (1559-84). See p. 851

c. Jaen Cathedral: fagade (1667-88). D. Valladolid Cathedral: facade (lower

See p. 855 part 1580-; upper, 1730-3). See p. 855
 860 SPANISH RENAISSANCE

pall SCREEN oa GATE tooS

CHAPEL: CUENCA CATHED

NOTE: PANELS |
Opqrs. ENRICHED

PAIS
JS=o
K

AT Uo il : Zab
lh5 dqoiy<
M
$3
io
[tz
hy
: Wiis

MOULDING
AT X
Sears
fi III
aOOOH!
peat
LA,
Ac Mose
im
om
— oe. =e
rent
MOULDING
ATV | cee
a
Laya
lel \\(<l MOULDING
AT y El
Youre
iE
x

=
N S|
| G
IJ
aM‘|
MNT

pie”)
us Hl

== es
|I
—->--—
--—
SQUARE
CIRCUL
NDOW from FACA\ IRON PULPIT.
UNIVERSITY: ALCALA pe NENARES AVILA CATHEDRAL
ihn
estes
SPANISH RENAISSANCE 861

B. El Pilar Cathedral, Saragossa (1677-1766). See p. 855

862 SPANISH RENAISSANCE

wrought-iron screens, called ‘rejas’, of churches (p. 860B, C) and grilles of palace
windows (pp. 843B, 860D) are among the most beautiful productions of Spanish
craftsmanship, and everywhere show the influence of architectural forms, such as
those in Seville Cathedral. The iron pulpit in Avila Cathedral in the Plateresque
style (p. 860E), dating from 1525, of which the upper portion is wood plated with
iron and gilded, is an instance of the importance attained by the metal-workers’
craft, which also produced the elaborate armour of the period. Sculpture (pp. 850B,
859A) varied much in quality, and was sometimes coarse in execution, but the work
of Berruguete, the Spanish Donatello, is refined, though it often fails to become an
integral part of the building. The love for superficial ornament endures almost
throughout the Renaissance period, and makes itself manifest in the various expres-
sions of the Baroque which are found in the country, particularly in that known as
the ‘Churrigueresque’, after the family of that name, who largely practised it (pp.
850B, 857A, 858A, B). Stained glass, at first influenced by Flemish work, was
often heavy in colour, but the tile-work of southern Spain has the charm of its
Moorish origin. Spanish churches are veritable museums for treasures of art, which
have not, as often in other countries, been removed to public museums. Reliquaries,
monstrances, bishops’ crooks, candelabra, altar busts, and book-covers provided an
opportunity for the workers in metal to exercise that meticulous treatment which
even extended to architectural design so much as to have suggested the transference
of the appellation of Plateresque from the ornament to the architecture.

REFERENCE BOOKS
BEVAN,B. History of Spanish Architecture. London, 1938.
BRIGGS,M.S. Baroque Architecture. London, 1913.
BYNE, A., and STAPLEY, M. Provincial Houses in Spain. New York, 1925.
CALZADA, A. Historia de la arquitectura espanola. Barcelona, 1933.
CHAMOSO LAMAS, M. La arquitectura barroca en Galicia. Madrid, 1955.
GALLEGO Y BURIN, A. El barroco granadino. Madrid, 1956.
HARVEY, J. The Cathedrals of Spain. London, 1957.
JUNGHANDEL, M., und GURLITT, C. Die Baukunst Spaniens. 2 vols. Dresden, 1889-93.
KUBLER, G. Arquitectura espafiola 1600-1800, (Ars Hispaniae, XIV). Madrid, 1957.
—., and SORIA, M. Art and Architecture in Spain and Portugal. Pelican History of Art, 1959.
MAYER, A.L. Architektur und Kunstgewerbe in Alt-Spanien. Munich, 1920.
PRENTICE, A.N. Renaissance Architecture and Ornament in Spain. 1893.
SCHUBERT, O. Geschichte der Barock in Spanien. 1908.
SITWELL, S. Spanish Baroque Art. London, 1931.
UHDE, C. Baudenkmaeler in Spanien und Portugal. Berlin, 1889-92.
VILLA-AMIL,G. P. de. Espaiia artistica y monumental. 3 vols. Paris, 1842-50.
VILLIERS-STUART, C.M. Spanish Gardens. 1929.
WARING, J. B., and MACQUOID, T. R. Examples of Architectural Art in Italy and Spain.
1850.
WYATT, SIRM.DIGBY. An Architect’s Note-book in Spain. 1872.
 Land over 500 feet

9 Miles 100
$$

af a {Seaton Delaval

- reeabears ca Newcastle
‘ Sy gore
N

" Castle Howard

Manchester
Liverpool :

Ke pele

“Derby 4 {Grantham
Shrewsbury

Knole.. EROS
* Penshurst =

England in the Renaissance period

XXV. ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

(sixteenth—nineteenth century)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. The island influence still continued, as in previous periods (p.
379), to produce those pronounced modifications which stamp all English archi-
tecture with an essentially national character. There is therefore no need for further
reference to geographical influences, except insofar as their operation was affected,
altered or arrested, by other considerations, such as the varying relations of England
with Continental powers. Moreover, owing to the distance from Italy, the birth-
place of Renaissance, England was the last country to fall under the influence of the
new movement, which naturally reached this island by way of France and the
Netherlands. The friendly relations which, at different times, marked our intercourse
864. ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

with these countries may be seen faithfully reflected in English architecture.

The great wars, however, at the end of the eighteenth and beginning of the nine-
teenth century closed Continental travel to Englishmen, though contacts were at
once renewed after 1815. Internal communications began to improve in Britain
about the mid-eighteenth century, the first important step as regards good road-
making having been taken by General George Wade in Scotland from 1726; the
really important developments were due to Thomas Telford and James Loudon
Macadam in the first quarter of the nineteenth century. Bridge-building necessarily
improved at the same time. The peak period of canal and navigable inland water-
way construction was between 1760 and 1800, and the extensive system created
greatly facilitated the transport of heavy goods, including building materials, with
the result that the surviving local character in minor architecture tended to dis-
appear.
GEOLOGICAL. This influence has been considered in the Mediaeval period (p.
380), and, as one of the natural influences, it is continuous, and still gives a special
character to the architecture of various districts; though other elements have modi-
fied its operation. Timber, for instance, gradually fell into disuse for building pur-
poses, partly because of the growing scarcity of the material as forests were cleared
for the needs of the rising population, or because of the risk of fire in crowded
towns, but particularly because stone, and in due course, brick, provided more
stable, permanent and weather-proof structures. Timber-frames, exposed exter-
nally, were still normal throughout Elizabethan times, and under various forms of
external sheathing, such as plaster or tile-hanging, persisted in the smaller buildings
of the countryside even until the opening of the nineteenth century in regions where
building-stone was not readily available. In the latter regions, as in East Anglia,
buildings of note not infrequently were being built in brickwork as early as c. 1500.
Stone, however, was the natural successor to timber, and in favoured areas became
usual in the seventeenth century. Inigo Jones first made use of Portland stone in
his London buildings. Sir Christopher Wren also adopted it for his many churches
and secular buildings, and it has been largely used up to the present day. Bath stone
of the soft oolitic formation, which crosses England diagonally from Somerset to
Lincoln, gives a charming character to the manor and other houses of these districts,
just as the Yorkshire gritstone, which did not lend itself to carving, caused the
adoption there of a plain and unornamented style. The geological map (p. 379)
gives a rough indication of the building materials available in the different districts.
By the eighteenth century, brick was becoming almost universal for domestic
architecture and the less important classes of building. Bricks, thinner than today,
were at first bonded irregularly in a loose form of ‘English bond’, but after mid-
seventeenth century ‘Flemish bond’ became usual. Terra-cotta, introduced in the
Tudor period, was not much used even for architectural details until Victorian
times (p. 983). Roofing-tiles accompanied the use of bricks in the eastern and
southern parts of the country, while stone slates or flags replaced thatch in the up-
land midland, western and northern regions. The employment of thin slates ex-
tended greatly after mid-eighteenth century, their distribution made practicable by
the improvement of inland waterways and roads and the construction of canals. A
consequence of the exploitation of mineral resources as the Industrial Revolution
gathered force was the appearance of cast iron as a structural material, well before
1800.
CLIMATIC. The influence of climate was operative in the Renaissance as in
former periods (p. 380). When the new style was introduced from Italy, the dull
English climate caused it to be adapted to our northern use. In order to admit
abundant light, large windows still continued, especially in the early period, in
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 865

striking contrast to those of Italy. A growing desire for comfort, coinciding also
with the more general use of coal as fuel in the reign of Charles I, brought about the
introduction of a fireplace in each room; while chimneys continued, as in the Tudor
period, to be prominent symmetrical features of the external design, instead of
being disguised as in Italy.
' RELIGIOUS. Early in the sixteenth century religious controversy was astir in the
land, and the Reformation in religion coincided in England with the commencement
of Renaissance in architecture. Abuses had crept into the Church, and the popes
had failed to deal with them. The constant irritation which had existed between
kings of England and popes of Rome had already been accentuated in England by
the attitude taken up by Henry VIII, and the relation of the English Church to the
Crown was finally settled by the Act of Supremacy (1559) in the reign of Elizabeth.
When the monasteries, large and small, had been suppressed (1536-40), much of
their property was distributed among the courtiers of Henry VIII. Monasteries
either fell into ruin or, in a way characteristically English, emerged as national
cathedrals; while others again were cleared away for the erection of country houses,
or were even incorporated in the mansions of the new nobility. During this period
men’s minds were turned rather to Church reform than to church building. More-
over, the great church-building era of the Middle Ages had left an ample supply of
churches, and not until the latter part of the seventeenth century was there a re-
newal of church building. In London especially, the Great Fire gave Sir Christo-
pher Wren an opportunity of exercising his genius in the new style which, from an
ecclesiastical point of view, was specially suitable for the preaching which formed
so important a part in the Protestant service.
SOCIAL. At the time when the Renaissance came to England, not only had new
social conditions been created, but national life was rich in every variety of social,
artistic, and literary movement. The Renaissance, with its recognition of the
inherent human right to the enjoyment of life, appealed strongly to a community
which had thrown off ecclesiastical domination and was rapidly developing a free
national and domestic life along secular lines. The Wars of the Roses (1454-85) had
already decimated the old nobility, but expanding commerce was constantly sup-
plying a new class of wealthy merchants and traders to take the place of the former
feudal lords. The new men who, as we have seen, had acquired land—often from
monastic establishments—now required houses suitable to their wealth and to the
standing in the country which their enterprise and success in trade had conferred
upon them. These then were the men who were ready to adopt the new style which,
in its grandness of scale, exactly suited their ideas. Of this period it may also be said
that ‘knowledge spread from more to more’; for Caxton, with his printing press at
Westminster (1477), had brought the hoarded knowledge of the privileged few
within the reach of common humanity. The printed and picture book also served
to make artists and craftsmen familiar with the plans and details of Classic buildings.
An Englishman, John Shute, published the First and Chief Groundes of Architecture
in 1563, this owing much to the writings of the Italian, Serlio; while the great work
of Vitruvius, the ancient Roman architect, was also translated and circulated.
Foreign artists, imbued with Renaissance ideas, had already flocked to the court
of Henry VIII, and to these were added, in the reign of Elizabeth, Flemish and
German craftsmen, who settled principally in the eastern counties, and there
influenced the style of the new mansions. Finally, the Massacre of S. Bartholomew’s
Day (1572) drove to England many skilled Huguenot craftsmen who contributed to
the efficient execution of the new style in their new home. The changed social con-
ditions, together with practical considerations resulting from new methods of
warfare and the increasing use of gunpowder, had rendered the fortification of
2E H.O.A.
866 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

dwelling-houses useless. Thus the ancient castle had given way to the Tudor manor
house, which in its turn was developed into the stately mansion of the Elizabethan and
Jacobean periods. We have already seen the result of the suppression of the monas-
teries in the foundation of national cathedrals and in the erection of country houses;
and yet another phase of national and local life, affected by the dissolution of
monastic establishments, is seen in the growth of educational and philanthropic
endowments. Both Henry VIII and Edward VI had devoted part of the monastic
treasuries to the foundations of colleges and grammar schools, and thus some of the
monastic funds continued in use for one of their original purposes, but no longer
under the special control of the Church. The progressive development in domestic
comfort and the increase in hospitality during the reign of Elizabeth (1558-1603)
were responsible for an era remarkable for the erection of those great and commo-
dious mansions which are still the special pride of England, and many important
building schemes, as those of the ambitious Protector Somerset, cut short by his
execution in 1552, had been initiated. It was also fashionable for young men to visit
Italy, and thus Renaissance ideas were brought to England.
During the spacious days of Queen Elizabeth, literature bore no small part in
influencing national architecture; for the writings of such literary giants as Spenser,
Shakespeare, Bacon, and Sir Philip Sidney, with their constant reference to the
themes and traditions of ancient Rome, could not fail to give a Classic tone to the
buildings erected by men who were artists in stone as the others were artists in
words. In all these combined and simultaneous activities we see a new national art
in the making, under the influence of Italian and French Renaissance. During the
reigns of James I and his son, English colonizing enterprise, which then surpassed
that of any other country, led to the expansion of English trade, with a consequent
further accession of numbers to the wealthy classes who, following the King’s
example, lived much in the country and there erected many stately houses. Though
Charles I was a patron of art, the disturbed condition of the country during his ill-
starred reign, culminating in the Civil War, arrested the progress of architecture,
as exemplified in the abandonment of the great scheme for the projected Palace of
Whitehall (p. 898). During the Stuart period the English colonies of North
America and the West Indies exceeded all others in importance, and together with
Indian and African trade established English overseas prestige. This growing trade
also gave increased consideration to all questions of home commerce and a con-
sequent greater importance to the trading classes.
In Charles II’s reign the feudal system of knight-service was abolished. The
revocation of the Edict of Nantes (1685) caused another influx of Huguenot crafts-
men with their skill and trade secrets.
The Bank of England was established in 1694; the economic situation underwent
a marked change, and the ‘mercantile system’ was concerned in securing a surplus
of exports over imports, which naturally resulted in an increase of home manufac-
tures. These conditions also created a further demand for houses for wool staplers
and weavers, who challenged the supremacy of those in France and Holland.
Agricultural industry was in a more thriving condition, and pauperism consequently
decreased; while the settlement laws of the period helped to equalize the poor
relief of different districts and to arrest vagrancy. There was a greater sense of
security of living, which created better conditions for general architectural enter-
prise. It is difficult to realize that as late as the end of the eighteenth century there
were still only some eight million inhabitants in England and Wales; while London,
with almost a million, far exceeded any other town in size, and correspondingly in-
fluenced public opinion and national policy. Norwich, with its weaving and banking
community, and Bristol, with its West India trade and sugar refining, were next in
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 867
importance to the capital. The increase of population in London did not, however,
induce the City to extend its boundaries, and thus a new town grew up to the west-
ward, which gave a further opportunity to Renaissance architects, in addition to that
which had been afforded by the Great Fire in the City in 1666. The general increase
in wealth and the rise in the standard of comfort are seen in the number of plain
comfortable Georgian houses of our country towns.
In the nineteenth century further changes in social conditions are reflected in a
breaking away from tradition in architecture, and many minds turned restlessly for
inspiration to past styles, which they applied to the new buildings required for the
various needs of an increasing population. Nineteenth-century developments after
1830 are referred to later (Ch. XXVI, p. 982).
HISTORICAL. Henry VIII had been firmly established on the English throne,
and the security of his position at home enabled him to interest himself in affairs on
the Continent, and his famous meeting with Francis I on the Field of the Cloth of
Gold in 1520, with all its resplendent accessories, resulted in attracting foreign
artists to his court, and they largely determined the manner of the adoption of the
Renaissance style in England, alike in architecture, sculpture, and painting. Henry
VIII usually was on friendly terms with his brother monarchs, but would brook no
interference from Rome with his royal prerogative. He handed on this legacy of
political and religious freedom to his son, Edward VI; but the position was tem-
porarily changed during the reign of Mary who, through her marriage with Philip II,
was under Spanish influence, though it did not extend much beyond her own im-
mediate surroundings. A similar foreign influence had been at work in Scotland,
and there French architectural features were popularized, as at George Heriot’s
Hospital, Edinburgh (p. 525), owing to the alliance of France and Scotland under
James IV (1488-1513).
The accession of Elizabeth brought in widely different elements, and the defeat
of the Spanish Armada (1588) not only heralded the decline of Spanish power in
Europe, but also further established the independent position of England, and gave
an extended scope to her national genius, both in politics and art. This was the
period of Hawkins, Drake, Frobisher, and Raleigh, when great discoveries were
made in the New World. The sense of security and the prosperity which followed
the defeat of Spain found material expression in the splendid mansion-building of
the period.
The Stuarts brought England into closer touch with the Continent, more
especially with France and Italy. James I was not only a disciple of the new learning,
but was also a patron of Inigo Jones, the great English architect who studied in
Italy and introduced the Palladian Renaissance into England, notably in his design
for the Banqueting House, Whitehall (p. 898). Charles I inaugurated a period
marked by an amazing intermingling of intrigue, politics, and war, when the King
found himself embroiled both with France and Spain. These conditions were de-
picted in architecture, painting, and the minor crafts, which were fostered by the
fine artistic sense of the King; but the Civil War arrested progress in architecture.
The Commonwealth, with the social upheaval consequent upon a new form of
government, together with the reaction represented by Puritanism, overshadowed
general historic influences. It was essentially a period when the connection between
England and the Continent was marked rather by the power of Cromwell in assert-
ing the position of England than by the operation of foreign influences upon English
art. Charles II had lived at the court of Louis XIV, and there imbibed French ideas
in art, which were introduced into England at the Restoration and continued in
force till the Great Rebellion and the flight of James II (1688). William of Orange
brought over those Dutch influences which were so long predominant in English
868 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

domestic architecture. He introduced into his new kingdom those substantial red
brick houses, with the formal gardens and water-ways which make up the landscape
of Holland, and which form such conspicuous features at his Hampton Court
Palace. The later Stuart period had seen the carrying trade of the world transferred
from Holland to England, while English victories over the French, followed by the
Peace of Utrecht (1713), secured to England the chief trade of Europe and made her
rich enough to build up a navy which gave her supremacy at sea, both over France
and Holland. England still depended largely on the manufactured products of those
countries, but Huguenot weavers from France helped our workmen in the towns to
develop their industries, and engineers from Holland taught our agriculturists to
convert swampy fenlands into corn-growing country. Thus there was an increase in
general prosperity which naturally produced a still further demand for more and
better dwelling-houses.
The reigns of Queen Anne and the four Georges saw Dutch influence on archi-
tecture gradually anglicized, and the houses that were now built were of that con-
venient and comfortable type known as Queen Anne and Georgian, well suited to
the needs of the increasing middle classes, both in town and country.
The French Revolution (1789) was the outcome in one country of a spirit of
revolt general in all countries, which in England led to the breaking up alike of
stereotyped social conventions and of continuous tradition in architecture, and this
has resulted in that revival of past styles which is the special characteristic of
nineteenth-century architecture (Ch. XXVI, p. 982).

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
We have already studied the general architectural character of the Renaissance in
Europe (p. 656), and traced its gradual adoption in different countries to suit differ-
ent nationalities. From Italy, where it had its origin about 1400, the Renaissance
movement travelled to the sister Latin country of France; to Germany, which,
through the universities, welcomed the new movement; to the Netherlands, and to
Spain. Not until a century after its birth in Florence did it make its first appearance
in England in the famous Tomb of Henry VII (1509) (p. 879A), which was a tenta-
tive display of a style which afterwards secured a firm footing, as suitable for the
magnificent country mansions and stately town houses of the substantial professional
and trading families which were rapidly forming England’s new nobility.
English Renaissance architecture may be divided as follows:
Elizabethan (1558-1603) (pp. 868, 878)
Early Renaissance {
Jacobean (1603-25) (pp. 869, 885)
Stuart (1625-1702) (pp. 870, 897)
Late Renaissance {
Georgian (1702-1830) (pp. 872, 928)
The architectural character of Early and Late Renaissance will now be traced
through successive periods, displaying a more or less persistent continuity of style
with variety in detail, and the reader is referred to the Comparative Analysis (p. 964)
for the characteristic features in each period.

EARLY RENAISSANCE
Elizabethan Architecture. The reign of Elizabeth (1558-1603) witnessed the estab-
lishment of the Renaissance style in England. Elizabethan architecture, which
followed the Tudor, was a transition style with Gothic features and Renaissance
detail, and in this respect it bears the same relation to fully developed English Re-
naissance as the style of Francis I does to fully developed French Renaissance.
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 869
But in character it was quite individual, fundamentally still Mediaeval yet affected
superficially by influences which had been transmuted in the course of their passage
from the source in Italy. Italian or French books on architecture, notably the
writings of the Italian, Sebastiano Serlio (1475-1552), in various editions, had some
importance, but particularly, the Renaissance influences reached England from
Flanders, which at the time was practising a decoratively-exaggerated style of
‘strapwork’ and grotesques mainly based on the work of the Italian stuccoists, such
as I] Rosso and Primaticcio at Fontainebleau (p. 774). As we have seen, Antwerp
was a highly important commercial and artistic centre at this period, and from that
locality and neighbouring Germany came not only architectural pattern books of
various kinds but also craftsmen and artisans displaced by political disturbances or
religious persecution. The zeal for church building in the Middle Ages in England
had provided churches which remained sufficient for popular needs, and thus
Elizabethan architecture was secular rather than ecclesiastical in its nature, and
was the outcome of the needs of a time when powerful statesmen, successful mer-
chants, and the enriched gentry required mansions suitable to their new position,
and these were built in England, as in France, mainly in the country, in contrast to
the churches and palaces of the cities in Italy. These great houses were not designed
comprehensively by a single person but were rather the conceptions jointly of the
owner and his chosen master-craftsmen (for large buildings, the chief was usually a
mason), and subordinate specialist craftsmen might be employed to execute decor-
ative features like entrance-doorways, porticoes, fireplaces, staircases and panelling,
to their own designs. The mansions displayed many new combinations of features.
Externally, towers, gables, parapets, balustrades, and chimney-stacks produced an
effective skyline, and walls were enlivened by oriel and bay-windows with mullions
and transoms (p. 880), while internally the same style applied to fittings, furniture,
and decoration, made for repose, dignity, and uniformity (p. 977). Elizabethan man-
sions looked outwards rather than inwards towards courtyards as in the Mediaeval
period, so that there now could be formal settings related to each front, a forecourt,
perhaps with decorative gateway and angle pavilions, on the entrance side, and on
the others, formal gardens with beds of plants arranged in intricate geometrical
knots and a central fountain marking converging paths, or balustraded terraces,
topiary gardens and walks, or terraces and orchards.
Jacobean Architecture. The architecture of the reign of James I (1603-25) in-
herited Elizabethan traditions; but as Roman literature and models became better
known, a subtle change crept in, and the sober regularity of Classic columns and
entablatures gradually supplanted the quaint irregularity of Elizabethan architec-
ture, although the main lines of the design were much the same in both periods
(p. 892). There was a greater tendency, now, for new structures to be designed by a
single hand. Buildings still continued to be for domestic rather than religious use,
and thus the style developed along lines suited to popular needs, with considerable
latitude in detail and ornament, not only for buildings, but also for fittings and
furniture, which now became more abundant in quantity and more decorative in
quality, and were supplied both for mansions and churches (p. 977). As in the
Elizabethan period, it was in the screens, pulpits, and monuments, which were
freely added to Mediaeval churches, that Jacobean art found its outlet in ecclesiasti-
cal architecture, and much of the human interest of English Gothic churches is due
to the historical continuity supplied by these Jacobean monuments (p. 976).
The drawings collected by John Thorpe (1563-1654) and Huntingdon Smithson
(died 1648), the former collection now being preserved in Sir John Soane’s Museum
and the latter at the R.I.B.A., London, are very informative about the houses of the
period c. 1570-1633. The buildings represented are not by any means all their own
870 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

personal designs, but in many cases represent the work of others. There were two
notable generations of Thorpes and three of Smithsons. Thomas Thorpe (died
1596) probably was the principal mason and virtual designer of Kirby Hall, Nor-
thants (p. 881), while his son John, a land surveyor and officer of the King’s works,
made drawings of notable contemporary structures without himself contributing
any buildings of special merit. Robert Smithson (c. 1536-1614) was an outstanding
figure. Probably the chief mason-designer of Longleat House, Wilts (p. 881), he
was certainly the architect of Wollaton Hall, Notts (p. 881), his chief work, and
importantly concerned with Hardwick Hall, Derbyshire (p. 882) and other great
houses in the Midlands, besides originating plans for smaller houses which became
established types. His son John (d. 1634) designed Bolsover Castle, Derbyshire
(p. 886), and he with his son, Huntingdon Smithson, made important additions to
the same building later on.

LATE RENAISSANCE
Stuart Architecture. The term ‘Stuart’ is used for the architecture of Charles I
(1625-49), the Commonwealth (1649-60), Charles II (1660-85), James II (1685-8),
and William and Mary (1689-1702).
The period readily falls into two phases, dominated respectively by two great
personalities, Inigo Jones and Sir Christopher Wren: but in the first, lasting to
about 1660, the majority of buildings showed little response to the striking innova-
tions of Inigo Jones in his courtly circles, and maintained a consistent trend on the
basis of the Jacobean. The designers mostly were working masters of the respective
crafts, rising from the ranks of the masons, carpenters or bricklayers. The latter
term may today suggest a more lowly social status than was sometimes attained by
the more gifted of such master-craftsmen. Influences still came mainly via the
Netherlands, but also from France; the former were evidenced at this time by the
so-called ‘Dutch gables’, shaped with ogee parapets crowned with semicircular or
triangular pediments (p. 907c). Brickwork, very often with stone dressings, became
increasingly popular as the century advanced, and stone and brick mullions
progressively gave place to wooden windows. Notable master-masons were Nicholas
Stone (1586-1647), who received part of his training in Amsterdam; the younger
Smithsons, still working in this phase; and, among master-bricklayers, Peter Mills
(1600-70). In the second or ‘Wren’ phase of the period, from c. 1660 onwards, the
national character of English architecture was becoming more firmly established,
in commonplace buildings as well as in those of prime importance. Dutch influences,
now much more authentically Classical, were reinforced towards the end of the
century, while increased travel brought a surer knowledge of French practices and
genuine Italian precedents. By this time Italy had nearly passed the peak of the
Baroque. Thus it will be seen that in the Stuart period the influences upon English
architecture became increasingly complex, and they remained so in the next, the
Georgian period. Development throughout the Late Renaissance was importantly
determined by the fortunes, training and preferences of distinguished individuals
referred to in the short notices which follow.
Inigo Jones (1573-1652) was a man of dominating personality and brilliance who
produced an architecture which was far in advance of that of his contemporaries, so
much so that its revolutionary nature was not at once fully recognized, and it was
only after his death that its importance began fully to be appreciated. His prolonged
studies in Italy, more especially of the works of Palladio but also of contemporary
Italian architecture as well as the antique, caused him to become an ardent disciple
of the Italian Renaissance style. Born of an undistinguished London family, he
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 871

apparently had first visited Italy about 1601, and emerges in 1605 as the designer of
costumes and scenery for court masques, an activity which he continued until the
outbreak of the Civil War. It is known that he visited Paris in 1609, and had an
important nineteen-months further tour in Italy in 1613-14 in the retinue of the
Earl of Arundel. His attractive personality, together with his skill and ingenuity in
stage-craft, seem to have brought him favour, for in 1611 he was appointed Sur-
veyor to Prince Henry, and in 1613, Surveyor of the King’s Works. Yet it was only
in the latter year that his notable work in architecture began. His principal build-
ings are mentioned on pp. 898-905. A pupil and assistant of Inigo Jones from 1628
to 1652 was John Webb (1611-72), who naturally absorbed his master’s ideas;
Webb’s own personality emerges in a small number of houses which he erected on
his own account after c. 1648. His greatest work and only public building was the
King Charles block at Greenwich (p. 898). Sir Roger Pratt (1620-85) spent six
years studying on the Continent (1643-9) and brought back ideas directly from
Italy. He knew Jones, who served as adviser for the first of the five considerable
houses which represented Pratt’s total architectural output, all completed before
1672, and shared Jones’s taste for architecture as interpreted by the Italian writers,
Palladio, Serlio and Scamozzi; thus being similarly in advance of the general run of
practice of the day. Pratt secured his knighthood for his services as one of the three
Royal Commissioners appointed for the control of the city after the Great Fire of
London of 1666, the other two being Hugh May and Sir Christopher Wren. Hugh
May (1622-84) is less readily classed with the Inigo Jones group, as his architecture
had a Dutch inclination, due to his strong contacts with Holland, which at this time
was practising its own brick-and-stone interpretation of Palladianism.
Sir Christopher Wren (1632-1723) was the supreme figure of the second phase
of the Stuart period. Scholar, mathematician, astronomer, his scientific training at
Oxford developed his constructive power, and largely counterbalanced his lack of
early architectural training; for he did not start the study and practice of architecture
until somewhat late in life, when in 1663 he was made a member of the Commission
for the repair of S. Paul’s Cathedral. In the same year he was asked to prepare a
design for Pembroke College Chapel, Cambridge (p. 906). As Inigo Jones had
come under Italian, so Sir Christopher Wren came under French influence. He was
in Paris in 1665, when the Palais du Louvre was in course of extension, and he then
became associated with the group of architects and artists, such as Bernini (the
great Italian master of the Baroque, invited to Paris by Louis XIV to prepare a
design for the Louvre), Mansart, Louis le Vau and others, and he not only studied
Renaissance buildings in Paris but also saw the royal and other chateaux in the
surrounding country: he may have visited the Netherlands. As he never went to
Italy, the force of this French influence was further accentuated, and, moreover,
his royal patron, Charles II, had been an exile at the French court, and had there
imbibed similar ideas. The destructive ravages of the Great Fire of London (1666)
offered Wren an immediate opportunity for practising his art on a grand scale in
the rebuilding of S. Paul’s and the city churches, although it was found not possible
to put into execution his plan for the rebuilding of the City of London. As men-
tioned earlier, Wren was one of three Royal Commissioners charged to consider the
problems of rebuilding the city after the Fire, and one outcome of their recom-
mendations was an Act (1667) which laid down standards for the new houses,
which were to be in brick and follow one or other of three types, each with specified
wall-thicknesses and floor-heights. These prescriptions had ramifications in other
cities and towns. In 1669, Wren was appointed Surveyor-General of the King’s
Works. Apart from his activities at the palaces at Hampton Court (p. 914) and
Greenwich (p. 928), Wren does not appear to have been responsible for much
872 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

domestic building, and such as survive of his lesser houses show some influence of
the mature Dutch style, like domestic architecture in general in the country. Wren
had, in an unusual degree, the power of adapting his designs so as to secure the best
results from the financial means at his disposal, and as has been said, his “designs
are mixed with brains’; for he produced his effects, not by expensive elaboration,
but by careful proportion of the various parts, by concentration of ornament in the
most telling position, or by one outstanding feature in the design. His buildings,
too, owe much of their character to the use of Portland stone, which proved to have
such good weathering properties; while in his domestic buildings, and some of his
city churches, he made an effective use of brick with stone dressings, as at Hampton
Court and S. Benet, Paul’s Wharf, London. Whether in the graded greys of quarried
stone or in the warm reds of hand-made bricks, Wren’s buildings seem native to the
site for which they were designed, and his influence was of the greatest importance
to subsequent developments. His principal buildings are referred to and are illus-
trated later (pp. 906, 908-28). Wren’s work is individual, but its character in the
later stages gave rise to a brief phase of English Baroque, this spanning the thirty or
so years concluding about 1725. As the main buildings of this nature were in course
of erection in the early eighteenth century, the phase may be regarded as intro-
ductory to Georgian architecture.
Georgian Architecture. Under this title is classed the architecture of the reigns of
Anne (1702-14), George I (1714-27), George II (1727-60), George III (1760-1820),
George IV (1820-30).
Reference has been made to the English Baroque, the rare examples of which fall
mainly between 1695-1725; Georgian architecture in general otherwise may be
divided into two phases, the Anglo-Palladian and the Antiquarian, the latter com-
mencing about 1750 and comprehending almost completely the so-called ‘Greek
Revival’ and the formative stages of the ‘Gothic Revival’—which only matured in
Victorian times—as well as a variety of other manifestations of a developing retro-
spective outlook.
As to the English Baroque; we have seen that the arrival of the Renaissance in
England was much belated and its nature transformed by practice in the countries
through which it had passed from the fountain-head in Italy, as well as by circum-
stances in England itself. Yet as there was always some direct intercourse between
England and Italy, increasing as time passed, and published works which gave
fairly recent accounts of what was transpiring at the source, the influences on
England were bound to be somewhat confused, the more recent being superficially
imposed upon those of longer standing, already partly or wholly assimilated. In
Italy, the ‘High’ Baroque of c. 1625-75 had been passed, and though in the main it
was little to the English taste it would have been remarkable if it had not been
reflected in some degree. A comparatively early response is shown in the south
porch of S. Mary the Virgin, Oxford (1637) (p. 396c), with its twisted columns and
broken pediment. It is not known who designed it, but the mason was a John
Jackson. Besides the echoes in the later works of Wren and in those of William
Talman (1650-1719), who built Thoresby House, Notts (1671; destroyed by fire,
1745), of remarkably advanced character, and the south and east fronts of Chats-
worth House, Derbyshire (1687-96), famous for its art treasures and grounds laid
out by Paxton, the English Baroque appears outstandingly in the architecture of
three great personalities, and, to a diminished extent, in some few buildings designed
by admiring followers. The three were Vanbrugh, Hawksmoor and Archer.
Sir John Vanbrugh (1664-1726) was a writer of dramas as well as a designer of
palaces, besides being a military officer, a wit and a courtier, who became Con-
troller of the Royal Works (1702). Monumentality is the keynote of his architecture.
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 873

His was a personal, not recognizably Italian, interpretation of the Baroque, de-
pending on plasticity of mass; that is, a bold advance or recession of parts, or
‘movement’ as it was called. At least as regards the detail a good deal of the eventual
character of his buildings must have been due to Nicholas Hawksmoor (1661-1736),
for Vanbrugh turned abruptly to architecture, and Hawksmoor was his distin-
guished assistant from the outset, already possessing highly-developed practical
abilities, for previously he had been a right-hand man to Sir Christopher Wren
from the age of about eighteen. Hawksmoor assisted Wren with the city churches,
and again at Greenwich Hospital, where he was Clerk of Works or Assistant Sur-
veyor for his whole life after 1698. He also did important work on his own account,
including six London churches, some buildings at Oxford and Cambridge, and
designs for the western towers of Westminster Abbey (1734) (pp. 424, 663A), com-
pleted after his death. Hawksmoor’s varied interpretations of the Baroque seem to
have been based partly on Wren and partly on books; he was much interested in an-
tiquity. Thomas Archer (c. 1668-1743), designer of a small number of churches and
houses, studied for four years on the Continent. His buildings are the closest approxi-
mation to the Italian Baroque ever achieved in England, showing a leaning in taste to-
wards Borromini (p. 726). Archer influenced provincial vernacular building, particu-
larly in Somerset, Dorset and Devon, as in the work of the Bastard brothers (John,
1688-1770; William, c. 1689-1766) at Blandford, Dorset, in the rebuilding of the
town after a disastrous fire in 1731. Outside the London region there was little new
church building, and thus so much the less room for the Baroque to take hold: we
have seen that, in Italy, churches were the chief vehicle for the more florid ex-
pressions of the style. In the eighteenth century, domestic architecture continued
to be the chief type of building, though there was an expansion in public building
too. The spread of wealth brought fewer opulent great houses but many more of
comparatively modest dimensions, sited in the attractive parts of the countryside
or at the fringes of towns, while the smaller houses reached new standards of com-
fort and convenience, and even cottages passed into permanent, solidly-built form.
The English phase of the Baroque, acclimatized and restrained though it was,
was short-lived and already being supplanted by a ‘Palladian’ phase before it had
run its course. The change is illustrated by the professional career of James Gibbs
(1683-1774), born near Aberdeen, who, having travelled extensively on the Con-
tinent and studied under Carlo Fontana (p. 726) in Rome, returned to England in
1709, imbued with the Baroque. In this vein he built S. Mary-le-Strand, London
(1714-17) (p. 949), but thereafter his very great output of building was accommo-
dated to the prevailing Palladian mode, which from about 1710 to 1750 came to
affect building comprehensively in the country down to the most modest dwelling.
Gibbs himself contributed to the diffusion of Palladian principles in his many
writings, of which the principal was Rules for Drawing the Several Parts of Archi-
tecture (1732), used as a copy-book by builders not only in England but also in
America. Foundational in the Palladian movement was a growing recognition of
the virtues of the buildings of Inigo Jones, together with the influence of books
such as the Vitruvius Britannicus (1717 and 1725) of the Scot, Colin Campbell (d.
1729), architect of a score of houses between 1712-27, and a new edition (1715-16)
of Palladio’s I quattro libri dell’ Architettura, by Giacomo Leoni (1686-1746)—a
Venetian working in England—under the title of The Architecture of A. Palladio.
Palladio’s restrained Classicism was readily adaptable to the English taste. Its
most influential advocate was the Earl of Burlington (1694-1753), who in the part
he played typifies the interest now displayed in architecture by the social élite.
Attracted by Colin Campbell’s Vitruvius Britannicus, Burlington visited Italy a
second time in 1719 expressly for the study of Palladio’s architecture, particularly
874 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

that at Vicenza (p. 738). He was accompanied on his return by William Kent (c.
1685-1748), who long had been studying in Italy as a painter-stuccoist and who
turned architect under Burlington’s patronage from about 1732. Lord Burlington
at first employed Campbell’s services for the buildings he undertook, but after
about 1721 began himself to assume the position of designer, with or without the
help of Campbell, Kent and others, but with Henry Flitcroft (1697-1769) as his
personal assistant. After c. 1729, Flitcroft designed a number of houses and one or
two churches in his own right, including S. Giles-in-the-Fields, London. Kent is
worthy of his fame as a decorator, and as a prolific architect is celebrated especially
for his Horse Guards building, Whitehall (p. 956). He is almost more famous as a
landscape architect, for he headed a revolt against the formal garden, which had
been customary through the seventeenth century, in favour of informal, ‘natural’
landscape settings calculated to lend pungent contrast to the strict lines of Palladian-
type dwellings. Another protégé of Burlington was Isaac Ware (d. 1766), whose
fame rests mainly on his writings; he made his own translation of Palladio, pub-
lished a collection of Designs of Inigo Jones and Others and, much more important,
The Complete Body of Architecture. The two latter went through several editions,
and became much-used copy-books. Important, too, as a writer, was John Vardy
(d. 1765). There was a veritable flood of such books at this period, laying down the
standard parts of the Orders, ostensibly according to the revered masters, Alberti,
Palladio, Jones, etc., giving ranges of designs for doorways, windows, fireplaces and
other features and reproducing buildings designed by famous contemporary
personages; not, of course, excluding the works of the author himself, where forth-
coming, for the books of the eighteenth century served as a chief means of advertise-
ment. Books were directed now, not solely towards the informed patrician or
connoisseur, but increasingly towards the master-builder, the working craftsman,
artisan and even gardener, like those of ‘William Halfpenny’, an alias for Michael
Hoare (d. 1755) and Batty Langley (1696-1751), both of whom were enormously
prolific writers. Langley’s The Builder’s Fewel, or the Youth’s Instructor, and Work-
man’s Remembrancer (1746), and New Principles of Gardening (1728) are typical.
He attracted much ridicule by attempting to standardize Gothic elements into
Orders in his book Gothic Architecture improved by Rules and Proportions (1742), a
topic significant of a coming change in the trend of architectural development. Of
this same generation was Roger Morris (1695-1749), designer of the famous Pal-
ladian bridge at Wilton House, Wilts (1736) (p. 905).
Palladianism thus entered the bloodstream of the architecture of England, and
also of Scotland, Ireland and even North America, at the lowest level variously
producing charming, bizarre or crude effects. England was never so completely
unanimous in the whole Renaissance. Formal Palladian principles were applied not
alone to individual buildings but to the relationship of buildings one to another in
schemes of civic design. The work of the Woods at their native town of Bath (John
the elder, 1704-54; John the younger, 1728-81) serves as an illustration, and demon-
strates the link between successive generations of designers practising Palladian
principles. There, town houses were drawn together to afford collectively a ‘palatial’
effect. The Circus, Bath, begun 1754 by the elder Wood and completed by the
younger, and the Royal Crescent (1767-75) by the latter, are famous instances (p.
946A). Notable London architects at this time were Sir Robert Taylor (1714-88),
who began as a sculptor and studied in Rome, and James Paine (1716-89), each
enjoying a very large practice. It was said that they ‘divided the practice of the pro-
fession between them until Robert Adam entered the lists’, though in fact, John
Carr (1723-1807), a provincial architect, of York, only a few years younger, was
equally if not more prolific of country houses. This sweeping extension of the
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 875

employment of architects, who now began to engage pupils, indicates a consolida-

tion of the profession as well as the revivification and enlargement of the gentry,
due to the incipient industrialization of the country, while urban nucleation pro-
ceeded apace and brought demands for an increasing number of public buildings.
The luxury of internal decoration in dwellings, often contrasted with grandly
simple exteriors, bears witness to the influx of wealth from fresh sources. Land-
scape art reached its climax in the work of Lancelot Brown (1716-83), known as
‘Capability’ Brown from his habitual reference to the capabilities of the site and
grounds of a mansion for the purposes of his art. He designed very many gardens
and converted old formal gardens into the new style, besides in his later days ad-
venturing in architectural design.
While Palladian architecture proceeded, a new trend became clearly apparent
about mid-century: there had been signs long before of an Antiquarian movement,
which was on the one hand romantic and trivial, and on the other archaeological.
Indeed Palladianism itself was in some sense a reversion to practices of an earlier
time, but now, designers began to turn to more distant architectural antecedents,
to the Gothic and to ancient Rome and to Greece. The Roman grafted itself almost
imperceptibly on to the Palladian—one important outcome was the ‘Adam’ manner
—and to a less extent so did the Greek, though the latter and the Gothic emerged as
plainly recognizable ‘styles’ after the end of the century. Each of the latter styles,
as also some quaint interpretations of the Chinese and Indian, was superficial
rather than fundamental, and building plans remained essentially Renaissance in
character. Gothic architecture had never been wholly abandoned: Wren, Van-
brugh, Kent and others occasionally had produced their personal versions of it,
usually, but not invariably, to match existing structures, while country builders in
stone-producing districts like the Cotswolds might continue to preserve the old
traditions uninterruptedly. The new tendency of mid-eighteenth century was a
deliberate looking-back to bygone times. Whimsical, decorative “Gothick’ was
popularized particularly by Horace Walpole (1717-97), 4th Earl of Orford, who
from 1747 to 1776 progressively extended and decorated his house at Twickenham,
which he named Strawberry Hill (p. 944A), in Gothic conceits. Sanderson Millar
(1717-80) was another amateur with kindred tastes, who, however, was himself the
actual designer of one or two buildings in the new Gothic mode.
Books, French, German and British, particularly those reporting archaeological
investigations, were important in stimulating the various antiquarian movements;
like Robert Wood’s (1716-71) Ruins of Palmyra, published in 1753, and his Ruins
of Baalbec (1757); or the series due to James Stuart (1713-88) and Nicholas Revett
(1720-1804), beginning some years after their visit to Greece with The Antiquities
of Athens in 1762. Both Stuart and Revett did a little designing in full-blooded
Greek style, but their volumes, appearing intermittently over a long span of years,
had much the greater influence.
The famous Robert Adam (1728-92) emulated Stuart and Revett. He left his
native Scotland for Italy in 1754, studying in Paris on the way, and after a long period
centred on Rome, where he met Piranesi, the accomplished draughtsman and etcher,
whose imaginative restorations of Roman monuments are world-renowned. Adam
went with a small party to Dalmatia in 1757, where he made the measurements
which led to the publication of his Ruins of the Palace of Diocletian at Spalatro (now
Split) in 1764. He returned to England in 1758 to found with his brother James an
enormous practice, advertising it very soon with the first two volumes of his Works
in Architecture of Robert and James Adam (1773, 1779). Adam’s light and gracious
style owed little to the Palace of Diocletian, and was due to his discreet selection
among Roman precedents and the Italian Renaissance interpretations of them,
876 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

particularly of methods of stucco ornamentation. He captured the Greek Hellenistic

spirit in Roman work, and justly claimed to have introduced depth of ‘movement’
and a calculated variety of effect in his buildings, inside as well as out. Sir William
Chambers (1723-96), on the other hand, abhorred his rival Adam’s light style, and
practised a robust and correct Classicism tinctured with the contemporary French;
for he too, studied abroad for a considerable period. Not only did he visit the
nearer European countries, including a five-years stay in Italy (1750-5), but in his
earlier days had twice been to China. An outcome of the latter voyages was a book
on Design of Chinese Buildings, etc. (1757). Of more far-reaching importance was
his Treatise on Civil Architecture (1759), enlarged in subsequent editions. The
range and quality of Chambers’s architectural work vied with that of the Adams.
The ‘Grand Tour’ on the Continent became a regular procedure, followed by
Robert Mylne (1734-1811), another Scottish architect, who also gained an exten-
sive practice, and, a decade later (1762-8), by James Wyatt (1746-1813), a much
more colourful personality. Wyatt’s Classical style had a strong resemblance to that
of Adam, of which the latter complained; like Adam and others of his predecessors
and contemporaries, some of his country houses were Gothic, but whereas theirs
were usually Classical conceptions tricked out with battlements, turrets and towers,
Wyatt’s were imaginative decorative creations in the succession of Walpole’s
Strawberry Hill. A growing respect at this time for the old Mediaeval buildings
led to a general move for their repair, and Wyatt got into trouble with knowledgeable
antiquarians for his too-drastic ‘improvements’ to several of the great cathedrals;
Salisbury, Lichfield, Hereford and Durham. A lesser light practising a frail and
decorative Gothic was the provincial architect, Francis Hiorne, of Warwick (1744-
89) (p. 950). The better-known contemporaries of Wyatt include the younger
George Dance (1741-1825), most of whose work, often highly original and some-
times showing a strong Greek note, has been destroyed or drastically remodelled;
Thomas Cooley (1740-84) and James Gandon (1742-1823), the latter a pupil of
Sir William Chambers, both famous for their Dublin buildings; Thomas Hardwick
(1752-1829), another pupil and somewhat colourless follower of Sir William
Chambers; and Henry Holland (1745-1806), son-in-law of ‘Capability’ Brown,
whose style was the now-current ‘Graeco-Roman’. Humphrey Repton (1752-1818),
has more importance in the history of landscape art than in that of architecture,
being a designer of ‘Picturesque’ gardens in which trees and other natural features
were disciplined informally in a rolling sward; sometimes he himself designed the
related mansions also, at others he deputed the latter function to his collaborator,
John Nash, who struck a new note by introducing the informality of the Picturesque
into the buildings too.
John Nash (1752-1835) is an outstanding figure. He acquired extensive com-
missions and the royal favour, and designed many mansions as well as civic
schemes, and some churches and public buildings. In his day the English Renais-
sance movement came to a close, succumbing to the rising tide of stylistic revival-
ism, to which Nash himself contributed. A brilliant if superficial designer, with
grand ideas, his urban style was mostly Neo-Classical, a compound of the notions of
his contemporaries, cleverly organized on Picturesque lines. Hard plaster stucco
was his favourite medium, in which at relatively low cost his external effects were
secured. But he also worked in the Gothic, and some of his houses, villas and estate
cottages were informal versions of this or were pretentiously based on English
vernacular homesteads. He even essayed the ‘Hindoo’ at the Royal Pavilion,
Brighton (p. 947D), with internal decorations veering to the Chinese. Much of an
age with Nash was Sir John Soane (1753-1837), following the Neo-Classical ex-
pression with many personal idiosyncrasies. His interiors had fine and remarkable
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 877

qualities, yet externally, his innovations were not invariably successful. The un-
certainties of his style illustrate this period of change. He made the famous collec-
tion of models, casts, drawings and fragments of ancient architecture in his house
in Lincoln’s Inn Fields, which he left to the nation as a museum.
The work of the next generation of architects falls almost wholly in the early
nineteenth century, and much of it after the Napoleonic wars; it tends more
definitely to be revivalist, either Greek or Gothic, though some maintains the older
cast. Despite a number of eighteenth-century precursors, both the Greek and
the Gothic Revivals were only consolidated about 1805, and neither gained real
force until after 1815. Meantime, books on Greek architectural precedents con-
tinued to appear, while antiquaries such as the draughtsmen John Carter (1748-
1817) and A. C. Pugin (1762-1832) made faithful drawings of Mediaeval monu-
ments which gave greater authority to the Gothic Revival. Thomas Rickman
(1776-1841) was the author of a momentous book An Attempt to Discriminate the
Styles of English Architecture from the Conquest to the Reformation (1817) which did
much to turn the Gothic Revival from a wayward caprice into a definite and pro-
tracted movement. He himself built only three Classical churches, but some fifty-
seven in the Gothic, all in the provinces, including four ‘iron’ churches at Liverpool,
of which S. George’s (1812-14) was said at the time to be ‘nearly the first iron
church erected in the kingdom; the framework of the windows, doors, pillars,
groins, roofs, pulpit and ornamental enrichments are of cast iron’. Other early
adherents to the Gothic Revival now were John Shaw (1776-1832), designer of S.
Dunstan-in-the-West, Fleet Street, London (1831) (p. 954D), with a fine steeple;
James Savage (1779-1852), author of S. Luke, Chelsea (1820) (p. 954c); Francis
Goodwin (1784-1835), who built a number of churches in the provinces; and Francis
Bedford (1784-1858), whose work, a few churches, is mostly in London. Each of
these built in the Classical style too, still strongly favoured for public buildings;
Goodwin’s Old Manchester Town Hall (demolished 1912), in Greek Revival style,
was especially fine.
The Greek Revival had passed its best by c. 1830, and by 1840 was definitely
dead in England, though it lingered in Scotland until after mid-century. William
Wilkins (1778-1839), designer of University College, London (1827-8) (p. 961B) and
the National Gallery (1834-8) (p. 961A) was a notable figure, practising the style
extensively from about 1806 onwards. He, and Sir Robert Smirke (1781-1867), a
prolific though not particularly gifted architect, who used the Greek principally for
public buildings such as the British Museum (1823-47) (p. 962D), had both under-
taken Continental tours and studied architecture in Greece and South Italy, and
thus their work has an archaeological correctness of detail. Wilkins was the author
of Antiquities of Magna Graecia (1807) and several other writings on archaeological
themes. Among the chief provincial architects adopting the Greek Revival im-
portantly were David Hamilton (1768-1843) of Glasgow, John Foulston (1772-1842)
of Plymouth, John Foster (1786-1846) of Liverpool, and Thomas Hamilton (1785-
1858) and W. H. Playfair (1789-1857) of Edinburgh. In London, a slightly younger
group included H. W. Inwood (1794-1843), who, with his father, William Inwood
(c. 1771-1843), designed several churches of varying merit, including, however, S.
Pancras Church, London (1819-22) (p. 9548), the finest ecclesiastical building of the
whole Revival. He studied in Greece and published a book on the subject of the
Erechtheion and other Greek remains (1827). In the Greek character were also
certain of the earlier buildings of Decimus Burton (1800-81), whose triple archway
at Hyde Park Corner, London, is famous (1825-46) (p. 962E), and of Sir Charles
Barry (1795-1860), whose best design of the type was the Royal Manchester
Institution building (1824-35) (p. 1022A), now the City Art Gallery.
878 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

By no means all architecture fell into the Greek or Gothic Revival categories.
Sober Graeco-Roman continued to be a popular expression, the Georgian succes-
sion reached its final phase in the spare and refined delicacy of many a suburban or
town house or terrace, while some buildings were so mixed in their characteristics
as to defy classification. Architects might betray leanings in a particular direction,
but changed freely from one expression to another as seemed to them best to meet
the occasion. The scholarly and much-travelled Professor C. R. Cockerell (1788-
1863), despite the extent of his archaeological knowledge, was no exception; he at
times practised the Gothic, and in the Classical, had his own personal vein, favour-
ing Graeco-Roman rather than Adam character while admitting some influence from
contemporary French architecture. His buildings have quality of detail. Contem-
porary with him was John Dobson (1787-1867) of Newcastle-on-Tyne, who built
up a considerable practice in north-east England, and designed the lay-out of the
expanding city. While his public buildings were Classical, in his country mansions
and churches he was among the first to introduce the Gothic into that region.
Churches in general were the more likely to be expressed in Gothic. Apart from a
flurry of Classical works in the later seventeen-eighties and early nineties there had
been comparatively little church building in the forty years before 1810; but by
1820 activity had become intense, partly as a result of the Church Building Act of
1818, which devoted a million pounds to contributions to the building of cheap
churches and chapels to serve the fresh congregations of expanding towns. The
aged John Nash and Sir John Soane, and the much younger Sir Robert Smirke,
were advisers to the Commissioners discharging the Act, and each himself built one
or two churches. By 1837 the ‘Commissioner’ churches totalled about 230, and the
advance of the Gothic is indicated by the fact that scarcely a fifth of these were in
the Classical styles. The Greek Revival was especially favoured in the London area
at the outset, the provinces meanwhile having turned in force to the Gothic, but
after 1827 the fashion passed and the very few churches afterwards built in the
Greek style were almost all in the provinces. Classical churches of any sort became
rare after 1827; but whatever the style externally, plans followed Classical lines.
Being for congregational worship, they usually were simple rectangular boxes,
lacking transepts or chancels, and had galleries inside. Nearly all had an axial
‘western’ tower, spire, cupola or bell-turret, unlike Victorian churches (Ch. XXVJ),
of which the towers normally were asymmetrically placed. For cheapness, they
were mostly of brick with stone dressings. Churches built under private auspices
ordinarily were much more costly and lavishly finished.

EXAMPLES
EARLY RENAISSANCE
(ELIZABETHAN ARCHITECTURE, 1558-1603)
MONUMENTS, TOMBS, AND FITTINGS
The early Renaissance was heralded by a number of smaller monuments and fittings
erected in existing churches, as in other countries (pp. 976, 977M).
The Culpepper Tomb, Goudhurst (p. 976c), the wall tablets at Peterhouse,
Cambridge (p. 976J), and also All Hallows, Barking, London (p. 976a), the
pulpit, North Cray (p. 976A), and the chapel screen, Charterhouse (p. 976s),
are examples of many features found in churches throughout the country, while the
stalls, King’s College, Cambridge (1531-5) (p. 977M), are amongst the earliest
examples of the newly introduced style.
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 879

. Westminster Abbey. Tomb B. Montacute House, Somerset (1580-99).

f Henry VII (1509) and his See p. 881
Jueen (1503). See pp. 868, 881

. Knole House, Kent: stair- Dp, Canons Ashby, Northants (1584 with additions).
case (1605). See p. 881 See p. 882

E. Burghley House, Northants (1577-87). See p. 881

 880 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

HARDWICK HALL
DERBY SIME,

Sane

a i,

ae a ae if

aes
iG
ty
ah
Q ee
ool
a

ou FROM ©.
Hires (MeO _50 _ 100 ISOFT
oe ea 10 20 30 40 METRS
= — SCALE FOR PLANS

BED , 4
RM | |]

UPPER
PART OF UPPER PART OF
KITCHEN GREAT HALL

(D)crouno FLOOR PLAN

 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 881
The Tomb of Henry VII (1509) (pp. 427, 868, 879A), in Westminster Abbey, by
Torrigiani, is an early and exquisite example of Renaissance art. It is a black marble
table tomb, with angle Corinthian pilasters, between which are the royal arms,
while above are winged cherubs and recumbent life-like effigies of Henry VII and
his queen, enclosed in a Chantry Chapel with fine Gothic screen by Ducheman
(p. 428). Other monuments and fittings are referred to under Ornament, Pp. 974.

ELIZABETHAN MANSIONS
Well-known Elizabethan mansions are: Charlecote, Warwickshire (1 558)3
Loseley Park, Surrey (1562-8) (p. 887A); Longleat House, Wilts (1567-80) (p.
965D) probably by Robert Smithson; Kirby Hall, Northants (1570-5) (pp. 8884,
905), perhaps by Thomas Thorpe; Penshurst Place, Kent (portion) (1570-85)
(p. 449); Burghley House, Northants (1577-87) (pp. 965A, 9698); Montacute
House, Somerset (1580-99) (pp. 879B, 9658); Wollaton Hall, Notts (1580-8)
(pp. 883A, 965C), by Robert Smithson; Longford Castle, Wilts (1580) (p. 965);
Haddon Hall, Derbyshire (long gallery) (1567-84) (pp. 452, 884A); Westwood
Park, Worcester (1590); Bramhall Hall, Cheshire (Additions 1590-1600)
(p. 459); Hinchingbrooke Hall, Hunts (1602) (p. 969c); Sizergh Castle,
Westmorland (1558-75), enlarged in this period, and Lower Walterstone,
Dorset (1568).
‘These mansions show a general similarity in their arrangement with those of the
Jacobean period, and so we give here detailed descriptions of the plan and usual
features, which were evolved from those of the Tudor period (p. 452). The smaller
mansions had a central hall flanked at one end by kitchen and offices, and at the
other by withdrawing- and living-rooms; while the larger type was quadrangular
with similar accommodation, but with additional rooms grouped round the court,
and with a gatehouse in the centre of the entrance side, as at Oxburgh Hall (p. 450k),
Compton Wynyates (p. 458c), and Sutton Place (p. 458G). Elizabethan and Jacobean
architects adhered to the Tudor plan for smaller mansions, but they evolved the
E-shaped plan from the quadrangular plan by omitting one side, as at Hatfield, thus
admitting sunlight and air (p. 965F), and for this reason one side of the court
at Caius College, Cambridge, was removed. The H-shaped plan was used also in
this period (p. 964). The gatehouse often became a detached building, as at Bur-
ton Agnes, Yorkshire; Charlecote; Cranborne, Dorset (p. 897), and Stanway,
Gloucestershire. Features, such as the great hall, grand staircase, and long gallery,
are common to the typical houses mentioned above. As houses began to look out-
wards, instead of into courts, surrounding gardens developed, on formal lines.
The Great Hail (pp. 880D, 965) still retained its central position, but became more
than ever a hall of state, connecting the various parts of the mansion. The walls were
cased internally in oak panelling to a height of 8 or 10 ft, surmounted by ancestral
portraits, armour, and trophies of the chase. The fireplace, with its huge dog-grate,
was an elaborate feature flanked by columns, while above were ranged heraldic
devices of the owners. The hall was covered either by an open timber roof, as that
over the Middle Temple Hall (pp. 500H, 888C), or with elaborately moulded plaster
panels (p. 8918). At the entrance end the carved oak screen supported the minstrels’
gallery (p. 887B) and screened off the kitchen department beyond; while at the other
end of the hall was the lofty bay window and raised dais, from which were reached
the living-rooms of the family. A similar arrangement of plan was adopted in the
colleges of Oxford (p. 891c) and Cambridge, and the Inns of Court, London, as
Gray’s Inn Hall (p. 888B) and Middle Temple Hall (p. 888c).
The Grand Staircase, as at Knole House (p. 879c), Aston Hall, and Blickling Hall
(p. 975B, C), with carved newels and pierced balustrades, and usually adjacent to
882 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

the hall, forms a dignified approach to the rooms above, and its prominence as a
feature is in marked contrast with the inconvenient corkscrew stairs of the Mediaeval
period.
The Long Gallery (pp. 880B, E, 884A, 965) is perhaps the most striking feature of an
Elizabethan mansion, with ornamental chimney-pieces, panelled or tapestried
walls, large mullioned windows, and modelled plaster ceiling. Long, low, and nar-
row, though varied as at Haddon by room-like bays (p. 884A), the gallery often ran
the whole length of the upper floor of the house and connected the wings on either
side of the central hall (p. 965F). Its original purpose is somewhat doubtful; it may
have been designed merely as a connecting corridor, as a covered promenade, or as
a ‘picture gallery’ which was also used to display the art treasures which it had now
become the fashion to collect; or it may even have been designed to serve all three
purposes. It would almost seem as if the aristocracy of Elizabethan times in Eng-
land rivalled one another in the length of their galleries, even as did the nobility of
Mediaeval Italy in the height of their towers (p. 624). Some of the finest of these
galleries are: Haddon Hall (1567-84) (p. 884A), 109 ft by 18 ft; Montacute House
(1580-99), 170 ft by 20 ft, and Hardwick Hall (1590-7) (pp. 880B, 884B), 166 ft by
22iits
The Withdrawing-room or ‘solar’ of previous times was often elaborately finished
with carved chimney-pieces and panelled walls, as at Loseley Park, Surrey (1562—
68) (p. 887A), Crewe Hall, Cheshire (1636) and Stockton House, Wiltshire (1610)
(p. 975A), where it even rivalled a long gallery in treatment.
Bedrooms were multiplied and were often elaborate, as at Sizergh Castle, and a
private chapel was frequently incorporated in the building (p. 965D, F).
Hardwick Hall, Derbyshire (1590-7) (pp. 880, 8848), by Robert Smithson, is
unusual in plan (p. 880B), consisting of a rectangular block with projecting bays.
The exterior is famous for its large mullioned and transomed windows, giving rise
to the saying ‘Hardwick Hall, more glass than wall’, while bay-windows, carried up
as towers, relieve the skyline and are terminated by open scroll-work with the initials
‘E.S.’ for Elizabeth, Countess of Shrewsbury, known as ‘Bess of Hardwick’.
Castle Ashby, Northants (1572-) (p. 880), added to from time to time, is
situated on high ground, and was originally in the form of a three-sided court,
which included the great hall (60 ft by 30 ft), with screens, bay-window, and stair-
case turrets. The lettered balustrade displays the words ‘Nisi Dominus edifica-
verit’, etc. (Ps. cxxvii). The fourth side (c. 1635), with the long gallery (91 ft by 15
ft 6 ins), attributed to Inigo Jones, illustrates the difference between the Eliza-
bethan and Later Renaissance styles (p. 880C).
Canons Ashby, Northants (1584) (p. 879D), is an Elizabethan house with an
internal court showing Tudor influence, and with Jacobean additions.

ELIZABETHAN COLLEGES
During the Mediaeval period many colleges had been founded at the universities
(p. 473), and as the day of the pious founder had not yet passed, new colleges were
still endowed both at Oxford and Cambridge. These were, of course, built in the
Elizabethan style, which retained many Gothic features; while additions were also
made to Mediaeval colleges. Thus revival of learning and Renaissance in architec-
ture went hand in hand in the old universities. At Cambridge there is Emmanuel
College (1584), with its dignified facade; the beautiful little Gate of Honour,
Caius College (1572-3) (p. 895B), designed by the founder, Dr Caius; Nevile’s
Court, Trinity College (1593-1615) (p. 922A), and new quadrangles to Sidney
Sussex College (1596-8) and S. John’s College (1598-1602) (p. 473), by Ralph
Simons, At Oxford there is a fine example of Renaissance work in Jesus College
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 883

B. Blickling Hall, Norfolk: aerial view from W. (1626). See p. 886

884 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

B. Hardwick Hall, Derbyshire: long gallery (1590-7). See p. 882

 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 885

(1571) by Holt. Other colleges and additions at both universities belong to the later
periods (pp. 886, 963). Among the Inns of Court, London, Gray’s Inn Hall (1556-
60) (p. 8888), The Temple (p. 889), with its church, halls, libraries, chambers,
and the famous Middle Temple Hall (p. 888c), with its magnificent hammer-beam
roof (1562-70) (p. 500H), partly date from this period. Much damage was caused at
Gray’s Inn and the Temple by enemy action in 1941-5.

ELIZABETHAN SCHOOLS
The reign of Elizabeth saw the beginning of many schools, such as Repton (1556),
Merchant Taylors (1561), Highgate (1565), Rugby (1567), Harrow (1572), and
Uppingham (1584), and some had joint founders, as at Wakefield, Ashbourne, and
Sandwich. The Charterhouse (1611) (p. 8898) and Dulwich School (1619) both
started under James I. The Commonwealth fostered old schools and established
new ones, notably in Wales, at Cardiff, Carnarvon, and Denbigh; while the Restora-
tion period proved anti-educational. Subsequent to the Restoration period,
education saw a new development in the increase of elementary schools for the
poor, and over one hundred such schools were established in London in Queen
Anne’s reign; the Blue Coat School was founded at Hertford (1683) on the model
of Christ’s Hospital, London, while the Foundling Hospital, London (destroyed),
received its charter in 1739.

ELIZABETHAN TOWN HOUSES

Many interesting houses were built, not only in London, but also in country towns;
for in days of slow and difficult travelling by coach, many of the landed gentry,
especially in parts remote from London, found it convenient to have their town
residences close at hand. York, Chester, Shrewsbury, Ludlow, Coventry, Canter-
bury, Exeter, Truro, and many another town bear testimony to the fine design and
craftsmanship of the houses of this period. In London there remain, in spite of the
Great Fire, the half-timber building of Staple Inn (1581), with its fine hall and
hammer-beam roof, and portions of the Charterhouse (p. 8898), including the
great hall (1571, mutilated by war damage), added by the Duke of Norfolk; while
the facade of Sir Paul Pindar’s House (1600) is now preserved in the Victoria and
Albert Museum, as is also a panelled room from the Palace of Bromley-by-Bow
(1606), which, with its plaster ceiling (p. 977B), recalls the glories of such palatial
buildings although it actually dates from the Jacobean period.

EARLY RENAISSANCE
(JACOBEAN ARCHITECTURE, 1603-25)
JACOBEAN MANSIONS
The great era of mansion building, which had commenced under Elizabeth, con-
tinued in the reign of James I.
Hatfield House, Herts (1607-11) (pp. 890B, C, 891A, B, 965F), built for Robert,
first Earl of Salisbury, stands pre-eminent among many noble piles of this period
in displaying the special characteristics and elaboration of treatment considered
suitable for the country mansion of a nobleman. The house is E-shaped in plan
(p. 965F), with central hall and projecting symmetrical wings, and is set off by
formal gardens, designed with the same care as is displayed in the planning of the
house itself (p. 890B). The entrance front, 225 ft long, is of daringly plain brickwork
with stone mullioned windows, relieved by a projecting central entrance (p. 890C);
while the bay-windows of the wings are taken up as small lateral towers, and the
886 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

building is finished by a flat roof and balustrade and dominated by a central clock-
turret. The south front (pp. 890B, 891A) is much more ornate in treatment, with
Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian Orders superimposed to form a centre-piece flanked
by an arcaded ground storey, mullioned windows and pierced parapet. The two-
storeyed hall (p. 891B), with mullioned windows, minstrels’ gallery, and modelled
plaster ceiling, is a Renaissance development of the traditional Mediaeval hall, but
there is an unusual connecting gallery at the dais end. The long gallery, chapel, grand
staircase, and suites of private rooms all contribute to the completeness of this
Jacobean mansion, designed, at least in part, by Robert Lyming, who was also
the designer of the whole of Blickling Hall (see below).
Holland House, Kensington (1607) (p. 892), erected for Sir Walter Cope and
afterwards inherited by the Earl of Holland, was the residence of many famous
men. It was burnt out in 1940. The plan (p. 892B, C) was H-shaped, with entrance at
one end, as at Bramshill (p. 965G), and arcades on the south bordering a fine
terrace (p. 892A). The central porch, carried up as a tower with an ogee roof, was
flanked by bay-windows and by curved gables. The entrance had been intended to
be central on the south front, and the change to the east side required an encroach-
ment on one of the arcades. The doorway (p. 892D) and the typical chimney-piece
and oak-panelled walls in the White Parlour (p. 892E) are noticeable features.
Bramshill House, Hants (1605-12) (pp. 893A, 965G, 969A, D, J) was designed
for Lord Zouche. Its unusual plan (p. 965G), partly due to an older building, is of
the H-type, with entrance through an arcaded porch (p. 893A) direct into the hall,
which thus loses its feudal character, but still retains the dais. An odd feature is the
long narrow internal area. The long gallery (130 ft long), the terrace with its arcades
(p. 969J), and the oriel window (pp. 893A, 969A) are among the many beautiful
features of this building.
Blickling Hall, Norfolk (1626) (pp. 881, 883B, 965J, 969G, 975B, C, F) by
Robert Lyming, is in brick and stone, usual in Norfolk, and the plan resembles that
of Bramshill. It has two small internal courts, the outer court giving entrance to the
hall, which is a thoroughfare room, as at Aston Hall (p. 965); at the external angles
of the building are square towers. The principal entrance (p. 969G), reached across
the moat, has an arched opening with carved spandrels, framed with Doric columns
and entablature, surmounted by the arms of Sir Henry Hobart. The staircase (p.
975B, C), rearranged in its present position in 1770, with the upper part in two
opposite flights—unusual in this period—has boldly carved newels surmounted by
figures, and an arched balustrade. The chimney-piece (p. 975F) has flanking
pilasters diminishing towards the base and surmounted by Hermes figures which
frame heraldic devices.
Other Jacobean mansions are: Chastleton House, Oxon (1603-14); Audley
End, Essex (1603-16) (pp. 887B, 894A, 977A), by Bernard Johnson; Knole House,
Kent (1605) (pp. 879C, 890A) (re-modelled); Charlton House, Wilts (1607);
Stockton House, Wilts (1610) (p. 975A); Aston Hall, Warwickshire (1618-35)
(pp. 965H, 977C); Bolsover Castle, Derbyshire (1612-), by John Smithson, which
has later additions made (1629-33) by John and his son, Huntingdon Smithson;
Quenby Hall, Leicestershire (-1621); and Charlton House, Kent (1607-12)
(p. 894D).
JACOBEAN COLLEGES
This period saw a number of additions to colleges both at Oxford and Cambridge,
which are of the greatest interest.
The Bodleian Library, Oxford (1613-36) (pp. 475A, 895A), formerly the Old
Schools, attributed to Thomas Holt (d. 1624), is a conspicuous instance of the
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

A. Loseley Park, Surrey: drawing room (1562-8). See p. 882

aN aa
888 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

ae 4 = SS

B. Gray’s Inn Hall: interior (1556-60). c. Middle Temple Hall, London; interi
See p. 885 (1562-70). See p. 885
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 889

© ah eat me i oe oo
A. The Temple, London: aerial view in 1938. See pp. 885, 928
1. Middle Temple Library 7. Hare Court 12. Temple Church
2. Garden Court 8. Pump Court 13. Master’s House
3. Fountain Court 9. Elm Court 14. Tanfield Court
4. Middle Temple Hall 10. Crown Office Row 15. King’s Bench Walk
5. New Court 11. Inner Temple Hall and 16. Paper Buildings
6. Essex Court Library 17. Middle Temple Lane

Many of these buildings were destroyed in the war of 1939-45

CiLOiS Tee

@ ant :
5] CHAPEL COURT
@l ouTeR court [6] CHAPEL
{21 INNER COURT [7] PREACHERS C”
| (LWASH HOUSE
CT [B]PENSIONERS©
OSES RIT Sse

B. The Charterhouse, London: aerial view from S. (1545-71 and later).

See p. 885
890 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

c. Hatfield House: entrance (N.) facade (1607-11)

 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 891

ata F 3 es

B. Hatfield House, Herts: hall (1607—- cc. Wadham College, Oxford: hall (1610-
1611). See p. 886 1613). See p. 897
 892 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

HOLLAND HOUSE >‘KENSINGTON

tee] bos=t)

PRINCIPAL
LIBRARY FL
D
34
WA,
a

5
-Mpi@_0
2020-4050€0FEETFIRST FLOOR PLAN
| 1 20Mt8s
aT HI
all

— Ill!

tH
\ ; vl

an = Tap
Lat ae
ei
Tanah

me
Toe ge] 1 |
ses
he
j ||
I
B10 6)!

DOORWAY at a (on pLan) HIMNEY PIECE iw WHITE PARLOL

 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 893

,
;:

B. Old Market Hall, Shrewsbury (1595). See p. 897

894 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

ane
at

B. Fountains Hall, Yorkshire (1611).

See p. 897

Bie

Dp. Charlton House, Kent: west facade (1607-12). See p. 886

 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 895

A. Tower of the Bodleian Library, Oxford B. Gate of Honour, Caius College,

(1613-36). See p. 886 Cambridge (1572-3). See p. 882

c. Library (additions c. 1600-24) D. Frontispiece (1610).

Merton College, Oxford. See p. 897
896 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

B. The Banqueting House, Whitehall, London: west facade (1619-22). See p. 898
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 897

work of the period, for the tower over the gateway is a curious but effective mixture
of traditional Gothic and new Renaissance, with mullioned windows and canopied
niches flanked by the five Orders of architecture, one above the other; while the
whole is capped by Gothic pinnacles.
Thomas Holt is equally dubiously credited with several other works at the older
‘University at this time. At Merton College he is said to have designed the entrance,
with superimposed Orders (1610) (p. 895D), and library (p. 895c); Wadham Col-
lege, frontispiece of ‘Orders’ (1610-13), and fine hall (p. 891C), besides additions to
Oriel and Jesus Colleges (1612). Pembroke College (1624) is certainly by another
hand. At Cambridge the quadrangle of Clare College (1638-) is later than our
period.
JACOBEAN MANOR HowsES
Mediaeval manor houses supplied a good ground-work for Jacobean architects to
elaborate with Renaissance additions and fittings, such as we see in South Wraxall
Manor, Wilts (p. 452), and Cranborne Manor House, Dorset (1601-12)—a Tudor
building with a Jacobean casing; while Fountains Hall, Yorkshire (1611) (p.
894B), is a complete example, built largely with material from the Mediaeval
abbot’s house (p. 430).

JACOBEAN ToOwN HOUSES

The building known as S. Peter’s Hospital, Bristol (1610, totally destroyed in the
war of 1939-45) (p. 894C), was a fine half-timbered house of this period, with over-
hanging upper stories and panelled ‘Court Room’ with carved chimney-piece and
modelled plaster ceilings.

JACOBEAN MARKET HALLS

Market halls, as at Shrewsbury (1595) (p. 893B) and Chipping Campden (1627),
are frequently built of stone or brick, while the Market Hall, Wymondham, Nor-
folk (1617), is a half-timbered example.

JACOBEAN HOSPITALS AND ALMSHOUSES

The need for hospitals and almshouses, which had already been recognized in the
Mediaeval period (p. 479), became greater after the Dissolution of the Monasteries,
and many hospitals were erected in this period.
The Whitgift Hospital, Croydon (1596-9), with its fine quadrangle, common
hall, and living-rooms, still carries on the uses for which it was founded. Sackville
College, East Grinstead (1619), Weekley Hospital, Northants (1611), Chipping
Campden Hospital (1612), Trinity Hospital, Greenwich (1613), Trinity Hospital,
Castle Rising (1614), Eyre’s Hospital, Salisbury (1617), Abbot’s Hospital, Guildford
(1619), and somewhat later, Berkeley Hospital, Worcester, are a few of these
buildings which have a similar arrangement of hall, kitchen, chapel, and rooms for
the inmates.
LATE RENAISSANCE
(STUART, 1625-1702)
The architecture of this period is seen in the work of two of England’s greatest
architects—Inigo Jones (p. 870) and Sir Christopher Wren (pp. 871, 906)—and
their best-known buildings will now be described.

INIGO JONES (1573-1652) (p. 870).

The court masques (1605-40) of the time of James I and Charles I, for which
Inigo Jones designed the scenery (p. 871), showed his intimate acquaintance with
25 islAOloiNG
898 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

Italian Renaissance architecture, and he was thus able to practise the art tentatively
while applying his knowledge to actual buildings.
The Banqueting House, Whitehall, London (1619-22) (pp. 896B, 899), was
erected by Inigo Jones on the site of the old Jacobean Banqueting House burnt
down in 1619. It was afterwards intended by John Webb, Inigo Jones’s talented
pupil, to incorporate this Banqueting House in a design for a royal palace which is
shown on the plan (p. 899B). This palace-scheme would have formed one of the
grandest architectural conceptions of the Renaissance in England, both in extent
and in the finely adjusted proportions of its various parts (p. 899A). The complete
plan of the palace (p. 899B), with its seven courts, shows the position the Banquet-
ing House would have occupied on the Grand Court (800 ft by 400 ft), twice the
size of the court of the Louvre, Paris (p. 775E); across its intended site now runs the
thoroughfare of Whitehall. The facades of the Banqueting House (pp. 896B, 899C),
75 ft 6 ins high have a rusticated lower storey and two upper storeys, each with an
Order in which no two adjacent columns are uniformly treated, except those in the
centre. The lower windows have pediments, alternately triangular and segmental,
and the upper windows have straight cornices; while festoons and masks under the
upper frieze suggest the feasting and revelry associated with the idea of a royal
banqueting hall. The severely Classic treatment here employed for the first time in
England was the natural result of Inigo Jones’s study of the correct Palladian
architecture of Italy, and it constituted nothing less than an architectural revolution
following directly, as it did, on the free and picturesque Jacobean architecture.
This noble building has a fine interior occupying the entire height, with a gallery
at the level of the upper order (p. 899D). It was converted into a Chapel Royal
by George I, and in 1894 it became the Museum of the Royal United Service
Institution.
The Queen’s House, Greenwich (1616-35) (pp. 900, 901) (now National Mari-
time Museum), by Inigo Jones for the Queen of James I, shows the influence of
Palladian architecture. It has a great central galleried saloon (p. 896A) and well-
balanced facade with rusticated ground storey and central Ionic loggia, flanked by
plain wings—a model for many later houses.
Greenwich Hospital had its commencement as a palace by the erection of ‘King
Charles’s Block’ designed 1663-7 by John Webb, the pupil of Inigo Jones. The
facade (p. 901F) has a lofty Corinthian Order and chaste Classic details showing a
close study of Inigo Jones’s work, and recalls a similar treatment by Michelangelo
on the Capitol at Rome (p. 718B). The building was completed as a Hospital by
Sir Christopher Wren, who included the Queen’s House and King Charles’s Block
in one grand symmetrical scheme (pp. 900, 901, 928).
York Water-Gate, London (1626) (p. 902A, B, C) appears to have been designed
by Sir Balthazar Gerbier (c. 1591-1667) as an element in the scheme for York
House, residence of the Duke of Buckingham. It was executed by the master-
mason, Nicholas Stone, to form the river entrance, in days when the Thames was
used as a highway for the pleasure barges of the nobility, but it now stands isolated
in the Embankment gardens. This is a charming little piece of monumental archi-
tecture, with rusticated masonry and Tuscan Order surmounted by a pediment
with armorial bearings flanked by ‘lions couchants’.
S. Paul, Covent Garden, London (1631-5) (p. 902G, H, J), was designed by
Inigo Jones to be the ‘handsomest barn in England’, for he was told by the Earl of
Bedford to erect a church as simple and inexpensive as a barn, and he here showed,
in the Tuscan portico, wide-spreading eaves and simple pediment, how it was pos-
sible to produce dignity by the simplest means. Actually, the present building is
merely a close copy, for the original was burnt in 1795 and rebuilt by Thomas
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 899

WHITEHALL PALACE : LONDON

OI Fy
LTB
2
th tw
ee wee Ptah tie EE
ar emmee! NP LEER MITT TD
ai og?INCA cucuCK
Fos MASE RaNOAN GTR

ie
\\V 80 ONES INIGO JONES

x
2 | at
ud —. [ag
= h <
< | oO
=5
F /
: |2 GRAND
S
ie)
couRT 5
(?2)
| ul
[aa | =
ul <=<
> |
a | 2)
|
i + + -—400.0— — —

SSS RES tpt hen

[SS STAT TTS

Secessies
ear eeeeeee een seseeet ieeeeeet seem eet eeeeeets
goo ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

B. The Royal Hospital (1663-1814) from the river (N.), with the Queen’s
House in the background

eee sina.

c. The Royal Hospital from the South, with the Queen’s House
in the foreground
Greenwich: the Royal Hospital and the Queen’s House. See pp. 898, 928
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE gol

ROYAL HOSPITAL eGGREENWICH

te
fia

O00}
—
4
RO
—-—
43/0"--
4:

f erie -1C) pee

PLAN AT 12! FLOOR HOUSE: iSFRONT

2
NieZIN Sea ete}
{

—450!0°—
4K——
—-

5esay
—2)'6"
+<-

i)
io)
+
|
|
\|
if

Leeae ‘PLAN TSR a

F PART or RIVER FRONT
 902 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

YORK WATER -GATE

ft LONDON
k= — - -sz.0"— = = 4
ite
.:
‘e
ds
A
4 aDe NALS

“RIVER THAMES

AJELEVATION (B)etan “Concent ASPECT

THE COVERED BRIDGE :WILTON

te
sre enaiom

Sl sezie
ua

“y aaBes
at ar a Ce
SECTION
= eS 1 = ‘oe
Cc a “IL,
Be
peter (view! (PINTERIOR
». PAULWire GARDEN : LONDON

ie
a7 ee I

4 .
| hs I

. .
yl | 2
tt ie)

==LoOsS= ee »
. ALTAR ls aay
ee
| |
= Y
i} PORTICO
a) @ @&
EAST ELEVATION
oo“ FOR ELEVATION
H PLAN l 20. 30 40 -50R
I 15 M72
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 903

B. Saloon c. Entrance facade

Coleshill, Berks (1650-2): destroyed by fire 1952. See p. 905

p. Eltham House, Kent: the E. Belton House, Lincs. (1685-8).

staircase (1664). See p. 906 See p. 905
 904. ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

re |
al
welll

=A
A
STAIRCASE ASHBURNHAM HOUSE: LOND. CHIMNEY PIECE:STOKE HALL:
ime

——
Witten
Winn
7
4
UH Mi | itil!i eae
H {lho INTC

ul AL i
ie i PAUL |

{ | f
j
via{llit

2h mm
Kellen a iJ bil nun

—f

ae a mH nN me

a:
g. |
ayy YY f

es4
Ege Hy
EDS |

a2 DINING ROOM: BELTON HOUSE : GRANTHAM: LINCS.

 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 905

Hardwick (1752-1829) in 1795-8. The church was part of a scheme for Covent
Garden—which soon began to develop in a small way as a market—standing on the
west side of the square, which for the rest was lined with uniform terraced houses,
arcaded on the ground floor, the whole forming the earliest instance in London of
this class of civic planning. The houses, too, have been replaced, in a character
different from the original.
Stoke Bruerne Park, Northants (1629-35) (p. 966N), by Inigo Jones, consisted
of a central block containing the living-rooms connected by quadrant wings for
library and chapel—a Palladian type of plan which influenced the larger Georgian
houses (p. 931). Of the impossibly large number of further houses and other build-
ings ascribed to Inigo Jones there is probability for Chevening Place, Kent (1630)
(p. 966H), much altered, and for Wilton House, Wilts (additions, 1647-9) (p.
903A), in the grounds of which is the later, very fine ornamental Palladian Bridge
(1736) (p. 902D, E, F), by Roger Morris, imitated afterwards at Prior Park, Bath (p.
935D) and Stowe, Bucks. Rather less likelihood of Jones’s authorship attaches to
Raynham Hall, Norfolk (1635-8) (pp. 907C, 940E), though this, at least, plainly has
been built under his influence; Kirby Hall, Northants (additions, 1638-40) (p.
881); Lindsay House, Lincoln’s Inn Fields (1640); and Barber-Surgeons’ Hall
(1636) (destroyed). The Marlborough Chapel in S. James’s Palace, London (1623-7)
(altered later) is among his earliest designs.
Ashburnham House, Westminster (—1662) probably by John Webb (1611-72),
pupil and assistant of Inigo Jones from 1628-52, is notable for its fine staircases
(pp. 904A, 971J).
Coleshill House, Berks (1650-62) (pp. 903B, C, 937), by Sir Roger Pratt in
consultation with Inigo Jones, was a work of fine quality representative of the small
output of this able designer. It was destroyed by fire in 1952.
Belton House, Grantham (1685-8) (pp. 903E, 904C, 966B), built by the mason
William Stanton (1639-1705) for Sir John Brownlow, very strongly shows the in-
fluence of the domestic designs of Sir Roger Pratt. It is of the H-type plan (p. 966B)
double depth in the centre, with central steps leading to the hall and rooms on the
principal floor. There is a main staircase to the right of the hall, and in each wing
service stairs from the kitchen in the basement. The exterior (p. 903E) has a pro-
jecting pedimented centre, hipped roofs, dormers, belvedere, and central turret.
The dining-room (p. 904c) has a Late Renaissance decorative treatment with
walls panelled from floor to ceiling, doors with large panels and pediments, and
chimney-piece surmounted by elaborately carved birds, fruit and flowers probably
by the famous woodcarver Grinling Gibbons (1648-1720), while the plaster ceiling
oy at
has a fine geometrical design.
Groombridge Place, Kent (late seventeenth century) (pp. 907B, 966F) is similar
in many respects to Belton House, having an H-type plan and a central hall serving
as a thoroughfare room, although the entrance is across one end, in the old tradi-
tion. Externally it has the same essentially English character. It is reached by a
bridge across the moat (p. 907B), and is of red brick with sash windows, divided by
stout bars, with Ionic portico, hipped roofs, dormers, and tower-like chimney
stacks.
Honington Hall, Warwickshire (c. 1685; with later additions) (p. 907A) is
another example of an opulent country house of the period, of brick with stone
dressings, projecting wings and hipped, low-pitched roof. i
Thorpe Hall, Northants (1653-6) (pp. 907D, 966M) is reminiscent of Chevening
external
Place in its deep rectangular plan and of both this and Coleshill House in its
a coarser
character. But it is by no means equal to either in quality, and is indeed
rendering of the type, suited to the average country house and soon in popular
906 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

favour. It was designed by Peter Mills (c. 1600-1670), a master-bricklayer of

London who attained considerable repute as a surveyor and architect.
Eltham House, Kent (1664) (pp. 903D, 966E), designed by Hugh May (1622-
84), Paymaster (Surveyor) to the King’s Works from 1660 to 1668, externally
evidences the influence of a Palladianism which had recently developed in Holland,
where he had resided. He also erected some buildings at Cornbury House, Oxford-
shire (1663-8) and did some remodelling at Windsor Castle (1675-83), besides de-
signing Berkeley House, Piccadilly (1665) and Cassiobury Park, Herts (c. 1677-80).

SiR CHRISTOPHER WREN (1632-1723) (p. 871).

Pembroke College Chapel, Cambridge (1663-5), designed for his uncle, the
Bishop of Ely, was Wren’s first essay in architecture, and though a daring innova-
tion, shows restraint in design, with its Corinthian pilasters, central window flanked
by niches, and hexagonal cupola (p. 908A, B, 971A).
S. Paul’s Cathedral, London (1675-1710) (frontispiece, pp. 663B, 908-12, 915A,
B, 925), occupying the site of the Mediaeval cathedral destroyed in the Great Fire, is
Wren’s masterpiece. The first design, of which there is a model in the north tri-
forium, was a Greek cross in plan, with projecting vestibule (p. 910A, B), but the
influence of the clergy, who desired a long nave and choir suitable for ritual, finally
caused the selection of a Latin cross or Mediaeval type of plan (p. 910D). The in-
terior has a length of 463 ft including apse, a breadth including aisles of 1o1 ft, and
an area of about 64,000 square ft. This plan, in which Wren wisely so spread the
weight of the structure that in the crypt solids and voids are approximately equal,
consists of a great central space at the crossing suitable for vast congregations, like
Ely Cathedral, crowned by a dome painted by Sir James Thornhill; choir and nave
in three bays, north and south transepts with semicircular porticoes, and projecting
western portico of coupled columns. The western bay of the nave is, unlike the other
bays, square on plan, and is flanked by chapels, which project externally. This bay (p.
gIoD) has coupled columns supporting lateral arches, through the northern of which
is visible the Chapel of S. Dunstan, with its fine columnar screen of carved wood-
work. The piers of the nave (pp. 909B, 910C) are fronted with Corinthian
pilasters, entablature, and attic which conceals the triforium, while the nave is
crowned by ingeniously designed saucer-like domes, 91 ft high (p. 658F-J), beneath
which the clear-story windows (not visible from the exterior) (pp. 908C, 909B, 910,
QIIF) have lunette vaults. The choir is enriched with fine stalls and organ case by
Grinling Gibbons, and beautiful hammered iron gates by Tijou, while it termin-
ates in the modern reredos, the vaulting being decorated by Sir William Richmond
with coloured glass mosaics. The dome (pp. 908c, 909B, 9I0C, D) and its sup-
port presented a complicated structural problem (p. 912). The dome is carried
on eight piers, and is 112 ft in diameter at the base of the high drum, at the level of
the Whispering Gallery, diminishing to Io1 ft at the top of the drum, and is of triple
construction. The inner dome of brick, 18 ins thick, has its eye 214 ft 3 ins above
the floor, while the intermediate conical dome, of brick 18 ins thick, strengthened
by a double chain of iron (pp. 9IIE, 912A), supports the stone lantern, ball, and
cross; besides which the outer dome also rests on this intermediate cone and is
formed of timber covered with lead (pp. 910C, 9118). Eight openings are formed in
the summit of the outer dome to admit light to the inner dome (p. 911D, £) (cf.
dome of the Panthéon, Paris (p. 8008).
The vaulted crypt, extending under the whole church, is the last resting place of
many famous men, including Nelson, Wellington and Wren himself.
The exterior is exceedingly effective and groups well with the central dome. The
facades have two Orders, the lower Corinthian and the upper Composite, totalling
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 907

Honington Hall, Warwickshi

c. Raynham Hall, Norfolk (1635-8). D. Thorpe Hall, Northants

See p. 905 (1653-6). See p. 905
908 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

A. Facade B. Interior
Pembroke College Chapel, Cambridge (1663-5). See p. 906

c. The crossing D. South transept

S. Paul’s Cathedral, London (1675-1710). See p. 906
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

RS A et, BR pow ons ey

B. Nave looking E.
S. Paul’s Cathedral, London (1675-1710). See p. 906
 910 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

. PAUL : LONDON

SS z

(A)SKETCH or MODEL
or ORIGINAL. DESIGN

i iist=}
Dob

fr

\LONGITUDINAL SECTION
555.0
‘REFERENCE TABLE: |
‘REFERENCE TABLE:
ABELL TOWER
b-S!DUNSTANS CHAPEL |]. REREDOS & HIGH ALTAR
C-MAJ-GEN. GORDON
~~ |mJESUS CHAPEL
l !n-PULPIT
d:WELLINGTON MONMT.
|]D-J.M.W. TURNER.R.A.
€-SIR JOSHUA REYNOLDS
f-DR. SAMUEL. JOHNSON $M Q:GEN. SIR JOHN MOORE
G {PROJECTION OF Y-FONT
(WHISPERING GALLERY S:LORD NELSON
h-LECTERN Cee OF MEDIAEVAL
CLOISTER & CHAPTER HO
}:CHOIR SCREEN BY TIJOU
U CHAPEL OF THE ORDER OF
‘SITE OF PAUL'S CROSS
S. MICHAEL & S.GEORGE
V:STAIRS TO LIBRARY

40. A 50 100 ISO | 200FEET 20, 40, 60801,

1""O 16 do 30 40 So 60 MTB 19,0
T
IQOFEET
7
10 2o 30 Mis
T T y

SCALE FOR PLAN

SCALE FOR SECTION
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE OII

U L F 3L O N D O N
7
_ S.PA Py

Ss
x

Xe)
o
io)

Nis foa a
= I ee
E = SUGGESTED OPENING
. IN SCREEN WALL TO
= SHOW FLYING BUTTRESS

A
eerste | : PAS = ‘i

nN: E ¢
=r : zs ar +
| ie eaPEA aie
}| if re |HE i el ‘| oe
| omy Es ELLE eel LE: ts
_aee =e ——
b [WEST ELEVATION
Ps g

is
; \‘. £
ie\
EIGHT WELLS TO ale ESTIMATED WEIGHT OF i \ g
LIGHT INTERIOR 9 |<~ LANTERN 850 TONS as, eee

=
Bi| yy
planU is|4
i
le} Sia ic aN
Ser 2 | y

7 ee | vy
| LJ Bi tc aD
| Waris: |
yO":

(FSEGTION thro NAVE. LooxineW

oo ee FEET
[ohare 10 20 OMETRES
 912 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

a as zy
tool |
\ !
|

11S
ee
1
|
|
PAUT ly HWSD :
°
CATHEDK T ID IN
eer LY JUS

: | © AA LANTERN
|
vied !
Me GOLDEN
thal
a LIGHT
WELLS. if GALLERY
\ : WN
| a SS

i| ark CHAINS NS
SY

fi a= UA
| WOOD —
FRAMING,
| |
ie eI
i |
I 1
ia i Seine = s=
egtie
ed
|

|
te CHAINS
ie te a BRICK
_—e INNER DOME
Ie eel 18’) STONE GALLERY
S64 IRON BAND
eo) 4
©
Le) ira)

he
i gat ken
\ Ih 83)
(he ek, Sst
| a
| ' — — —MENGR DIAGONAL TIE =
rr ium! | “S2BUTTRESSES \ 4)HORIZONTAL
TesOO Bare
Oa mal STEEU y 2
100 30 t
CHAINS. ADSSgETONS 2. BERS ali]
‘ | N =. PENDENTIVI }
go fF | coat
! paeil
70 | \
20 |
60 4
50 +145 |
|
‘9 _—
a :

8 fie *F |
i i
30 40 ! i) ,
12BE
=) |
! | on

10 |
!
|
ie iy
i}
O=b0 | Re

A
10 ==3 1
CRYPT
AV. GROUND LEVEL-

A SECTION tro’ DOME. | ELEVATION or DOME & S. TRANSEPT

== See
32 BUTTRESSES TABLE OF WEIGHT:

(ossape ae
See hee Littl [OF GREAT ARCHES:
- 2305

PLAN ar AE ]
Nan FROM TOP OF KEYS

PLAN ar BK
||
joes
7}
Riwast PF Fas f EES He 512
EC /.==
4'2 LOOR: «281

eration cL] a ey oS C
Ae oe ’ A LT —
x ic eee
We FOUNDATIONS =+: -- 16,0!
PLAN ar D [ff] B) a= + at fay WW NY lits TOTAL WEIGHT UPON
EARTH ASCRIBABLE
TOTHE WEIGHT OF
PLAN at E 9 Givin, aac eome! THE DOME AND ITS
SUPPORTS «----+ -67,2
HALF PLAN OF DOME AREA AT DIFFERENT LEVELS
The calculations in the Table of Weights are those made by Mr J. E. Drower for the S. Paul’
Commission. The thrusting weight of the inner and outer drums of the dome is extended over a large:
area by means of the thirty-two radiating buttresses, assisted at a lower level by the four great angl
bastions. Various cracks in the masonry having appeared, a sum of £400,000 was collected publich
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 913

110 ft 6 ins in height (p. 911F). The aisles are only one storey high, so the part
above them is a screen-wall introduced to give dignity and to act as a counterweight
to the flying buttresses concealed behind it, which receive the thrust of the nave
vault. Considerable criticism has been directed against this screen wall, which is
said to be a sham, since the space behind it is unroofed, and a suggestion is here put
forward (p. 911B) that such objections might be removed if the wall were pierced
with openings so as to show the flying buttresses behind. The western facade, 177
ft wide (frontispiece, p. 91ID), approached by a broad flight of steps which give
scale to the building, has a central two-storeyed portico of coupled Corinthian and
Composite columns superimposed, surmounted by a pediment sculptured with the
Conversion of S. Paul. The portico is flanked by two beautifully proportioned taper-
ing steeples, which are pleasing features in the design, 212 ft 6 ins high above the
nave floor, that on the left containing bells and that on the right the clock, while the
fine semicircular porticoes to the transepts are notable (p. 908D). The external dome
(frontispiece, p. 909A) is probably the finest in Europe, for the projecting masses of
masonry at the meeting of nave and transepts, forming the vestries and stairs to
dome, express support from the ground upwards (pp. 663B, 910D). The peristyle
round the drum, with an external diameter of about 139 ft 6 ins, is particularly
effective with threequarter columns attached to radiating buttress-walls; while as
every fourth intercolumniation is filled with masonry, there is an appearance of
strength and solidity lacking in the Panthéon, Paris. Above the colonnade is the
‘Stone Gallery’, and attic supporting the dome, which is crowned with lantern, ball,
and cross, weighing 850 tons, rising to a height of 366 ft above the pavement.
There are some striking contrasts in the history of the building of the great
metropolitan cathedral and that of S. Peter, Rome (p. 714). S. Paul’s, London, had
one architect and one master mason, and was built in 35 years, during the episco-
pate of one bishop; while S. Peter’s, Rome, had 13 successive architects and numerous
master-masons, and the building extended over I00 years, during the pontificates
of 20 popes.
The London City Churches (pp. 916, 925, 926), 52 in number, designed 1670-
1711 by Wren in the Renaissance style to replace those destroyed by the Great
Fire, are models of simplicity and restraint in treatment. Many have been destroyed
or war-damaged but the towers and steeples still remaining make London City one
of the most picturesque in the world, and form a unique setting to the great
cathedral. Many are most skilfully planned on cramped and awkward sites (p. 916),
and are among the first churches actually designed to meet the requirements of
Protestant worship, in which a central preaching-space usurps the nave and aisles
suitable for the processions of Roman Catholic ritual, while galleries were frequently
added.
S. Stephen, Walbrook (1672-9, damaged in 1941) (pp. 917, 925M), is famous
for original and ingenious planning which produces a wonderful effect within a
limited area. Enclosed in a rectangle are sixteen columns, of which eight are
arranged in a circle to carry a central cupola, with the judicious disposition of single-
columns so as to produce a church with five aisles. The fine pulpit (p. 921E), organ
(p. 917E) and reredos (p. 917F) are typical of Grinling Gibbons’s influence.
S. Mary-le-Bow, Cheapside (1670-3, much damaged in 1941) (pp. 915C, 916G,
919, 925R), is specially notable not only for ‘Bow Bells’, but for its graceful Renais-
sance steeple (completed 1680), the masterpiece of that particular type which Wren
may be said to have evolved. With the Gothic spire as his prototype, he surmounted
a square tower with a pyramidal spire in receding stages of encircling columns, all
unified by a clever use of inverted consoles.
S. Bride, Fleet Street (1671-8, gutted 1940) (pp. 915D, 918, 919, 920B), has a
 914 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

similar though less successful steeple (1701-3), in which the absence of the invertec
consoles gives a telescopic effect to the series of columned stages.
S. Martin, Ludgate (1677-84) (pp. 916D, 924A, 925D), has an interior with fou:
Corinthian columns to the central vault, but is best known for its beautiful littl
steeple, consisting of a square tower connected by side scrolls to the facade anc
surmounted by an octagonal stage with timber spire and weather vane, all grouping
well with views of S. Paul’s Cathedral.
S. Clement Danes, Strand (1680-2) (pp. 920C, 924B) (gutted 1941, restored 1958,
which has a graceful spire in diminishing stages added by Gibbs in 1719-20, anc
S. James, Piccadilly (1682-4) (pp. 918, 920A) (much damaged 1941, restored 1952,
are remarkable for their two-storeyed aisles in which galleries are supportec
by square piers surmounted by Corinthian columns and a barrel-vaulted roof.
intersected by semi-cylindrical vaults at right angles over the gallery bays
(p. 918C).
S. Mary Abchurch (1681-6) (pp. 916A, 921B) (damaged, 1940) is a square church
in a cramped position with the dome on pendentives as a principal feature, while
the steeple is neither fine nor well placed; but the Grinling Gibbons altarpiece and
the excellent organ case, pulpit and pews help to produce an attractive interior.
which even appears spacious under its painted dome.
S. Mildred, Bread Street (1677-83) (destroyed, 1941) was a rectangle in three
compartments with central dome on pendentives, and was quite a gem in the per-
fection of its parts and in the beauty of its carved woodwork.
S. Lawrence Jewry (1671-7) (pp. 916B, 921C); S. Benetfink (1670-3) (p. 916c)
(destroyed, 1842); S. Mary-at-Hill (1670-6) (pp. 916E, 921A), a vaulted and domed
church formed into a cross by four columns; S. Anne and S. Agnes (1677-80,
steeple c. 1714) (p. 916F); S. Swithin, Cannon Street (1677-85) (p. 916H) (gutted,
1941); Christ Church, Newgate Street (1677-87, steeple 1704) (p. 916]) (gutted,
1940), and S. Magnus-the-Martyr, London Bridge (1671-6, steeple 1705) (pp.
916K, 920D), all show Wren’s subtle adaptation of plan to site.
S. Alban, Wood Street (1682-5) (wrecked, 1940); S. Dunstan in the East (1670-
I, steeple 1697-9) (gutted, 1941); S. Mary Aldermary (1681-2, tower 1702-44) (p.
925G) and S. Michael, Cornhill (1670-2, tower completed by Hawksmoor 1718-
22) (p. 925J), offer examples of his treatment of Gothic towers and spires.
Wren designed a number of collegiate buildings in Oxford and Cambridge which
display his peculiar power of adapting the design to meet the exigencies both of
site and purpose. At Oxford there is the Sheldonian Theatre (1664-9) (pp. 475A,
925x) designed after the Theatre of Marcellus with roof on the lines of a velarium,
since altered, while the Library, Queen’s College (1693-6) (pp. 922C, 959C), the
Tom Tower, Christ Church (1682) (p. 925s) and the Garden Quadrangle,
Trinity College (1668, north wing; 1682, west wing; 1728, south wing) exhibit
Wren’s mastery of design. The Old Ashmolean Museum (1679-83) (p. 475A)
was designed by T. Wood under Wren’s influence. The designer of Trinity College
Chapel, Oxford (1691-4) (p. 922B) is not definitely known. At Cambridge, in
addition to Pembroke College Chapel (p. 906), there are Emmanuel College
Chapel (1668-73), and Trinity College Library (1676-84) (pp. 92IF, 922A,
925Z).
Among Wren’s secular works are the Monument, London (1671-6) (p. 925H);
to commemorate the Great Fire of 1666; the Fountain Court and garden facades
(1689-94) of Hampton Court Palace (pp. 459, 923A, 925U) which have been
described in connection with the Tudor portion of Henry VIII (p. 459); Chelsea
Hospital (1682-91) (pp. 923B, C, 9251) with its fine chapel (p. 923c); Marlborough
House, Pall Mall (1709-11); additions to Kensington Palace (1690-1704); and the
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 915

A. Bishop’s Throne and stalls B. S. aisle looking W.

S. Paul’s Cathedral, London (1675-1710). See p. 906

c. S. Mary-le-Bow, Cheapside, London p. S. Bride, Fleet Street, London (1671-8):

(1670-3): steeple (1680). See p. 913 steeple (1701-3). See p. 913
 916 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

WRENS Cir CHURCHES GUILDHALL

a
VARS —— a,

LANE

ABCHURCH

(A))s MARY ABCHURCH GRESHAM

STREET

Z, || STATIONERS’ HALL VESTRY. me

G | GARDENS 7

CHURCH PASSAGE

. LAWRENCE JEWRY

CHEAPSIDE

se

LUDGATE ni me \

S. MARTIN -
LUDGATE E

2 3
: ie

rue oe Bow m2 YARD << — oe

©)s. ANNE 6 9.AGNES S.MARY-LE-BOW :cHEAPSIDE H 2 a
LOWER THAMES STREET

STREET
EDWARD
KING
PASSAGE
CHURCH
CHRIST
Rime aes wR ee oe (K)s MAGNUS tue MARTYR: Lowpon a
(Wcupist CHURCH: newcare street
—eiin- i Sea
<— — a
FS
Dae 10 20 ie 40 50 60 70
na
80 90 I00FEE

© ee: oe
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 917

) S, STEPHEN
» Wd aN

EN Cl] aa:
Jy KE cS PxG
Lu i)

SY ||
ere

ete)
og | h Sy i) (ss a
a > 4 [us i i i ND Ih

rs =
———

INTER |ORaietne SiN

IS

THE REREDOS
 918 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

S. JAMES: PICCADILLY
LONDON 3
10s O20 60 , 80 , OF! §&
pi
OMS: 20 25 som’ p

Ss RU

Besa
F_ TaffWn
nese =
sjocojal joo0G

(FYsiDE ELEVATION
WELLL.

SECTION b-b
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 919

0. MARY LE BOW + SBRIDE +

| | | | |
>
| LONDON
—

i)

Til woes
4+
9!0"-—.-17'9*--
—-—--33!
10—

105,
es
Be

I
se)
aes

-—226.11"—-

i ry

he
ae og ol rT
(BYELEVATION (C)ELEvaTION_ (D)SECTION
%PLAN 4
AT j
4,PLAN
AT k
 920 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

A. S. James, Piccadilly, London: B. S. Bride, Fleet Street, London: interior

interior looking W. (1682-4). See p. 914 looking E. (1671-8). See p. 913

c. S. Clement Danes, Strand, London: D. S. Magnus-the-Martyr, London Bridge:

interior looking W. (1680-2). See p. 914 interior looking E. (1671-6). See p. 914
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 921

> - -_
A. S. Mary-at-Hill, London B. S. Mary Abchurch, London (1681-6).
(1670-6). See p. 914 See p. 914

c. S. Lawrence Jewry, Dp. The Banqueting Hall (Orangery), Kensington

London (1671-7): Gardens, London (1704). See p. 928
vestry. See pp. 914, 974

E. S. Stephen, Walbrook, F. Trinity College, Cambridge: library

London (1672-9) : (1676-84). See p. 914
pulpit. See p. 913
922 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

A. Trinity College, Cambridge: Nevile’s Court, looking towards the Library

(1676-84). See pp. 882, 914

B. Trinity College Chapel, Oxford Cc. Queen’s College, Oxford: library

(1691-4). See p. 914 (1693-6). See p. 914
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE
<—Wolsey and Henry VIII: 1515-
~— eS ba
saa: Ae

B. Portico c. Chapel
Royal Hospital, Chelsea (1682-91). See p. 914
924 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

A. S. Martin, Ludgate, London B. S. Clement Danes, London

(1677-84). See p. 914 (Tower 1680-2, steeple 1719-20).
See p. 914

c. Custom House, King’s Lynn D. Temple Bar, Strand, London:

(1683). See p. 928 looking E. (1672). See p. 928
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

Buildings by Sir Christopher Wren: an imaginative composition made by C. R. Cockerell in 1841. (See pp. 871, 906 and overleaf.) Not all these buildings are now
A. S. Paul’s Cathedral E. Greenwich Hospital J. S. Michael, Cornhill N. S. Dunstan in the East S. Tom Tower, Oxford W. Temple Bai
B. Christ Ch., Newgate St. F. Winchester Palace K. S. Margaret, Lothbury P. S. Augustine, Watling St. T. S. Nicholas Cole Abbey X. Sheldonian
C. S. Bride, Fleet Street G. S. Mary Aldermary L. S. Magnus, London Bridge Q. S. Edmund, Lombard St. U. Hampton Court Palace Y. S. Mary So
D. S. Martin, Ludgate H. The Monument, London M. S. Stephen, Walbrook R. S. Mary-le-Bow, Cheapside V. S. Michael Paternoster Z. Library, Ti
I. Chelsea Hospital Royal Cambrid
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

ope
2)
ea
)
om
=— \
A
4 52 FR

pSssene

i
+) &

fy
5 1 &

ean <n \ {Lol

irom, Sedans) jon,

ATO

\2 AME ise
a asns em

hy

————

> I Za yr ~ 4

Wo
5
7

(i 36 37 iS
N|

a
a,tT. TEAC i SORE
8 Se ailll
L af Maya
er
L,
= 5 | ana |_| i a: 7
4(I
le
|S
=) =\sl|FO]
i
millers “43t{———+—|

=lean
dies

——| ‘tees ba
p>
——
= wee
5 =
°bo

18 Fewy at, Il sree AM _ int fo Dol LAN Ll Ad

ESS i Nii|
siz ee DS "] I
Till f= ten
mmOminTOsfl= Nene A? ee ESS
: i

eye pL
eee

ces TL ee alco
I ( ra —- : un = " =
& D| ono

=|"
= ro — —— =
i SS =
Ey
b-———=]
a i — ;
>|
r a + a bibs iar =| ATA ¥ ad
i tL =
[hE AS
si eS Z~ 3 cosa & Sag | pee \z (RESEAATIT| f
=; 3A 23 7s)
= 4 |——= i
[LOI At mH MEH

E
=\ am
(
\= alee ii
w—
p ras ——

|8Hip
jae) i="
Mt
NT |

|HI
|St ==
|W
Sas
NE f
Ay
—|
VE
Oy ijeee acy

SS
=—
be i)
i Ss
ime
ST A
SSS

nigeoal
)Sinisi@im(@iars
A i Tal Nt 132m 7A.
seyp uN 7 LS
oh
. al Wry oop
4 A

ymplete outline key to the buildings by Sir Christopher Wren shown on the previous page. Not all these buildings are now ascribed to Wren
13. S. Peter’s, Cornhill 24. Tower of Edem 34. Doctors’ Commons 44. S. Michael’s, Cornhill 55. Old Mansion House,
14. S. Michael’s, Wood Street 25. S. Michael, Queenhithe 35. Temple Bar 45. S. George’s, Botolph Lane Cheapside
15. All Hallow’s, Bread Street 26. Laurence Pountney Hill 36. S. Margaret Pattens 46. Morden College 56. S. Matthew’s, Friday St.
16. S: Michael, Queenhithe 27. S. James’s, Piccadilly 37. S. Mary Aldermary 47. Old Custom House 57. S. James’s, Garlick Hill
ine 17. Marlborough House . 28. S. Benet, Paul’s Wharf 38. S. Mary-le-Bow 48. Chelsea Hospital 58. Sheldonian Theatre
18. S. Martin’s, Ludgate 29. Buckingham House 39. Great Pillar or Monument 49. S. Margaret’s, Lothbury 59. Trinity College Chapel,
rd 19. Royal Hospital, Greenwich 30. Hampton Court Palace 40. Greenwich 50. Christ Church, Oxford Oxford
rch 20. Winchester Palace 31. S. Nicholas, Cole Abbey Observatory 51. S. Edmund the King 60. S. Mary Somerset
21. S. Dunstan’s in the East 32. Colonnade, Hampton 41. S. Anthony, Watling St. 52. College of Physicians 61. Trinity College Library,
22. S. Lawrence, Jewry Court 42, S. Alban’s, Wood Street 53, S. Austin Cambridge
tyr 23, S. Stephen, Walbrook 33, S. Michael Royal 43. S. Andrew’s, Holborn 54, S. Benetfink 62. Doctors’ Commons
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 927

Ndlh eo i
—— ‘el
aes

TOWN HALL: MONMOUTH TOWN ALL:ABINGDON: BERKS

928 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

Greenwich Observatory (1675-6). There is no evidence that he designed Temple

Bar, London (1672) (pp. 924D, 925W), (now at Theobald’s Park, Herts), commonly
ascribed to him, which was built by two master-masons, Thomas Knight and
Joshua Marshall; and he was only indirectly concerned with the Orangery, Ken-
sington Gardens (1704) (p. 92ID), probably designed by Vanbrugh (p. 872).
Again, there is no documentary proof that Wren had directly anything to do with
Morden College, Blackheath (1694) (pp. 927A; 966K).
Greenwich Hospital (1696-1715) (pp. 898, 900, 901, 925E) is a magnificent
palace scheme devised by Wren to include the Queen’s House and King Charles’s
Block, respectively by Inigo Jones and John Webb (p. 898), with which he incor-
porated the great court and Queen Anne’s Block, and the two intermediate blocks
of King William and Queen Mary with the Hall, Chapel, two majestic domes, and
fine colonnades.
Winchester Palace (1683-5) (p. 925F), designed by Wren, was left unfinished
at the death of Charles II, and burnt down in 1894.
Middle Temple, London; the cloisters in Pump Court (1680-1) (pp. 885,
8898) (destroyed 1941) were from Wren’s design.
Wren appears to have done very little domestic work of modest scale, despite the
substantial number of town and country mansions loosely attributed to him. Thus
in this connection the course of the Renaissance owed nothing much to his influence,
though it was considerable in other directions.
Abingdon Town Hall (1677-80) (p. 927F), with its open market and assembly-
room over, is a bold design with pilasters including two storeys, of a character
strongly suggesting the influence of Wren.
The Custom House, King’s Lynn (1683) (p. 924c), by Henry Bell (1653-1717),
is an example of effective grouping.
Guildford Town Hall (1682) (p. 971C) is a bold and picturesque building of the
period, partly vernacular in that it retains timber-frame structure, with carved
brackets supporting the overhanging storey; above are large pedimented windows
separated by pilasters, consoled cornice, hexagonal turret and projecting clock with
wrought-iron stays.
LATE RENAISSANCE
(GEORGIAN, 1702-1830)
As stated under Architectural Character (p. 872), there was some appearance of
an English form of the Baroque between the years 1695-1725, but otherwise the
Georgian period may be divided into two phases, the Anglo-Palladian, to about
1750, overlapping with the Antiquarian phase thereafter, the latter marked princi-
pally by the ‘Adam’ manner but in which designers tended increasingly to turn to
differing ancient models and after 1800 produced not only the ‘Regency’, natural
successor of the Adam style, but also the ‘Greek Revival’, an early stage of the
‘Gothic Revival’ (sometimes denoted by the contemporary spelling of ‘Gothick’),
and certain other expressions.

GEORGIAN HOUSES
We have seen that the course of Renaissance architecture depended largely upon
the preferences of individual designers. So far as domestic architecture is con-
cerned, the Low Countries still had continued mainly to be favoured in the Stuart
period, influences proceeding therefrom through trade, political expatriates or
pattern books. But about 1630 Dutch architecture itself changed to a straight-
forward Palladianism, expressed in brick with stone dressings, reflected in England
after the Restoration in 1660. These fresh influences were in turn assimilated, and
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 929

CASTLE, HOWARD -YORKSHIRE

p NORTH FORMING WEST FACADE

4 & CONTAINING LIBRARY ETC. WAS
ALTERED & REBUILT A) 1763.

GREAT |COURT

-
ss 2 aes DAIRY |
WHOUSE ae

Re

== —>

—>
------4
=---~----8!',0"-

PORTION ALTERED C. .1763

930 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

/, (QEXTERIOR FROMN SE
j i

aoe

ITALIAN ITALIAN
GARDEN GARDEN

és“sreameuse Poxoe ae Pesstunsibie

GREENHOUSE YARD KITGHEN *| ie
pada YARD GREZNHOUSE
——
ee oe

0 10 20 30 40 SO

GREAT COURT STABLE COURT

$50.0

_ - peg fatter
YARD lB yarp Pa S

(DExTERIOR FROM SE
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 931
by the present period an English national character was being firmly established.
There was a great expansion in domestic building. Mansions for the aristocracy
grew more numerous, if progressively less grand in scale, but the really significant
increase was in the houses of the middle and inferior classes. Already before 1800,
villas were being erected on the fringes of towns, and even humble cottages mostly
had achieved lasting form. In towns, terrace building in rows, a mark of the Indus-
trial Revolution, became an increasingly common practice, in turn for the rich, the
citizen proper, and at length, the artisan and labourer.
Eighteenth-century mansions were of two types, essentially similar, and differing
chiefly in their scale and pretensions.
(a) The central block with wings. This type of plan now begins to denote the
greatest houses, in place of the more modest E- and H-shaped plans of the previous
period. It is a type deriving from Palladio, first used in England at Stoke Bruerne
Park, Northants, by Inigo Jones (p. 905); it remains popular until towards the end
of the eighteenth century. The central block has a basement storey, not necessarily
below ground, often containing kitchen and domestic offices. The principal floor,
with its columned portico, reached by imposing external steps, was devoted to the
hall, grand staircase, saloon, and reception rooms, which were usually of noble pro-
portions. On either side, colonnades, quite often quadrant in form, connected the
central block to the wings, which sometimes contained the chapel, library, kitchens,
and stables. All the component parts, whether central block, pedimented portico,
wings, or colonnades, were designed to give scale and dignity expressing the great-
ness of England’s noble families.
Castle Howard, Yorkshire (1699-1712) (p. 929), by Sir John Vanbrugh, an
outstanding figure of the English Baroque, assisted by Nicholas Hawksmoor, is a
stately palace (p. 929A) possessing many of the general features already alluded to,
with a total length of 660 ft. Externally, it has that boldness of advance and re-
cession and the richness of expression which are the hall-marks of the Baroque in
whatever country it is found, though here the total effect is somewhat massive and
ponderous, as critics of the time were not slow to point out. The plan (p. 929B)
shows a central block, with north entrance to the great hall, 34 ft square, which is
crowned by a dome and flanked by staircases. The saloon beyond, on the central axis,
faces the garden, and on either side are the principal rooms. Curved arcades con-
nect the main building with the stable court on the west and the kitchen court on
the east. The hall (p. 929, D) forms a stately vestibule, with its Composite Order,
statues in niches, and arched openings admitting light from the central dome to the
main staircases. The Mausoleum in the grounds, with its circular plan and ex-
ternal periphery of Doric columns (1729-) was designed by Hawksmoor working
alone, he himself having the same Baroque preferences.
Blenheim Palace, Oxfordshire (1705-20) (pp. 930, 933A, 934A) by Sir John
Vanbrugh, is again Baroque and the most monumental mansion in England. It was
given by the nation to the first Duke of Marlborough. The plan (p. 930B) (850 ft
long) is designed on axial lines in which symmetry rather than convenience is
aimed at. A bold entrance gate led to a great court, three acres in extent, beyond
which is the central block, with hall, saloon, internal courts for light, and numerous
corridors, while on the west is the great gallery, 180 ft by 22 ft. Right and left on the
entrance facade are quadrants and colonnades which connect the main building to
the kitchen and stable courts. The great hall (p. 930C), 70 ft long by 45 ft wide and
67 ft high, forms a worthy approach to the saloon and state apartments. The ex-
terior (p. 930A), with its imposing Corinthian portico, embraces two storeys, flanked
by quadrants, and there are four angle turrets to the main structure, all set amidst
fine formal gardens. The garden facade, 320 ft long, is more delicate in treatment
2G H.O.A.
932 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

than the ponderous but imposing entrance facade, satirized by the Rev. Abel
Evans, an Oxford don, in his reference to Vanbrugh.

Lie heavy on him earth, for he

Laid many a heavy load on thee.
Seaton Delaval, Northumberland (1720-8) (p. 934B, D), by Sir John Vanbrugh,
is a smaller but splendid example of English Baroque, in which bold use is made of
rustication, extended to the shafts of the Doric Order in the porticoes. The building
was gutted by fire in 1822. The wings here again flank a great forecourt, having the
kitchen and stable courts on their outer sides.
Holkham Hall, Norfolk (1734-) (pp. 934E, 966J), designed by William Kent in
collaboration with Lord Burlington and the owner, Thomas Coke, Earl of Leicester,
but executed by Matthew Brettingham (1699-1769), is a representative mansion of
Palladian character in the present class. Unlike Vanbrugh’s principal houses, the
plan (p. 966J) shows no deliberate framing of the entrance court by the wings,
which here number four instead of two and give symmetrical elevations on all four
fronts. A grand feature of the central block is the hall, adorned by Ionic colonnades
which turn in an apse to enclose an axial flight of steps rising to the ‘piano nobile’
or principal floor; the chief apartments include a stately gallery of three related
rooms. Externally (p. 934) on the south front is the inevitable Palladian portico,
while the angles of the main block are raised by attic stories into pavilions, each of
which has as a chief feature a ‘Venetian’ window (p. 970C), of a type deriving from
the so-called ‘Palladian motif’ (p. 738). The elevations in general are typically
Palladian in that considerable play of form is contrived by simple means of advance
and recession of the planes, which mostly comprise local symmetrical and focalized
features though subordinated to the general composition: there is little recourse to
identical rhythms in the fenestration as a means of binding the elements visually
together. The similarity of the Holkham exterior to that of the Horse Guards,
Whitehall (p. 958A), also by Kent, is noteworthy.
Other Palladian mansions with wing blocks are Ditchley, Oxon (1720-5) by
James Gibbs, who formerly had been an exponent of the Baroque; Moor Park,
Herts (c. 1720), by Sir James Thornhill (1675-1734), of which the wings were
rebuilt by Robert Adam in 1763 and demolished c. 1785; Houghton Hall, Norfolk
(1722-6) (p. 935B) by Colin Campbell; Prior Park, Bath (1735-48) (pp. 933B, 935D),
by John Wood the elder, the grounds of which contain a delightful version of the
Palladian bridge (perhaps by ‘Capability’ Brown, c. 1765) originated by Roger
Morris at Wilton House, Wilts (p. 905); Wentworth Woodhouse, Yorkshire,
as remodelled from the dull and tasteless designs of Henry Flitcroft, c. 1735; Buck-
land House, Berks (1755-7) (p. 966L), by John Wood the younger, which has a
central block on the model of his father’s Prior Park, Bath, with corridors right and
left leading to the octagonal chapel and library; and Harewood House, Yorkshire
(1759-71) (p. 936E), by John Carr of York, which in some sense is transitional to
the next phase, since substantial amendments by Robert Adam were incorporated
in the design, and Adam was responsible for the interior. John Carr designed and
built the adjacent Harewood village.
Kedleston Hall, Derbyshire (pp. 936c, D, 939) was designed by James Paine and
its erection supervised by Matthew Brettingham between 1757-61, but Robert and
James Adam succeeded them and completed the work, including the south front,
the saloon, and the interior decoration as a whole (c. 1765-70). It is thus, like
Harewood House, Yorkshire, partly Palladian, yet in many respects the whole
building exhibits the Antiquarian tendency. The plan (p. 939D) consists of a central
block, 135 ft by 105 ft, having on its principal floor the great hall, 66 ft by 42 ft, and
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 933

B. Prior Park, Bath: view from E. (1735-48). See opposite page

 934 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

ESS RES 3s

A. Blenheim Palace,
Oxfordshire (1705-20) : (c. 1720-8). See p. 932
gateway in east wing.
See p. 931

c. Flint Cottage, Box Hill,

Surrey (18th cent.). See p. 938 See p. 932

cit oe
E. Holkham Hall, Norfolk: south front (1734-). See p. 932
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 935

ANIM SP4 ges

D. Prior Park, Bath: the Mansion (1735-48) with Palladian Bridge (c. 1765) in
foreground. See pp. 932; 979
 936 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

A. Mereworth Castle, Kent (1722-5). B. Chiswick House, Chiswick, Middlesex

See p. 938 (1725). See p. 938

c. Aerial view from S.W. D. Hall (1765-70)

Kedleston Hall, Derbyshire (1757-70). See p. 932

E. Harewood House, Yorks: aerial view from S. (1759-71). See p. 932

 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 937
saloon on the central axis, with drawing-room and other apartments on either side.
Quadrant corridors connect the main building with the kitchen and private wings;
the southern wings, which would have completed a general likeness to the Holkham
Hall, Norfolk, plan, were not carried out. The hall (pp. 936D, 939C, E) is a most im-
posing apartment, being the whole height of the mansion and having the appearance
of an ancient basilica, with colonnades of alabaster Corinthian columns, 25 ft high,
surmounted by a coved ceiling in the Adam style, while the walls have statue niches.
The drawing-room is a fine example of Adam’s style. The general lay-out (p. 939A)
shows the usual basement storey, the external steps to the principal floor, with its
fine Corinthian portico, and on either side are the wings, which being lower, give
scale and importance to the central block. The south front (p. 939B), by Adam, is
treated in lighter vein with curved steps to the garden.
Further examples of the mansion with linked wings in the second half of the
eighteenth century, during which time the type was becoming rare, are Mersham-
le-Hatch, Kent (1762-5), by Robert Adam, for once wholly from his designs, for
so many of his country domestic works were remodellings; Wardour Castle,
Wilts (1770-6), in James Paine’s half Palladian style; Heaton Hall, Lancashire
(1772) (p. 935C), and Castlecoole, Co. Fermanagh, Ireland (1790-7), both by
James Wyatt, rival of Adam; and Stowe House, Buckingham, where the south
front (1771-9) (p. 935A) was a remodelling from the designs of Robert Adam,
carried out by J. B. Borra and others. The grounds of Stowe, where the famous
‘Capability’ Brown first developed his art as a landscape gardener, are exceedingly
rich in garden temples and other ornamental buildings, variously by Sir John
Vanbrugh, James Gibbs, William Kent and Giacomo Leoni, who each contributed
a number. Ornamental garden buildings, including bridges, arches, grottoes and
the like, were normal embellishments of the grounds of eighteenth-century man-
sions of whatever type (pp. 902D-F, 929A, 935D, 980D, G). The Garden House,
Poundisford Park (c. 1675) (p. 927C) near Taunton, Somerset, is an earlier homely
and pleasing example.
(6) The simple block plan. This type of plan was very generally employed for
eighteenth-century houses both in town and country, in which the hall and staircase
occupy the centre, while the rooms are compactly disposed on either side. It was
developed from the square or oblong block of the previous period as in the Queen’s
House, Greenwich (p. 901E), Chevening (p. 966H), Coleshill (p. 966c) and
Thorpe Hall (p. 966M). In the same succession is the simple Moot House, Down-
ton (1650, remodelled 1720) (p. 941A), with brick walls, stone quoins, pedimented
central feature, sash windows and wooden cornice, crowned with a hipped roof.
Early eighteenth-century examples built as a whole are Eagle House, Mitcham,
Surrey (c. 1700) (p. 941B); Mompasson House, Salisbury (1701) (pp. 941C, 966A,
971B,L) and Fenton House, Hampstead (p. 966D).S wan House, Chichester (1711)
(p. 940A) is characteristic of the smaller Georgian houses of the middle classes, with
a basement for kitchen, stores and servants’ quarters. Such eighteenth-century
houses sometimes have stone but usually brick walling of neat, fine-jointed brick-
work in Flemish bond, which universally replaces English bond except in certain
parts of the north. Projecting angle quoins of stone or brick tend to disappear, but
frequently are substituted by flush quoins in brickwork of a second colour. Sym-
metrically disposed sash windows, at first with heavy sash-bars, are normal for all
but cottages, where casements often are retained, and there are columned or
architecturally enframed doorways, bold crowning cornices, dormered and hipped
roofs of which the pitch grows more flat as thin slates come into general use, and
large chimney stacks, which continue for some time to be a feature of the more
ostentatious designs. The type lingered on for many decades, with only moderate
938 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

changes of external detail, which nevertheless is regularly significant of the passage

of time, while there were similar progressive developments in internal planning.
Every old provincial town furnishes examples of these quiet and dignified houses,
often now occupied by professional men. Innovations of whatever character took
time to pass down from the more opulent houses to the smallest, so that a lapse of
more than twenty-five years might occur in the process.
Flint Cottage, near Box Hill, Surrey (p. 934c) is a typical example of the
smallest type of house above the cottage scale, of an almost standard character
found in all parts of the country.
Turning again to the principal houses, source of the innovations which deter-
mined the trend of development of the lesser dwellings just referred to, we find the
Palladian movement affecting the compact type in the earlier part of the century.
Mereworth Castle, Kent (c. 1722-5) (pp. 936A, 966G), by Colin Campbell, is
based very closely on the Villa Capra at Vicenza (p. 742), by Palladio, whose pre-
cepts the English Palladian followed with slavish zeal. The elevations are the same
on all four fronts, and the principal apartments are ranged around a great circular
hall, 35 ft in diameter, crowned by a dome which commands the whole composition.
Chimney flues ascend the shell of the dome, and meagre circular windows afford
the only natural light which the hall receives. The kitchen and offices are in the
basement, which is only partially below ground. Two separate pavilions flank the
main entrance front, the one containing bedrooms and the other stables.
Chiswick House, Chiswick (1725-) (p. 936B), by Lord Burlington and William
Kent, is a second and better version of the Villa Capra, Vicenza, having again the
raised ‘podium’ sustaining the principal apartments, these ranged around a high,
domed hall, the dome being octagonal and having arched windows in the drum.
This type of plan is not well suited to the English climate, but was also followed in
Nuthall Temple, Notts, a house designed by Thomas Wright in 1754 (demolished
1923). Chiswick House has only one grand portico and impressive flights of en-
trance steps.
Wrotham Park, South Mimms, Middlesex (c. 1754) by Isaac Ware, and
Spencer House, London (1756-65) by John Vardy, are later and less extreme
examples of the English Palladian style.
The Casino at Marino, near Dublin (p. 970E) designed by Sir William Cham-
bers in 1759 and built in 1769, is a dwelling in miniature, neatly contained in a
Greek-cross plan. The design was originally intended for an end pavilion at Hare-
wood House, Yorkshire, and is a fine early example of the Antiquarian phase.
From mid-century onwards, a small but increasing proportion of houses show
departures from the compact rectilinear plan, being looser or even asymmetrical,
particularly those which ape non-Classical models. Strawberry Hill, Twicken-
ham (p. 9444), ‘Gothick’ plaything of Horace Walpole (p. 875), an accretion from
1747-1776 in which a number of designers had a hand, is of this class, as also is a
hall (1753-5) at Lacock Abbey, Wilts, by Sanderson Millar, another instance of
flimsy Gothic.
Syon House, Isleworth, Middlesex, a square-planned Jacobean house re-
modelled 1762-9 by Robert Adam, affords some of the finest instances of his methods
of interior decoration (p. 942A, B), while Osterley Park, Middlesex (p. 942¢), a
similar remodelling (1761-80) by the brothers Adam, and Luton Hoo, Beds (1768-
75), wholly built by Robert but reconstructed in later times, are other examples of
Adam domestic works. Later houses of the same class include Althorp, Northants
(p. 944C), reconstructed internally and cased externally (1787-9) in white ‘mathe-
matical tiles’ (these are brick-tiles nailed to timber, brick, stone or flint walls
through a flange which is hidden when the tiles are mortared into position, giving a
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 030

KIEDILIES TON HALL ° DERBY SHURE

le]
(O}

io}
Ly
1}

So

100-10. 2050:49 50 69 70 89 90_!190 FE

One -5ilOMMI DSN 20N0 25 eSOIM=

PRIVATE. WING (Dian KITCH EN WING

FL mas

tit a ame,
(E)SECTION ana
 940 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

De
e~—se
l
came w

rSoo
mT

_|
a |. =
| (ita Te (==

at oe ee Mee

HOUSE: CHICHESTER

(®) =
STONE VASE
WREST PARK:BEDS.

“ld
mii, 4
1 raat HN
ScELanaeh |
4 Lemeiae'S | ee
:
ayn
rom Ly
DO _
FE) RAYNHDOOR WAY
wapavesnetnnr erHILL: LOND.’ SUNDIAL: wrest:BeDs AM HALL:NORFOLK
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 941

A. The Moot House, Downton, B. Eagle House, Mitcham, Surrey

Wilts (1650; remodelled 1720). (c. 1700). See p. 937
See p. 937

c. Mompasson House, Salisbury (1701). See p. 937

942 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

A. Ante-room to hall B. Long gallery

Syon House, Middlesex (1762-9). See p. 938

c. Osterley Park, Middlesex (c. 1575; remodelled 1761-80). See p. 938

 aa Z oO 4 nq a jes) Zz < n na < Z O jaa)

ye

A. Home House, 20, Portman Sq., London music room (1775-7). See p. 949
Cy
ee

B. Heveningham Hall, Suffolk: saloon (1788-99). See p. 948

 944 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

c. Althorp, Northants: house recased in

white brick-tile (1787-9). See p. 938

B. Ashridge Park, Herts (1803-13): hall p. Cronkhill, Salop (c. 1802).

and staircase. See p. 948 See p. 948
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 945

A. Fonthill Abbey, Wiltshire (1796-1807). See p. 948

B. Culzean Castle, Ayrshire (1777-90). See p. 948

946 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

A. Bath, Somerset: aerial view showing Circus and Royal Crescent (1754-75).
See pp. 874, 948

B. The Mansion House, London (1739-52). See p. 948

 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 947

ane Museum, London B. Cumberland Terrace, Regent’s Park, London (c. 1827).
1812-13). See p. 949 See p. 949

, Ely House, London D. Royal Pavilion, Brighton (1815-21): centre part of E. front.
(c. 1772). See p. 948 See p. 948
948 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

very convincing cheap imitation of brickwork), by Henry Holland; Heveningham

Hall, Suffolk (1778-99), begun by Sir Robert Taylor and completed after his
death by James Wyatt, which shows Wyatt’s interior decoration at its best (p. 943B)
and as being very similar to that of Adam; Dodington Park, Glos (1798-1808),
by James Wyatt, designed in a style tinctured with the Greek, then coming into
popular favour; and Stratton Park, Hants, comprehensively remodelled in 1803-6
by George Dance II, wholly in Greek Revival mode.
Meanwhile there were further stages of advance towards the Gothic Revival, in
houses often less compact in plan than those of Classical design, or even deliberately
irregular. Such are Downton Castle, Shropshire (1774-8), by Richard Payne
Knight, forerunner of the Picturesque movement which affected all styles from
about twenty years later; Culzean Castle, Ayrshire (1777-90) (p. 945B) a massive
symmetrical structure by Robert Adam; Luscombe Castle, Devonshire (1800-4),
by John Nash, of more intimate and varied character; and Lowther Castle, West-
morland (1806-11), by Sir Robert Smirke, all in towered, castellated Gothic, a
type of design which remained popular for country houses for several decades after
1790. More ornate, yet a definite improvement upon Strawberry Hill, were Lee
Priory, Kent (1783-90); Fonthill Abbey, Wilts (1796-1807) (p. 945A), a brilliantly
romantic pile of cruciform plan with wide-flung arms, but so flimsily constructed
that the central tower, 278 ft high, collapsed in 1807; and Ashridge Park, Herts
(1803-13) (p. 944C), all three from the designs of James Wyatt. Eaton Hall,
Cheshire (1804-12, remodelled 1870), by William Porden, was a remarkably
elaborate and spiky version of the Gothic, with traceried windows, ornamental
battlements, and pinnacled buttresses and angle turrets. Extraordinarily decorative
were two mansions in ‘Indian’ style, Sezincote House, Glos (c. 1803-15) by S. P.
Cockerell and the Royal Pavilion, Brighton (1815-21) (p. 947D), an extensive re-
modelling by John Nash, with wonderfully rich interior decorations of a Chinese
character eked out with Gothic. John Nash also was largely instrumental in bring-
ing sophistication to cottage architecture, and in developing the Picturesque
manner in urban and suburban villas, variously using the vernacular, Gothic or
Italianate styles. Cronkhill, Salop (c. 1802) (p.944D), is an instance of the last.

GEORGIAN TOWN HOUwuSES

Restrictions of site did not usually permit the town house to have the extended
treatment practicable in the country, and though circumstances sometimes allowed
them to be freestanding, the house confined between others was now the most
common.
Among town houses of Palladian character, the Mansion House, London
(1739-52) (p. 946B), by George Dance I, is exceptional in that it was built as a
mayoral residence to be occupied during terms of office, and thus has the qualities
of a public building. No. 44, Berkeley Square, London (1742-4), by William
Kent, a terrace house, developed in depth, is more representative. The idea of
organizing terrace houses in palatial or unified schemes became widespread at this
time. The Woods, father and son, created their splendid frontages at Bath (p. 946A);
Queen Square, north side (1729-), South Parade (1743-) and the famous Circus
(1754-) by John Wood I, and the Royal Crescent (1767-75) by John Wood II.
The Crescent, Buxton, Derbyshire (1779-81), by John Carr of York, followed
the Woods’ inspiration. Palladianism continued to be popular for town houses well
into the second half of the century. Chesterfield House, South Audley Street,
London (1766, demolished 1937), by Isaac Ware, and Ely House, Dover Street,
London (1772) (p. 947C), by Sir Robert Taylor, with its well-contrived and digni-
fied front, are instances.
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 949
The Antiquarian phase is represented by many fine houses, including a number
in London by Robert Adam: Lansdowne House, Berkeley Square (1762-8, now
altered), No. 20, S. James’s Square (1772-4), Apsley House, Piccadilly (c. 1775,
also altered) and Home House, No. 20, Portman Square (1775-7; now the Court-
auld Institute) with some splendid interior decoration (p. 943A). Adam also carried
out a considerable venture at the Adelphi, London (1768-72), a speculative under-
taking which failed and of which very little now is left, and a scheme for Charlotte
Square, Edinburgh (1791, built 1792-1807). Henry Holland developed Hans
Town, Chelsea (1771-), covering a number of streets, but of which only a house or
two remain, and built individual houses such as Carlton House, Pall Mall, Lon-
don (1783-5, demolished 1827) and Dover House, Whitehall (1787). No. 13,
Lincoln’s Inn Fields (1812-13) (p. 947A), by Sir John Soane, is now the Soane
Museum, housing a collection of drawings, antiquities and works of art which he
left to the nation. The most extensive work of the whole career of the prolific John
Nash was his grand scheme of civic design for frontages extending through Regent
St., London, to Regent’s Park. The Quadrant, Regent Street (1818-20) was re-
built between 1906-23, but much remains of the terraces of houses (1821-30) facing
the Park, one of the best being Cumberland Terrace (c. 1827) (p. 947B).

GEORGIAN CHURCHES
A number of churches of this period were designed by followers of Wren, whose
influence was paramount, with central space and surrounding galleries, suitable for
the preaching requirements of the Protestant faith. The first to be noted are several
having a character as nearly approaching the Baroque as was ever achieved in
ecclesiastical architecture in Renaissance England.
S. Mary Woolnoth, London (1716-26) (p. 951A), by Nicholas Hawksmoor,
who had been assistant both to Wren and Vanbrugh, is remarkable for its fortress-
like rusticated fagade and curious oblong tower with Composite columns sur-
mounted by two low turrets, forming a very original treatment. It was one of six
built by him under the Act of 1711 for the erection of fifty new churches (only a
dozen materialized), others of his being S. Alphege, Greenwich (1712-14, later
steeple); S. Anne, Limehouse (1712-14, restored 1851) (p. 951D); S. George-in-
the-East (1715-23, gutted 1941); S. George, Bloomsbury (1720-30) (p. 9518),
with a pyramidal spire; and Christ Church, Spitalfields (1723-9) (p. 951C), having a
lofty and unusual steeple. S. Philip, Birmingham (1709-25) (p. 952A), now the
Cathedral, instances the strong Baroque leanings of its gifted designer, Thomas
Archer. The much-weathered western tower, with its concave sides, is unique in the
country. A chancel was added in 1883-4. Similar though less pungent qualities are
observable in two of the ‘fifty churches’ by Archer; S. Paul, Deptford (1712-30), a
compact, centralized structure with a western spire and a columned semicircular
porch embracing its base, and S. John, Westminster (1714-28, gutted 1742 and
again in 1941), a less attractive composition. The influence of Archer was traceable
in S. Paul, Sheffield (1720-1, demolished 1937), by John Platt I, an attractive com-
position with a western tower completed by a nephew, John Platt II, in 1769.
S. Mary-le-Strand, London (1714-17) (p. 952B), by James Gibbs, another of
the ‘fifty churches’, shows evidence of his studies in Rome, where he had been a
pupil of Carlo Fontana (pp. 726, 873), but although it is florid it is not of thorough-
paced Baroque character. Situated conspicuously on an island site in the Strand, it
is notable for its fine general proportions, with facades of superimposed Ionic and
Corinthian Orders, a semicircular portico and storeyed western steeple, oblong on
lan.
: S. George, Hanover Square, London (1712-25) (p. 952C), by John James, yet
950 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

another of the ‘fifty churches’, is progressive in many ways while being massive
and indecisively Baroque in external character. Its ponderous Corinthian portico,
70 ft long, serves as a shelter in connection with the numerous weddings solemnized
within. Here for the first time is found a steeple rising from the roof, without
apparent support from the ground. S. Martin-in-the-Fields, London (1722-6)
(p. 952D), by James Gibbs, shows the developing mature manner of the architect
after he had tempered his Baroque inclinations and adopted a more orthodox style,
based on the characteristic work of Wren yet paying deference to current English-
Palladian trends. Here, all the rich architectural features are a logical expression of
the plan. A straightforward rectangular building, roofed from end to end, it has a
great Corinthian portico approached by a broad flight of steps and a western steeple
of singular beauty. Gibbs also designed (1719-20) the upper part of the steeple of
Wren’s S. Clement Danes (p. 914).
S. Giles-in-the-Fields, London (1731-4), is by Henry Flitcroft, protégé of Lord
Burlington, the architect being both designer and contractor for the building. It
is an impoverished version of S. Martin in the Fields, except that its steeple is at the
side and not on the axis at the west.
Mistley Church, Essex (1776, demolished 1870 except for its twin east and
west towers) (p. 953A), by Robert Adam, was one of the remarkably few wholly new
churches built in the latter part of the century. Expressed in typical Adam manner,
it had a quite unorthodox composition with balancing towers at east and west ends
and an axial southern Doric-columned entrance portico.
Other churches about this time were All Hallow-on-the-wall, London (1765-7),
by George Dance II, having admirable internal detail; All Saints, Newcastle-
upon-Tyne (—1796), by David Stephenson (b. 1757) and S. Chad, Shrewsbury
(1790-2) (p. 953C), by George Stewart (d. 1806), the latter two with circular naves
aid storeyed western towers.
Tetbury Church, Gloucestershire (rebuilt 1777-81, except steeple) (p. 953B),
by Francis Hiorne, is one of the precursors of the Gothic Revival. The nave is dull
externally but internally amazingly light and delicate, with slender piers of lapping
timbers which carry nothing but a timber shell-vault, for the roof is supported from
the side walls.
S. George, Liverpool (1812-14), by Thomas Rickman is the earliest of about
forty-seven churches built by this influential author-architect, all in the provinces
and all but three being in the revived Gothic style. Here, as in other cases, he used
cast iron extensively for the structural and decorative elements.
S. Marylebone Parish Church, London (1813-18) (p. 954A), by Thomas
Hardwick, was the first London church of importance in the new century. A dig-
nified hexastyle pedimented portico, said to be ‘after the Pantheon’, fronts a
transverse vestibule and stair block carrying a double-tiered, domed spire over a
rusticated base. Inside are galleries carried on cast-iron pillars, and there are two
vestries set angle-wise to frame the altar, behind which is a mahogany reredos
screen, ornamented with Ionic pilasters, carrying the organ. Originally there were
private galleries at the sides of the organ, fitted with fireplaces, but these were
altered to normal open galleries in 1826.
S. Pancras, London (1819-22) (p. 9548), by William Inwood and his father.
H. W. Inwood, is the best-known example of the Greek Revival, a fine design based
very closely upon the Erechtheion at Athens (p. 133). It has a hexastyle portico,
vestries resembling the Caryatid porch and an axial western steeple which is a
two-storeyed version of the Tower of the Winds, Athens (p. 140). By the same
architects is the less-striking All Saints, Camden Town (1822-4), also in Greek
Revival style.
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 951

A. S. Mary Woolnoth, London B. S. George, Bloomsbury, London

(1716-26). See p. 949 (1720-30). See p. 949

C. Chick Church, Spitalfields, (1723-9). p. S. Anne, Limehouse

See p. 949 (1712-14). See p. 949
 952 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

A. S. Philip, Birmingham (1709-25). B. S. Mary-le-Strand, London

See p. 949 (1714-17). See p. 949

c. S. George, Hanover Square, London D. S. Martin-in-the-Fields, London

(1712-25). See p. 949 (1722-6). See p. 950
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 9538

A. Mistley Church, Essex (1776, partly demolished 1870). From an old photograph.
See p. 950

B. Tetbury Church, Glos. (1777-81). c. S. Chad, Shrewsbury (1790-2).

See p. 950 See p. 950
 954 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

A. S. Marylebone Parish Church, B. S. Pancras, London (1819-22).

London (1813-18). See p. 950 See p. 950

c. S. Luke, Chelsea (1820-4). D. S. Dunstan-in-the-West, London

See p. 955 (1831-3). See p. 955
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 955
All Souls, Langham Place, London (1822-5), by John Nash, is one of about
230 churches built under the Church Building Act of 1818, devoting one million
pounds to providing churches to serve the new populations of expanding towns. It
is a simple Bath stone box, of Classical design, elaborated by a western circular
Ionic portico from which springs a sharp conical spire, itself having a ring of Corin-
thian columns at its base, concentric with the portico below but of a reduced
diameter.
S. George, Camberwell (1822-4), by Francis Bedford, and S. Mark, Kenning-
ton (1822-4), by D. R. Roper assisted by A. B. Clayton, are typical churches built
for the Commissioners administering the Act of 1818, here expressed in the Greek
Revival style, which was strongly favoured in the London area in the years 1821-7,
but rarely used thereafter; they are simple rectangular boxes with western, Doric,
porticoes and axial, storeyed western towers riding the ridge, over the vestibule.
S. Mary, Wyndham Place, London (1822-4, remodelled internally 1874), by
Sir Robert Smirke, has a semicircular columned Ionic portico in a sober Classical
style, like the same architect’s S. Philip, Salford, Lancashire (1822-5, altered
1895).
S. Luke, Chelsea (1820-4) (p. 954c), by James Savage, is the earliest—and one
of the best—Commnissioner churches in London in the Gothic Revival style, having
a nave and aisles forming the usual plain rectangular composition and with an axial
tower which here visually reaches the ground to contain the principal portal of the
western entrance porch. It is unusual for its class in having vaults over the nave,
with flying buttresses spanning the aisles. Holy Trinity, Bordesley, Birmingham
(1820-3), by Francis Goodwin, is a provincial example without a tower.
S. Dunstan-in-the-West, Fleet Street, London (1831-3) (p. 954D), by John
Shaw I and his son, John Shaw II, not a Commissioner church, shows a fine treat-
ment of a town church with a steeple in imitation of ‘Boston Stump’.

GEORGIAN PUBLIC BUILDINGS

Civic, social, government, and collegiate requirements had all to be provided for
during this period. Town Halls arose, as at Liverpool (1748-55), by John Wood
and son of Bath, at Monmouth, where the Shire Hall (1724) (p. 927E) is a well-
balanced building, and at Salisbury, where the Council House (1788-95) is from
the designs of Sir Robert Taylor though executed after his death by his pupil W.
Pilkington; Exchanges, as at Rochester (1766) (p. 957A), Bristol (1741-3), by John
Wood I, and Liverpool (1749-95), also by John Wood I but burned and rebuilt
(1795-1802) by John Foster, a portico being added in 1811; Law Courts, as the
‘Four Courts’, Dublin (1776-1802, damaged 1922) (p. 957B), by Thomas Cooley
and James Gandon; Custom Houses, as in London (1813-17) (p. 957D), by David
Laing, partly rebuilt by Sir Robert Smirke in 1825, and Dublin (1781-91, damaged
1921) (p. 957E), by James Gandon; Prisons, such as Newgate (1770-8, demolished
1902) (p. 958D), by George Dance II; Hospitals, such as S. Bartholomew’s (1730-,
gateway of 1702 by E. Strong), by James Gibbs, S. Luke’s Hospital (1782-4), by
George Dance II. Many Banks were erected in this period throughout the country.
The Bank of England, London (1788-1833), by Sir John Soane, is unique by
reason of its windowless facades in which he employed the Corinthian Order as
used for the Temple at Tivoli (p. 194), while he obtained light and shade by
columned recesses. It was reconstructed (1930-40) by Sir Herbert Baker, rising to
a much greater height than formerly, though within the original shell of Soane’s
facades.
The Banking House, No. 70, Lombard St., London (c. 1756), later the
Pelican Life Assurance Office, now demolished, was a scholarly building.
956 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

The Butter Markets, Barnard Castle (1747) (p. 927B), Bungay (1789) (p. 927D);
and Ludlow, are examples of the civic buildings on a smaller scale which abound
throughout the country towns, and show the full corporate and commercial life of
the period.
Clubs and similar social institutions developed greatly in the period, particularly
in the latter part. The Assembly Rooms, York (1731-2) (p. 958c), by Lord
Burlington, is a fine example of Anglo-Palladian art; the entrance front was re-
modelled in 1828 by J. P. Pritchett and W. Watson. Clubs were developed from
coffee-houses, which originally were almost indistinguishable from private houses.
Examples in London are Almack’s Club, S. James’s (1764-5, demolished 1863), by
Robert Mylne; Boodle’s Club (1775) (p. 957C), by John Crunden; the Royal
Society of Arts (1772-4), by Robert Adam; Brooks’s Club (1776-8), by Henry
Holland; the ‘Pantheon’, Oxford St. (1770-2), by James Wyatt, a famous fashion-
able resort, eventually demolished (c. 1936) after much reconstruction and change
of function; United University Club (1822-6, demolished 1902), by William
Wilkins and J. P. Deering; United Service Club (1827, altered later), by John Nash;
Athenaeum Club (1827-30, attic 1899), by Decimus Burton; and the Travellers’
Club (1829-31), by Sir Charles Barry (p. 1019), which, as it heralded a Renaissance
Revival in England, may best be considered in the following chapter. Barry was also
the architect of the Royal Manchester Institution of Fine Arts building (1824-35),
now the City Art Gallery, a notable instance of the Greek Revival (p. 1021E). Clubs
multiplied in all cities and large towns.
Theatres were liable to rapid change, often due to fire, as Covent Garden, Lon-
don (1732), by E. Shepherd, reconstructed (1792) by Henry Holland, rebuilt after a
fire (1809-10) by Robert Smirke and A. Copland, and again rebuilt after fire (1857-
8) by E. M. Barry; also Drury Lane theatre, London (1672-4), by Wren, refronted
(1775-6) by Robert Adam, rebuilt (1791-4) by Henry Holland, rebuilt after fire
(1811-12) by B. D. Wyatt, altered (1822) by Samuel Beazley. Beazley (1786-1851)
was responsible for much other theatre building in London, and theatres at Bir-
mingham (Royal, 1820), Dublin (Royal, 1821, burned 1880), Leamington (Royal
Music Hall, 1821) and abroad in South America, Belgium and India.
Hospitals and Almshouses still continued to reflect the wishes of the pious
founders, as we have seen in Morden College, Blackheath (1694) (p. 928). Many
of these buildings date from the seventeenth century, and amongst them may be
mentioned Smyth’s Almhouses, Lewisham (1664), Bromley College, Kent (1666),
Corsham Almshouses (1668), College of Matrons, Salisbury (1682) (p. 9585),
Trinity Almshouses, Mile End, London (1695), Trinity Almshouses, Salisbury
(1702), Fishmongers’ Almshouses, Yarmouth (1702), and Somerset Hospital,
Petworth (1748).
Government Buildings of the period in London include the Old Admiralty,
Whitehall (1723-6), by Thomas Ripley, and its enclosing street screen (1759-61),
by Robert Adam; the Treasury Buildings (facade to S. James’s Park) (1734-6), and
Horse Guards (1750-8) (p. 958A), from designs by Kent. The Register House,
Edinburgh (1774-92), is by Robert Adam.
Somerset House, London (1776-86, east and west wings completed 1834 and
1856) (p. 960A), by Sir William Chambers, is a grand and dignified building,
with a river facade, 600 ft long, in which rusticated walls carry a Corinthian Order
rising through two stories, pleasingly relieved by colonnades which emphasize the
open courts.
The British Museum, London (1823-47) (p. 962D) by Sir Robert Smirke, con-
tinued in building into the Victorian era. Its southern front has an octastyle pedi-
mented portico and projecting wings, around which the portico is continued.
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 957

. Corn Exchange, Rochester B. ‘Four Courts’, Dublin (1776-1802).

(1766). See p. 955 See p. 955

RS

c. Boodle’s Club, London D. The Custom House, London (1813-17).

(1775-6). See p. 956 See p. 955

o e
% RAL agate A be ”

E. The Custom House, Dublin (1781-91). See p. 955

 958 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

———— 4 ‘i See
B. Collegeof Matrons, Salisbury(1682). c. Assembly Rooms, York (1731-2).
See p. 956 See p. 956

D. Newgate Prison, London (1770-8, demolished 1902). See p. 955

 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 959

asel

A. Radcliffe Library, Oxford (1737-49). B. Queen’s College, Oxford

See p. 963 (1709-38): gateway. See p. 963

ae : REFERENCE
| TABLE
| LIBRARY: 1694
PALS Noe
5 cHapeut Hee}
4. PROVOSTS
LODGING
5, OLD BREWHOUSE

Ee
SER SS

c. Queen’s College, Oxford (1709-38): Library by Wren (1693-6). See p. 963

960 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

Cala
‘cuisine

Bw
Samest
Mme

So RRs

A. Somerset House, London (1776-86): north side of quadrangle (top),

and waterfront. See p. 956

B. Senate House, Cambridge (1722-30). See p. 963

 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 961

B. University College, London (1827-8). See p. 963

 962 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

A. Radcliffe Observatory, Oxford B. The Old University Library, Cambridge

(1772-94). See p. 963 (1754-8). See p. 963

—
c. Guildhall, Worcester D. The British Museum (1823-47).
(1721-3). See p. 964 See p. 956

E. Triple Archway, Hyde Park Corner, London (c. 1825). See p. 963
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 963

The massive and impressive scale of the Greek Ionic Order is impaired by over-
reiteration of the columns. The domed reading room, 140 ft in diameter, was
added (1854-7) by Sydney Smirke. The General Post Office (1824-9), by the same
architect, also a Greek Revival building in the Ionic Order, was demolished in 1912.
The National Gallery, London (1834-8) (p. 961A), by William Wilkins, occu-
pies a magnificent position in Trafalgar Square, which it fails to command, in spite
of its excellent detail. Its southern facade is much broken into pavilions and parts,
which insufficiently subscribe to the central octastyle Corinthian portico, pedi-
mented and crowned with an inadequate dome, while the principal floor is raised
upon a high podium, which appears to diminish the effective height.
Ornamental buildings in London include the Marble Arch (c. 1825), by John
Nash, built to front the architect’s half-realized scheme for Buckingham Palace, and
moved to its present position at the north-east corner of Hyde Park in 1847. Also
connected with the scheme for Buckingham Palace was the arch on Constitution
Hill (1828), a composition by Decimus Burton similar to the Arch of Titus, Rome
(p. 222), in the Composite Order. It is not now in its original position, its alignment
having been changed in 1883 from one axial with the nearby magnificent Ionic
screen at Hyde Park south-east corner (c. 1825) (p. 962E), a Greek Revival master-
piece which Decimus Burton had intended to be a complementary feature.
Collegiate buildings received many important additions, and numerous
effective examples of the period are to be seen in the universities.
The Radcliffe Library, Oxford (1737-49) (pp. 475A; 959A), by J. Gibbs—
probably his finest work—is monumental in character, with a rusticated sixteen-
sided ground storey, having alternately pedimented arch openings and niches,
while the upper portion is circular, 100 ft in diam., with two storeys of windows and
niches included in one Order of coupled Corinthian columns, supporting entabla-
ture and balustrade, behind which a high drum with eight buttresses supports the
lead-covered dome.
Queen’s College, Oxford (1709-38) (pp. 475A; 959B), by Nicholas Hawksmoor,
a pupil of Wren, is a fine example of a late Renaissance college with its quadrangle,
hall, and chapel, and the library designed by Wren (p. 922) with a dignified Order.
The gateway (p. 959B, C) is an effective composition with an archway flanked by
Tuscan columns and entablature, surmounted by an open cupola, enclosing a statue
of Queen Caroline.
The Clarendon Building, Oxford (1712-15) (p. 475A), by Hawksmoor, is a
pleasing structure with a fine Doric portico.
The Senate House, Cambridge (1722-30) (pp. 475B, 960B), is by James Gibbs.
Two storeys are included in a single Order of Corinthian pilasters, coupled at ends,
and centre-piece of four half-columns surmounted by a sculptured pediment,
flanked by balustrades, while the sash windows of the ground storey are headed by
alternately triangular and segmental pediments, the upper windows being round-
headed. The whole has a unity of composition and is rich yet reposeful in effect.
Among collegiate buildings of this period may be mentioned: at Oxford (p. 475A),
Worcester College (planned c. 1720, Hawksmoor participating), the Radcliffe
Observatory (1772-94) (p. 962A), by Henry Keene and James Wyatt, and the North
Quadrangle, All Souls College (1715-40), by Hawksmoor. At Cambridge (p. 475B),
the Old University Library (1754-8) (p. 9628), by Stephen Wright, and Downing
College (1807-20), an early instance of the Greek Revival by Wilkins. Trinity Col-
lege, Dublin (1752-98), was altered by Chambers, and Edinburgh University
(1789-91) is substantially by Robert Adam, completed (1815-34) by W. H. Playfair.
University College, London (1827-8) (p. 9618), by William Wilkins, assisted by
J. P. Deering, is a fine Greek Revival design with an axial Corinthian portico with
2H HeOwA.
964 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

dome over (destroyed 1941, rebuilt 1950), elevated on a high podium and approached
by grand flights of steps.
The Guildhall, Worcester (1721-3) (p. 962C), by Thos. White, is a fine civic
example, while the Guildhall, High Wycombe (1757) by Henry Keene, is an
interesting building of which there are many in English country towns by provincial
architects whose names and works are now becoming more generally known.
Bridges of architectural character, as Pulteney Bridge, Bath (1769-74), by Robert
Adam; Richmond Bridge (1774-7) and Kew Bridge (1783-9, rebuilt 1903), both
designed by James Paine, now joined up the busy districts on either side of the
Thames and other bridges of this period are at Chertsey and Walton. Waterloo
Bridge (1811-17, demolished 1938), designed by John Rennie, showed the in-
fluence of the Greek Revival.
The bridge at Coalbrookdale, Shropshire (1777-9), designed by T. F. Pritchard,
spanning about 100 ft, was the first cast-iron bridge built in England, and very
many bridges of iron and stone were built in connection with road and canal
developments (and for railways, after the opening of the Stockton and Darlington
Railroad in 1825) by John Rennie (1761-1821), Thomas Telford (1757-1834), first
President of the Institution of Civil Engineers (1820), and others, as well as dock
and harbour works and warehouses. S. Katherine’s Docks, London (1827-8)
(p. 982), by Telford, is one of the best examples.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
(A comparative analysis of essential differences between Gothic and Renaissance
Architecture is given on p. 661.)
This comparative analysis covers Early Renaissance (Elizabethan and Jacobean)
and Late Renaissance (Stuart and Georgian), as tabulated, p. 868.

PLANS
Early Renaissance. House plans are often E- or H-shaped (p. 965) with central
entrance and two side wings, as at Montacute (p. 965B), Bramshill (p. 965G), Aston
Hall (p. 965H), Hatfield (p. 965F), and Audley End. Plans are sometimes quad-
rangular, as at Burghley (p. 965A), Longleat (p. 965D), Wollaton (pp. 883A, 965C),
and Castle Ashby (p. 880D). Occasionally plans are of a fanciful shape, as at Long-
ford Castle (p. 965E). Hardwick Hall (p. 880B) is a rectangular block with large
projecting bays. Such buildings as Knole, Penshurst (p. 449E), and Haddon (p.
449) are of irregular plan, and are additions to previous Gothic houses. Internal
courts for lighting are sometimes employed, as at Blickling (p. 965J) and Chastleton
House, Oxfordshire. Characteristic features are the great hall (p. 8878), broad
staircase (pp. 879C, 975B, C), and long gallery (p. 884A, B). Broad terraces with balus-
trades (p. 969D, F) raised above the garden level and wide flights of steps are
charming features; while the gardens were often laid out in a formal manner, as at
Holland House (p. 892A), Montacute, Longford, Blickling (p. 883B), and Hatfield
(p. 890B).
Late Renaissance. Plans are now marked by regularity and even by exaggerated
symmetry, which aimed at uniting the various parts in an imposing facade (p. 966).
The square type of plan sometimes had a central saloon, as at the Queen’s House,
Greenwich (pp. 900A, 9O0IE), and Chiswick House (p. 938), and Mereworth (p.
966G). The oblong type was usually divided into three, of which the centre third
was occupied by hall, saloon, and stairs, as at Chevening (p. 966H) and Coleshill
(p. 966C), or a broad cross-belt containing stairs divided the principal rooms, as at
Thorpe Hall (p. 966M) and Eltham (p. 9668). The Italian ‘piano nobile’ was adopted
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 965

BARLY RENAISSSAN
NCE, PLANS

(ELIZABETHHAN p JACOBEAN)
Lea
SERRE |
ENTRANCE

RM. [vs RM RM.

He
SOUTH. CORRIDOR

[Se =
; ‘ea Cae
4

cco
<-~~-157'.0°---* coe
MONTACUTE HOUSE”:
SOMERSET

: . ee Soe a? ORD

LONGLEAT ENTRANCE
=sTHOUSE. WILTS CASTLE WILTS
GRAND §SUMMER WINTER
MARBLE HALL DRAWIN | [DINING PART
stairs RM: IP eH Ch FOF HALL
GA LLERY
ee 1 = Saptgs
f fMORNING
bt RM.

[iT GROUND PLAN

HATFIELD ©) HERTS
<---LONG GALLERY OVER- -- > ---~ LONG GALLERY OVER-—~ - > MOAT TOWER

eres 4
SMALL

aL, fe

TERRACE

FORECOURT

Gl 0'-->4
13 3
§&---130 (H) LODGE:

ASTON HALL: warWICkSHIRE MOAT if

Kent P| sua
50 50 100 ISOF! W

BRAMSHILL: HANTS erie 0 20

re
30 40MTS “BLICKLING HALL: NorFOLK
 966 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

LATE RENAISSANCE PLAN i)

(STUART & GEORGIAN)
— CHAPEL
a a
DINING = all: ots Rlze

}—-- | =a FENTON
| HW HOUSE: HAMPSTEAD
SALISBURY COLESHILL
B, BELTON HOUSE BERKSHIRE
GRANTHAM

jae
|” BED lave BED= k
iy 4 [Re .

LA \
GROUND FLOOR PLAN | |
| = —l
ELTHAM es MEREWORTH CASTL
HOUSE? KENT (F )eroomsripce PLACE: KENT ron KEN

FUP RAWHE CAL QON JURAW=8 15 aeom

= Nie
7 aN :
q VISITORS WING
RM ‘ =

ae MRE PSHE Te
em MORDEN COLLEGE
ING PLACE:KENT HOLKHAM on NORFOLK (K) BLACKHEATH
————_ ——— ~ —<—___—____—_

? KITCHEN

10 10 20 30 40 MEBs
SCALE FOR ALL PLANS

“ENTRANCE ~
me COURTH NN
(M) 2 TERRACE
LIBRARY ¢</PORCH PORCH||> CHAPEL
THORPE HALL
NORTHANTS (Ne PARK :NORTHANTS
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 967
for many country houses (pp. 903E, 929A, E, 930A, D, 939A, B) with basement, not
necessarily below ground, for cellarage and kitchen offices, while the principal
rooms are approached either by a great external staircase with a portico (pp. 903,
929A; E, 930A, D, 939A) or by an internal stair from the basement. The larger houses
have quadrant colonnades to detached wings (pp. 929A, 930B, 933B, 939A, D, 966N).
Octagonal, circular, and elliptical-shaped apartments became increasingly com-
mon, but are not indicated externally (p. 966G, J, L, N). Staircases, as at Ashburn-
ham House (pp. 904A, 971J), well-designed, with stout newels, variously treated
balusters, and consoled step-ends (pp. 903D, 971L), are a most characteristic feature
of the period. Corridors gradually superseded the ‘thoroughfare’ system of planning
(p. 452), and added much to the convenience and privacy of houses. The Jacobean
gallery survived in a modified form, as at Castle Howard (p. 9298), Chatsworth,
Holkham (p. 966J), and Blenheim (p. 930B), while fine formal gardens are seen at
Hampton Court (p. 923A), Blenheim (p. 933A) and Harewood House (p. 936£).
Towards the close of the period informal domestic planning was attaining favour,
not only for Gothic Revival and other non-Classical designs (pp. 944A, 947D) but
also for certain of the Italianate ‘villas’ springing up around towns (p. 944D).

WALLS
Early Renaissance. Facades, both in brick and stone, are picturesque in character
and often marked by a free use of the Classic ‘Orders’ one above the other, as at
Hatfield (p. 891A), the Bodleian Library, Oxford (p. 895A), Kirby Hall (p. 888a),
and Holland House (p. 892A). Gables are often of scroll-work, due to foreign
influence, and their general outlines are governed by the roof-slope (pp. 888A, 892A),
while parapets are balustraded (p. 880A) or pierced with letters or characteristic pat-
terns (pp. 880C, 891A). Chimney stacks, either of cut brickwork or stone, follow
Tudor traditions; the shafts are carried up boldly above the roof and are sometimes
disguised as columns, as at Burghley (p. 969B) and Kirby (p. 888A), and owing to
their prominence on the skyline they play an important part in the design, thus
differentiating it from Italian and approximating it to French treatment. Walls were
frequently finished internally with panelling or wainscoting, with framing often
joined by a ‘mason’s mitre’ (see Glossary), in small divisions of uniform size, as at
Stockton House (p. 975A), Hatfield (p. 891B), Knole (p. 879c), Haddon (p. 884a),
Crewe Hall, and Sizergh.
Late Renaissance. Walls continued to be of stone, but in the less important build-
ings the prevalence of timber led to many disastrous fires in towns and villages (Fire
of London, 1666) and popularized the use of brickwork, e.g. Belton House (p. 903E)
and Groombridge Place (p. 907B). Wall angles were frequently emphasized by
raised blocks or quoins, as at Swan (Dodo) House (p. 940A), which in brick buildings
were often of stone (p. 941A), as also were the window architraves. The walls of
Georgian houses are often terminated with well-designed cornices in brick (p. 940A),
stone (p. 941C), or wood (pp. 941A, 971D, E), which, when painted white in conjunc-
tion with the window-frames, give pleasant relief to the facades, especially when of
red brickwork. Plain ashlar wall surfaces served to throw into relief the ornate stone-
work of porticoes and windows (pp. 901C, 935B): stucco, to simulate the effect of
stone, became prevalent after c. 1774 and especially in Regency times (p. 947B).
Pediments and hipped roofs take the place of gables (pp. 903E, 935B), and chimneys
are often hidden behind parapets, and thus the design approximates more in this
respect to Italian Renaissance. The panelling of internal walls now generally ex-
tended in houses from floor to ceiling, and the wall surface was divided into dado,
large panels, and moulded cornice, which gives a finished appearance and sense of
968 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

comfort, as at Belton House (p. 904c), the Orangery, Kensington (pp. 921D, 971K),
and the vestries of many city churches, as S. Lawrence Jewry (p. 921C).

OPENINGS
Early Renaissance. Arcades were introduced into the larger houses, such as Hat-
field (p. 891A), Bramshill (p. 969J), and Holland House, Kensington (p. 892A).
Doorways are always important features, as at S. Catherine’s Court (p. 969H), and
are sometimes elaborate in design, flanked by columns (pp. 888A, 891A, 895A, B) and
are an evidence of the hospitality of the times, which is expressed in the couplet at
Montacute House:

Through this wide opening gate

None come too early, none return too late.

Windows still resembled those of the Tudor period with vertical mullions, hori-
zontal transoms, and leaded glass (pp. 880A, 888A, C, 892A). They became flat-
headed instead of arched, to suit the level ceilings of dwelling-rooms. Projecting
oriel windows, as at Bramshill (pp. 893A, 969A), and bay-windows were also used
and give light and shade to facades, as at Hardwick Hall (p. 880A), Longleat, Holland
House (p. 892A), Hinchingbrooke Hall (p. 969c), and Kirby Hall (p. 8884).
Late Renaissance. Arcades, formed of columns of correct Classic proportions, are
familiar features of this period, especially in the larger mansions, such as Blenheim
(p. 930A) and Castle Howard (p. 929A). Arcades with superimposed Orders, under
the influence of Palladio, became systematized (p. 970K), as were also superimposed
colonnades (p. 970G), and various other combinations were used by Sir William
Chambers (p. 970D, F, J). Doorways became more formal in design, owing to the
influence of Palladio (p. 903E), and many treatments became standardized (pp. 970B,
980A, C). The doorways of Georgian houses are often special features of the facades,
showing variety of treatment, and are sometimes provided with shell hoods (pp.
940D, 971G). Gateways, frequently filled in with wrought-iron gates, are flanked
by well-proportioned piers of stone crowned with balls, sculptured figures, or
armorial bearings (pp. 902A, 940A), and rustication was frequently employed (p.
970A). Windows, although sometimes still following the Early Renaissance pattern,
commonly became smaller, mullions and transoms being used in a four-light
window arrangement of stone or wood such as that at Wolvesey Palace, Winchester
(p. 971H), until, about 1660, sash windows were introduced (pp. 903E, 940A), often
replacing the older four-light type in existing buildings. These sash windows, placed
almost flush with the outer face of the walls (p. 97IF), were painted white and form
a pleasant colour scheme when flanked by green shutters, which contrast with the
red brickwork commonly in use. The openings were surrounded by moulded archi-
traves and frequently surmounted by a pediment (pp. 899C, 936A, B), while larger
openings were often formed in three divisions, as in Italy (p. 741)—a treatment
much favoured by the Brothers Adam (pp. 957C, 970C, 980B). In later practice, as a
precaution against fire, sash windows often were set back behind a 43 ins reveal
(pp. 942C, 944D). Many old door and window types were unconvincingly revived in
the ‘Gothick’ of the Antiquarian phase (pp. 944A, 945A).

ROOFS
Early Renaissance. Steep sloping roofs, sometimes covered with tiles or stone
slabs, were still used (p. 893B), as well as flat lead-covered roofs, and sometimes
both occur together (pp. 880, 883A, 888A, 892A). Roofs were fronted with gables of
the Gothic type, as well as with low pediments of Classic origin, even in the same
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 969

a aE ine
\ nN +i
Y NE a a ‘

Wt a sd
BAY WINDOW
INCHINGBROOKE HALL

u =

D) BALUSTRADE. KINGSTON HOUSE: BRADFORD ON AVON

BRAMSHILL. HOUSE: HANTS

me si
RAIN WATER HEAD
CLAVERTON MANOR
tL
a Hes

Ee n y
fa)
Ge i a :
iq
fie
a Pm bea
SF

SG
fA elHl
ily WO

Hit
1 i fe hie
ei
1
fal
iE
—— SU ee
t] IPs
ee
iae
nia
Papa 4

La 1
=}ti t=]wa
(Np[si
eas
sey
ce
3]
=)

eonsiall |
PNDN
ED
adda
AUAAUQAAD
ANNAN
Hye
UNYLUDEDO
|i
Me
:
= Se
\ (H) Rat mae gem
3) ENTRANCE. PORCH:StCATHERINE'S ;
BLICKLING HALL: NORFOLK COURT : SOMERSET ARCADE: BRAMSHILL: HANTS
 970 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

|
as a ET REIS ta

|
S|
hale
= VS%
sl
3]
ta

BA —

HALF PLAN
OF PRINCIPAL
FLOOR
XE Is

NAY | ee
Wy
ss = Te 7 alles

R PORTION
or IONIC ARCADE :COLS SOTEL I MOBULE
witHout PEDESTALS i ADIAMETER ANDIS z

Le
=!
IMM
22

: BORDERS A | oo ae 25
k-1
MO

SUPERIMPOSED ORDERS
wmourrevesms PALADIN ARCADES e:PEDESTALS
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 971

x
1

|
|
|

|
Ge
S
|

{
1
!

CSE
|
|
1
|
|
+

Soe. TOWN HALL: GuiLoF ORD

q
Repeeeeesss ELEVATION ===
=
") GEORGIAN SASH
WINDOW
PART PLAN AA

Bias

pate ee eed
STAIRS.
| STAIRS ‘ASHBURNHAM HOUSE IN CLOSE
: OUSE: WESTMINSTER SALISBURY
 INGO Vd ALLY 4 Sasdao
¥ dlsAM Sdavi
TW Ht OCVATAYIA
Hi QING
RN Wo) RT YIZICT
we a Ly ey iv aes ;
lo¥.
ae
|go
[a
:oe
5Seee2 ae k 3 = t | : ae Coon
|
= ae ; 3 ig © a ae )
-*- | 2 x 4S : | He
ug) aa z of eS === LL
—
2 4 E ee a an
+& .ra-* a5: ae :“e
\
:at |4
| Hie |
Saban :
e
! | i ial : ie | | l :
rl | | |
an ace = ee eb I gh-
inl Le | | i (4 | - |
ENGLISH

li fa! | | l | ! | |
ll s | ie ia ate
ie i ag 1a: | cae
| | | | | l |
{ Teel oe
i ee 5 = i= Toe
t 29 = $2 5 eee yee L
= aro wf Zo | aa | S u |
aus | 2 | | : :
ae ;
| al | | o>
RENAISSANCE

| I | | | l | | ! |
eae! |
| 1 | |hes Lil i=
7 eet aoey
d AT |ies
1 | fe 3 C | ColIss C)
| | | | |
|
| 1 aes eval : | ,
fy ee ie ay Tres * eae
aN OT ae maPR Poh
No S rata £ ale
WaaUa()
ood 7) NYWO’,
914OC OINOI((]) NVIHLNIYO9 ALISOdWOD
ALONYfy— anpow
st fry 9y) Lamop 1ajowWDIp
punSi paplupou? o€ splpd
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 973
building, and this is one of the many instances of reluctance to break with tradition
(p. 892A). Balustrades in great variety—arcaded, columned, pierced, or battlemented
—were favourite features evolved from those of the Gothic period (p. 9698, C, F, H).
Late Renaissance. Sloping roofs were frequently ‘hipped’ and without gables,
because the cornice was now the characteristic feature of the building and gables
were therefore inappropriate, while dormer windows now took the place of the
windows in the gables of the Jacobean period (pp. 903E, 907B, 940A, 941A). A low-
pitched pediment (p. 936B) sometimes outlined the ends of sloping roofs, in con-
trast to the steep gables of the early period (p. 902G). The upper part of the roof was
often formed as a lead flat, surrounded by a balustrade and surmounted by a turret
with a domical roof (p. 903E). Balustrades played an important part in the general
design, and partly concealed the flat-pitched roofs behind them (pp. 929, 930, 939).
Domes and cupolas were much in vogue (p. 971A, Cc), while splendid steeples,
initiated by Sir Christopher Wren, rival and even surpass Mediaeval spires in their
fanciful storeyed outlines (p. 925).

CoLUMNS
Early Renaissance. The columns of the five Orders of architecture, as standardized
by the Romans, were reintroduced, and indeed form the outstanding features of
the Renaissance style; so that all five Orders were sometimes superimposed, as in
the Bodleian Library, Oxford (p. 895A), and four Orders occur at Merton
College, Oxford (p. 895D). They were employed in all parts of the building, ex-
ternally in porches, gables, and even in chimney stacks (pp. 888A, 891A), and in-
ternally in panelling, doorways, and fireplaces (p. 892D, E). These columns, both
circular and square, were as yet seldom correct, either in design or proportion,
while pilasters, banded with strapwork or prismatic ornament (p. 969]), often
tapered towards the base like the ‘Hermes’ columns, which were also now used,
especially in the design of hall screens and elaborate chimney-pieces (p. 887).
Pedestals also received similar ornamentation.
Late Renaissance. The Orders of architecture now lost the naive incorrectness of
proportion and detail which characterized them in the early period. After Inigo
Jones’s visits to Italy and his study of Palladio’s buildings, columns, as in the
Banqueting House (p. 899c), and other buildings (p. 902), were more strictly
designed according to the proportions laid down by that autocrat of architecture.
Full scope was afforded for the display of the Orders in the spacious porticoes of
churches (frontispiece), country mansions (pp. 929, 930, 936B, 939), and public
buildings (pp. 959A, B, 960), and they were often carried through two or more storeys
to give an effect of unity, as at Greenwich Hospital (p. 901A, F). Columns and pilasters
are also the prevailing features of the Renaissance monuments introduced into Gothic
churches, while panelling, doorways, and chimney-pieces of interiors conform to
the same columnar style (p. 904). The canons governing proportions, first promul-
gated by Vitruvius and further systematized by Palladio, were again formulated by
Sir William Chambers, who was generally accepted by English architects as the
authority on this subject (pp. 970, 972). The Greek Orders affected design con-
siderably in the later eighteenth century, and were used exclusively in buildings of
Greek Revival character in the early nineteenth century.

MOULDINGS
Early Renaissance. Mouldings once again reverted to Roman forms as applied to
the bases and capitals of columns and their entablatures (pp. 164, 165), but naturally
displayed considerable variety, due to lingering Gothic influence. They were often
coarse in outline, but became more refined when used in wood panelling or plaster
974 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

ceilings (p. 884). Bold convex mouldings, banded and decorated with strapwork
(p. 892D, E), characterize many Jacobean chimney-pieces as well as monuments and
tombs.
Late Renaissance. Mouldings, like other features, became more strictly Classical
in form and, as the stock-in-trade of every craftsman, they admitted of little variety
in design (pp. 164, 165). Mouldings in general, whether in stone, wood, or plaster,
became bolder, and the large ‘ogee’ moulding was the one chiefly in use round fire-
places and panels (pp. 904, 940).

ORNAMENT
Early Renaissance (pp. 976, 977). The carved ornament of the Early Renaissance
period is often a strange mixture of Gothic and Renaissance forms, and this transi-
tional treatment gives it a special interest. ‘Strap’ ornament, now much employed
in all materials, received its name from its resemblance to leather straps interlaced
in geometrical patterns, attached to the background as if by nails or rivets (p. 977C,
E). It appears on pilasters, as at Hatfield (p. 891A), on piers, spandrels, and plaster
ceilings, as at Bromley (p. 977B), and in friezes, as at Yarmouth (p. 977E) and Aston
Hall (p. 977c). Carved figures of mythological personages, and of grotesques, such
as satyrs and fauns, are further evidence of Classic influence, while heraldry was
freely employed (pp. 969B, C, G, 977D). Interiors owe much of their finished
character to the carved wainscot panelling, wide stairs with carved newels (pp.
879C, 975C, E), chimney-pieces, as at Blickling Hall (p. 975F), and Holland House
(p. 892E), wall tapestries, and modelled plaster ceilings, as at Audley End (p. 977A),
developed from the rib and panel type of the Tudor period (p. 510). Renaissance
features also pervaded every branch of the allied arts and crafts, as in the following
examples: the monuments to Elizabeth (1604) and Mary, Queen of Scots, in West-
minster Abbey; the tomb of Lord Burghley (1598) (p. 976E); the Culpepper Tomb,
Goudhurst (p. 976c); the chapel screen at the Charterhouse (p. 976B); the doorway
in Broughton Castle (1599) (p. 975D); the bookcase at Pembroke College, Cambridge
(p. 976D); the throne and stalls in the Convocation Room, Oxford (1639) (p. 976F);
the pulpit in North Cray Church, Kent (p. 976A); the rain-water head from Claver-
ton Manor (p. 969E); a cistern (p. 976H); the tablets in Peterhouse Chapel, Cam-
bridge (p. 976]), and All Hallows, Barking (p. 976G); the entrance porch (p..969G)
and chimney-piece at Blickling Hall (p. 975F); while the style was also applied to
the furniture, such as chairs (p. 977K), chests, tables (p. 977G), stools (p. 977F),
table settles (p. 977J), cupboards (p. 977H, N), and bedsteads (p. 977L).
Late Renaissance (pp. 978, 980). The carved ornament of the later period is an
anglicized version of the fully developed Italian Renaissance, from which all trace
of Gothic influence disappeared as Classic tradition reasserted itself. The style of
Louis XIV naturally affected decorative art in England; while later on the brothers
Adam show the effect of the simpler Classic tradition on their designs (p. 943A), also
adopted by their followers and imitators (p. 943B). The pulpits, fonts, and panelled
vestries are characteristic and striking features of Wren’s city churches (p. 92IC, E).
Interiors are characterized by large wall panels (p. 904c), often containing family
portraits, which also appear over chimney-pieces which otherwise became simpler
in treatment (p. 9048). Plaster ceilings are boldly set out in squares, ovals, or circles,
framed in by mouldings, on which fruits and flowers are modelled in high relief
(pp. 903B, 904A, C). Walls and ceilings were sometimes painted, as those by Verrio
and Sir James Thornhill at Blenheim Palace and Hampton Court, and S. Paul’s
Cathedral. Renaissance features, now more sedate in type, were reproduced in all
decorative features, such as the archway at Wilton (p. 980D) by Sir William Cham-
bers, the gate piers (p. 980G) by Inigo Jones, the circular window (p. 980E£) by
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE ype)

THE STAIRCASE
BLICKLING HALL
NORFOLK

| CLE ZAR:
Ly
Li

qRs:
ira
|
ea
1
|HHH Selilh
{B

poNitraEARP
igeseree”
SE

el NEWEL
DOORWAY HATFIELD
I
—5:74-
es
33
€\1) ies
ee
|
sick
1SH
GE
na
HHI -—---
k———
j2,
—
—-——
BROUGHTON CASTLE:OXON HO. HERTS CHIMNEY PIECE: BLICKLING HALL
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

Y 7

‘ +) iy et
Z | | |

——— = 77 ot ra |
ce = I
a] 2;

‘oO
— a) a! in

7. ——5'1o% — 4 |
lal Y
f} he

i= = |
i |
=
|

B CHAPEL SCREEN: :
|

raPULPIT:N.CRey CHARTERHO
Nee PUT NOB USE :LONDON

ae
mie |
86"

Tf 3 Fa et u Kil 7 :

(D RaoncaSe PEM Nn car a

BROKE. COLL. CAMBS, TOMB or L? BURGHLEY THRONE > STALLS
‘ IN:STAMFORD CONVOCATION ROOM: -OXFORD

WALL TASLET-ALL “i “TEaD GSE ga

Ceti
Py
pe
er
orsne rs
eer

©|
(it
HALLOWS BARKING OyVICTORIA & ALBERT MUSEUM CHAPEL:C
Bes
uaa =) oO© lee
AMSS.~
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 977

LASTER CEILING: OLD PALACE: BROMLEY

BY BOW: NOW IN VICTORIA & ALBERT MUSEUM

STONE FRIEZE ‘PLASTER PANEL. OAK FRIEZE

ASTON HALL _HOUSE IN BARNSTAPLE_ HOUSE AT YARMOUTH
= =13* — 4
a <b

5
TIL2H
SILAS

mri
il
= eae
=

berg)
A

C. AD. 1610

fe.PERGTEAD locIncsGoes AK COURT CUPBOARD

 978 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

LATTER REENALSSANCE PUBNDTURE

MAHOGANY CHAIR {Bronte SETTEE Cc. I50A.D.

MAHOGANY CHAIR
hn

!
|
ll gt
o
o
|
|
|
I
|

i GILT (Kyaree ee SS
aN
peace eS SGUERIDON GRANDFATHER nea
Flaw
500KCASE CLOCK
scne TOP iv - a ee ae a Ee eos Va

l --21.6---->
to--
WALNUT {idl
LEGS Z\

C.1680 A.D. C.1666 A.D.

TABLE WALNUT TABLE MAHOGANY ARTISTS TABLE

 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 979
Gibbs, the typical chimney-pieces (p. 980H, K) by Gibbs; in the numerous wall
tablets of the period (p. 980F) and in monuments, such as that of the Duke of New-
castle in Westminster Abbey (p. 980J); in casinos, such as that near Dublin (p.
970E), and covered bridges, as in Prior Park, Bath (p. 935D), and Wilton (p. 902E),
and in buildings resembling Roman temples, as the famous temples in Kew Gar-
dens by Chambers, which were introduced into the formal gardens, the latter
usually decorated with ornamental vases and sundials (p. 940B, Cc). Houses owe much
of their interest to their beautiful fittings and furniture by Chippendale, Hepple-
white, Sheraton, and their followers. Chairs (p. 978A, Cc), settees (p. 978B), tables
(p. 978N, P, Q), waiters (p. 978D), book-cases (p. 978H, M), clocks (p. 978F, K),
mirrors (p. 978E), candlestands (p. 978L), gueridon (p. 978J) and pedestals (p. 978G)
all help to give a comfortable feeling to houses of this period.

REFERENCE BOOKS
EARLY RENAISSANCE (ELIZABETHAN AND JACOBEAN) AND
GENERAL WORKS
AMBLER,L. Old Halls and Manor Houses of Yorkshire. London, 1913.
DAWBER,E. G. Old Cottages and Farmhouses in Kent and Sussex. London, 1900.
—. Old Cottages in the Cotswold District. London, 1904.
FOX, SIRC., and LORD RAGLAN. Monmouthshire Houses. 3 vols. Cardiff, 1951-4.
GOTCH, J. A. Architecture of the Renaissance in England. 2 vols. London, 1891-4.
—. Early Renaissance Architecture in England. London, 1914.
—. The Growth of the English House. London, 1928.
GREEN, W. CURTIS. Old Cottages and Farmhouses in Surrey. London, 1908.
JACKSON, SIRT. G. The Renaissance of Roman Architecture. Pt. II. England, 1928.
NASH, J. Mansions of England in the Olden Time. 4 vols. London, 1839-49.
OLIVER, B. Old Houses and Village Buildings in East Angha. London, 1912.
PARKINSON, J., and OULD, E. A. Old Cottages, Farmhouses and other Half-timber Buildings
of Shropshire, Herefordshire and Cheshire. London, 1904.
RICHARDSON, C. J. Old English Mansions. London, 1841-8.
SHAW, H. Details of Elizabethan Architecture. London, 1839.
SHUFFREY, L.A. The English Fireplace to the XIXth Century. London, 1912.
SHUTE, J. First and Chief Groundes of Architecture. 1563 (the first English book on the
Orders). Repr. London, 1912.
STRATTON, A. The English Interior to the XIXth Century. London, 1920.
SUMMERSON, SIRJ. Architecture in Britain, 1530-1830. Pelican History of Art, 1953.
TANNER, H. Interior Woodwork of the XVI-X VIIIth Centuries. London, 1902.
Thorpe Collection of original drawings in the Soane Museum.
TIPPING, H. A. English Homes: Period III (1558-1649). 2 vols, London, 1922, 1927.
LATE RENAISSANCE (STUART AND GEORGIAN)
ADAM,R. and J. Works in Architecture. 3 vols. London, 1773-1822.
BELCHER, J., and MACARTNEY, M. E. Later Renaissance Architecture in England. 2 vols.
London, 1897-1901.
BEVERIDGE, T.J. English Renaissance Woodwork, 1660-1760. London, 1921.
BIRCH, G. H. London Churches of the XV IIth and X VIIIth Centuries. London, 1896.
BLOMFIELD, R. A History of Renaissance Architecture in England. 2 vols. London, 1897:
and abridged edition, London, 1900.
BULTON,A.T. The Architecture of R. andF.Adam. 2 vols. 1922.
BRIGGS, M.S. Baroque Architecture. London, 1913.
—. Wren the Incomparable. London, 1953.
BRITTON, J., and PUGIN, A. Public Buildings of London. 2 vols. London, 1825-8.
CLARK, K. The Gothic Revival. 2nd ed. London, 1950.
CLAYTON, J. Parochial Churches of Sir Christopher Wren. London, 1848-9.
COBB, G. The Old Churches of London. London, 1941.
 980 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE

= i
hi
|
1

me
ii
i
ae
OORWAY : TYPE WITH TYPICAL
Epa HORSE GUARDS LOND ON
rc RAILS

ool

pe
ee
Ee

MONUMENT To
SIR JOHN BRIDGMAN
ASTON : WARWICKSHIRE ||’

FRAME FOR
PICTURE

j CV Nw
1s )
Ni My)

WOW cS) OHIO

PIECE
MON"" +o DUKE or NEWCASTLE
= WESTMINSTER ABBEY == Lf isy GIBBS[4
 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE 981
COLVIN, H.M. Biographical Dictionary of English Architects 1660-1840. London, 1954.
—. ‘Gothick survival and Gothick revival’. Arch. Review, 1948.
DALE, A. James Wyatt, Architect. 1936.
DUTTON,R. The English Country House. London, 1935.
—. The English Interior. London, 1948.
FIELD, H., and BUNNEY, M. English Domestic Architecture of the XVIIth and XVIIIth
Centuries. London, 1905.
GIBBS, J. Book of Architecture. London, 1728.
GOTCH,J.A. The English Home from Charles I to George IV. London, 1919.
—. Inigo Fones. London, 1928.
HUSSEY, C. The Picturesque. London, 1924.
JONES, INIGO. Designs. published by W. Kent, 2 vols. 1770.
JOURDAIN, M. English Decoration and Furniture, 1760-1820. London, 1922.
—. English Decorative Plasterwork of the Renaissance. London, 1926.
—. The Work of William Kent. London, 1948.
KNOOP,D., and JONES, G. P. The London Mason in the 17th Century. Manchester, 1935.
LEES-MILNE, J. The Age of Adam. London, 1947.
LENYGON, F. Decoration in England from 1660-1770. London, 1927.
MACARTNEY, M. English Houses and Gardens. London, 1908.
POLEY,A.F.E. St. Paul’s Cathedral, London. 1927.
RAMSEY, S.C. Small Houses of the Late Georgian Period. 2 vols. London, 1919-23.
REDDAWAY,T.F. The Rebuilding of London after the Great Fire. London, 1940.
RICHARDSON, SIR.A. E. Monumental Classic Architecture in Great Britain. London, 1914.
—. Georgian England. London, 1931.
—. The Smaller English House, 1660-1830. London, 1925.
—.,and GILL, Cc. L. London Houses, 1660-1820. London, 1911.
R.1I.B.A. Sir Christopher Wren: Bicentenary Memorial Volume. London, 1923.
SMALL, T., and WOODBRIDGE, C. Houses of Wren and Early Georgian Periods. London,
1928.
SsRRC ON. A. The Life of Sir Christopher Wren. Liverpool, 1897.
STROUD, D. Henry Holland. London, 1950.
—. Capability Brown. London, 1950.
SUMMERSON, SIR J..fohn Nash. London, 1935.
—. Georgian London. London, 1945.
—. Sir John Soane. London, 1952.
—. Sir Christopher Wren. London, 1953.
SWARBRICK, J. Robert Adam and his Brothers. London, 1915.
TIPPING, H. A. English Homes: Periods IV, V, VI, 1649-1820. 4 vols. London, 1920-8.
TRIGGS, H. INIGO. Formal Gardens in England and Scotland. London, 1902.
—.,and TANNER, H. Some Architectural Works of Imgo Jones. London, 1901.
Vitruvius Britannicus, by Campbell, Woolfe and Gaudon. 5 vols. London, 1715-71.
WALPOLE SOCIETY. vol. XII (1923-4). Designs by Inigo Fones for Masques and Plays at
Court. Oxford.
WARE, I. Complete Body of Architecture. London, 1756.
WHIFFEN, M. Stuart and Georgian Churches outside London. London, 1947-8.
—. Thomas Archer. London, 1950.
WHISTLER,L. Sir fohn Vanburgh. London, 1938.
WREN, C. ands. Parentalia. London, 1750.
WREN SOCIETY. Publications, vols. I-XX. 1924-43.
 S. Katherine’s Docks, London (1827-8). See p. 964

XXVI. NINETEENTH AND TWENTIETH

CENTURY ARCHITECTURE IN
GREAT BRITAIN
(1830 to present day)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. The great wars of the end of the eighteenth and the beginning
of the nineteenth century had closed Continental travel for a while to British
people, yet left Britain with an enhanced prestige and a clear lead in the economic
field. Trade with foreign and Empire countries developed apace, and brought far-
ranging contacts and a miscellany of influences, faithfully reflected in her architec-
ture, from all parts of the world. Not until the latter part of the nineteenth century
did European countries, with Germany in the lead, seriously challenge her com-
mercial supremacy. Factors of greatest importance to her emergence as the world’s
leading industrial power were the vast improvements made in the means of transport
and communication. Internally in Britain, a canal system, totalling some 2,300
miles and linking the rising ports and chief manufacturing centres, had been cut
between 1755-1827, while the main roads, so reconditioned after 1815 on the
principles of the engineers John L. Macadam (1756-1836) and Thomas Telford
that they brought about the great coaching era of 1820-36, were almost immediately
surpassed in economic importance by the mesh of railways, laid out principally
between 1825-50, thrusting to all vital parts of the realm. In 1834 highways passed
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 983

into the charge of local authorities, and turnpikes began to disappear. Complement-
ing these developments was that of the steamship, driven by paddle and then by
screw-propeller; the old wooden walls were supplanted by iron hulls from 1821,
and by 1840 the steamship was in regular ocean service, vastly shortening inter-
national communications. Very much later came the automobile, around 1900,
and the aeroplane, in progress of development in the early twentieth century but
of little commercial importance until after the war of 1914-18.
GEOLOGICAL. As in preceding periods, indigenous materials, brick, tile,
terra-cotta, stone, and such little building-timber as the country now produced,
continued to be used, but with the difference that facile transport allowed hitherto
uneconomical sources to be tapped and permitted ready distribution of the products
wherever they might be required. An outcome was that vernacular architecture by
1850 had finally lost the last vestiges of regional character. Methods of processing
or manufacture of materials too were improved on mass-production lines : thin slates
of a range of uniform sizes supplanted the rough, thick slates of ‘random’ sizes
(i.e. courses diminishing in dimension from the eaves to the ridge of a roof), while
machine-made bricks and tiles, with meticulous dimensions and hard, shiny
surfaces, laid with tight joints, became everywhere common in the second half of
the nineteenth century. Bricks of different colours—yellow, black, blue and white—
were manufactured, tiles similarly of various hues, and were popularized in the
polychromatic architecture of William Butterfield (p. 990) and others after mid-
nineteenth century. Terra-cotta came back into favour about the same time, and
was extensively employed in urban buildings in the last quarter of the century.
Polychrome faience was a special mark of ‘Art Nouveaw’ (p. 991), and in extensive
use from about 1895 to the start of the war of 1914-18. Apart from minor structures
and occasional small houses in the south-eastern part of England, genuinely historical
timber-frame building ceased entirely (after c. 1600 it nearly always had been
sheathed over with plaster, stucco, tile-hanging or weather-boarding), though half-
timber was revived in the influential work of Norman Shaw (p. 991). Due to the
enormous building programme of a rising industrial nation, great quantities of
wood nevertheless were needed, and since 1850 more than nine-tenths of the
supply, chiefly softwood, has been imported. As labour costs increased, stone
progressively gave way to brick as a principal walling material, as it had been doing
already in previous centuries, and in the last quarter of the nineteenth century brick
invaded even the larger monuments in towns.
Of tremendous importance was the advent of structural iron. Britain has a wealth
of ore and the fuel to process it, and in the nineteenth century began to produce it in
great quantities. Employed for utilitarian structures, such as bridges, since c. 1770,
and for very many decorative adjuncts to architecture, the techniques had so far
developed by the railway era that great arched iron-and-glass roofs could be thrown
over the new stations in the principal towns and cities, and the Great Exhibition
of 1851 was housed in a structure wholly of this character (p. 1041). Pre-fabricated
cast-iron houses and other buildings even were exported about this period to
various parts of the Empire. A remarkably advanced completely iron-framed struc-
ture, a large boatstore, survives at the Royal Naval Dockyard at Sheerness, built
1858-60 (p. 1042). Systematic steel-framed building, however, had to await the com-
mercial exploitation of the mass-produced commodity in the eighteen-nineties, and
the first English wholly steel-framed building of architectural consequence dates
only from 1905, later than in America or the European continent. Reinforced-
concrete framing was first used in the country about the same time, again later than
abroad.
CLIMATIC. In building design, methods of combating climatic variations
984 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

developed in the second half of the nineteenth century, and by its end, central
heating and ventilation of buildings were conducted on scientific lines. Direct
heating by open fires, with various fuels, remained in favour for individual houses
for a much longer period than in flats or public, commercial and industrial buildings
in general, and still is by no means superseded. Gas lighting, introduced in 1792,
had become normal by 1850; electric lighting, known by 1846, was in general use by
the eighteen-nineties, and many improvements followed, including the introduction
of the fluorescent lamp in 1938. The systematic heating of buildings facilitated the
enlargement of window areas—liable to make rooms cold—needful in the dull
climate and smoky towns, and in Modern architecture after 1930 increasing advan-
tage was taken of the fact. Already in the second half of the nineteenth century, the
dim light in the close-built streets had led designers to contrive such additional glass
areas as the revived Classical or Mediaeval stylar systems then fashionable would
permit.
RELIGIOUS. In the earlier part of the period there was a further breaking off from
the established church (the Church of Scotland is Presbyterian) of various sects,
which together with the proliferating older groups of nonconformists occasioned the
need for innumerable places of worship, in addition to the old English parish
churches, in the towns and villages throughout the country. By the middle of the
nineteenth century the church-going population in England was as much Non-
conformist as Anglican, and this approximate equality persists, matched by the
membership of the Roman Catholic church. Above all, the need for new churches
was due to the greatly enlarged population, strongly concentrated in the industria-
lized tracts. No obstacle was placed in the way of faiths brought to England’s
shores in the wake of foreign trade, and sacred buildings of many exotic creeds were
erected in the principal cities and towns.
In Church of England circles there was formed in 1839 the Cambridge Camden
Society, the activities of which were to have a profound effect upon forms of
religious practice as well as upon the design of church buildings. It published a
series of pamphlets and, in 1841, a magazine entitled the Ecclestologist, which at
first were concerned with matters of the nature and meaning of ecclesiastical
architecture and the care and management of the ancient churches—which in many
cases were ill-kept, misused or in abject disrepair—but soon turned to questions of
doctrine and the advocacy of the restoration of ancient rubrical usage. Critical
comments were made upon the design of new churches, and despite spirited
protests from some quarters that Protestant principles were being endangered, had
the effect of restoring to church design all the main parts and features which had
been normal to churches of the Middle Ages. This was a tremendous change, for as
the ‘Commissioner’ churches built under the Act of 1818 so strongly demonstrate
(p. 878), all that had been considered requisite previously were pewed and galleried
preaching boxes, lacking transepts, chancel, rood screen, altar and sedilia, devoid
of symbolic ornamental and ritualistic trappings. After mid-century, it was the
nonconformist rather than the anglican churches that retained the protestant
austerity. An almost contemporary foundation to the Cambridge Camden Society
was that of the ‘Oxford Society for promoting the study of Gothic architecture’,
which developed in a similar way, both attracting highly influential support. A
further outcome of their activity was the extraordinary number of restorations of
ancient churches that came to be carried out, so that scarcely any in the realm fully
retained its pristine form.
SociAL. The consequences of the change from an agricultural to a dominantly
industrial economy were profound. The rapidly-increasing population was strongly
concentrated in towns, these thus expanding at an enormous rate and much too
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 985

hastily for any organized town planning until the nineteenth century was well
advanced. In the physical as well as the economic sense, life centred around fac-
tories, warehouses and nodes of commerce. For the many, conditions were wretched
indeed; for the relatively few, great wealth accrued. Business men rather than the
aristocracy were the overlords. Reformers endeavoured to mitigate the lot of the
unfortunates and the masses; order began to emerge from chaos and, at length,
the industrial population as a whole began to share the benefits of the very great
advances made in pure and applied science. By the twentieth century the gap
between the lowest and the highest social strata had considerably narrowed, and in
recent decades is less than it has ever been in past history, all classes now enjoying
a remarkably high standard of living.
The nineteenth century surpassed all its predecessors in the variety of its dis-
coveries, most of them related to the developing industrial, economic and social
patterns. Invention mounted on invention, and very great material progress was
made, though at some considerable expense of the finer cultural values, aesthetic
perceptions in particular growing gravely blunted. Among the innumerable series
of practical inventions some of the more relevant may be cited (some, regarding
long-distance transport, heating, lighting and ventilation already have been
noted). Photography, practicable from 1839, advanced via the dry-plate (1874) and
celluloid film (1889) to public cinematography in 1905, sound track being added in
1926. Telegraph (1837), telephone (1878) and phonograph, the gramophone,
wireless telegraphy (c. 1896) and television; in the medical field, x-rays and the
employment of radium; all indicate unprecedented progress along the lines of
applied science. The wire rope came into use about mid-nineteenth century; the
lift, developed after 1852, was driven at first by steam or gas, then hydraulically,
and from the eighteen-eighties by electricity. For local transport there were the
bicycle (1867); the tramway (1860), started in Birkenhead by an American, George
Francis Train (1829-1904), greatly developed between 1868-73 and electrified
1900-14, now practically obsolete; the motor-bus, which superseded the horse-bus
in the years before 1914; and the underground railway (London, 1860-3; electrified
1890).
Eduéition, at first much neglected, was affected by the Public Schools Com-
mission (1863) and the School Enquiry Reports (1868), and the Elementary
Education Act of 1870 opened a better era for general education and started well-
governed schools, free from religious tests. Since 1902, educational institutions,
like others of public interest, have passed under a democratic charge, and there is
now a free ladder through primary and secondary schools to the universities.
In the eighteenth century the greater and older established schools, such as
Eton, Winchester, and Westminster, had attracted students away from the grammar
schools, some of which were for a time reduced to the status of elementary schools.
In the nineteenth century many important public schools were founded, such as
the Colleges of Cheltenham (1841), Clifton (1862), Haileybury (1862), Lancing
(1848), Marlborough (1843), Malvern (1863), Radley (1847), Rossall (1844) and
Wellington (1859).
Many novel types of building sprang up in the period, such as Mechanics’
Institutes—intended for adult education—which flourished briefly between
1824-50; museums, provided by generous benefactors, associated with learned
societies or maintained by local authorities after the first Museum Act of 1845;
public libraries, due to the Public Libraries Act; town halls, after the Municipal
Corporation Act, 1835; and cinemas, of which there was at least one in each large
town by 1916 and over 4,500 in the United Kingdom by 1953. Besides these, there -
were markets, hospitals, benevolent institutions, swimming baths, exhibition halls,
986 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

technical colleges, art galleries, very many types of factory and industrial establish-
ment, railway and bus stations, aerodromes, and shops, stores and offices. Offices,
known as ‘counting-houses’ by the earlier merchants, traders and manufacturers,
were needed in vastly greater number than formerly, while shops similarly ex-
panded tremendously in quantity. Multiple shop businesses, chain stores and
department stores were under development from the beginning of the period, but
in their present form their history commences in the second half of the nineteenth
century. Terrace housing was the principal nineteenth century expedient in towns,
with single or paired houses on the outskirts. Flats, though usual in Scottish cities
were not popular in England until quite recent times, having latterly been adopted
extensively by local authorities because of land-shortage problems. The Town
Planning Acts since 1909 have influenced recent developments and produced
striking results in the laying out of ‘garden cities’ and new, satellite, towns.
HISTORICAL. After the turmoil of the Napoleonic wars, England enjoyed a
protracted period of economic prosperity, which opened up facilities for travel, for
the intensification of overseas trade and the consolidation and expansion of her
colonies. The Industrial Revolution affected western Europe in general, and the
development of pure and applied science gave a lead over the countries farther afield
which occasioned the widespread diffusion of European civilization. The abrupt
rise in the population and other factors encouraged emigration, and flourishing
colonies absorbed the ideas of the mother countries no less than their manufactured
commodities. The new freedom for travel gave unprecedented opportunities too,
for the study of past architectural styles, and encouraged the growth of revivalism,
which is so conspicuous a feature of western-European nineteenth-century
architecture: for whereas in previous centuries architecture had developed on
traditional lines, industrialization represented so violent a change and proceeded so
rapidly that the development of building outpaced the capacity to find an appro-
priate aesthetic expression for it. It was not until the twentieth century that a
machine-age architecture was evolved.
The course of British architecture was undisturbed by the distant Crimean war
(1854-6), the Indian Mutiny (1857) or the Boer war (1899-1902), and little by the
Franco-Prussian war (1870-1) on the Continent; but World War I (1914-19) was a
conflict which halted progress completely. Hardly had recovery taken place before
a serious economic depression ensued, and it was only after 1932 that the threads
were once more effectively taken up. Then again, World War II (1939-45) brought
a protracted pause, and for some years afterwards Britain’s building resources had
to be concentrated mainly on particular types of buildings—housing and schools—
under national control, before architecture could be given free rein to shape its
Modern course.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The period opens at 1830, and the rest of the nineteenth century is marked by the
‘Battle of the Styles’; i.e., between Classic and Gothic, the varieties of each that
were practised growing increasingly numerous and ever more eclectically confused.
Completely alien styles also were sporadically introduced. The issue was at its most
acute around the 1860’s. By 1900, the Classic almost had triumphed again, but
meanwhile fresh trends were shaping: an ‘Arts and Crafts’ movement led to ‘Art
Nouveaw’ at the turn of the century, the benefits of which were experienced on the
European continent rather than in Britain, and it was there that ‘Modern’ architec-
ture evolved. British architecture after the death of Queen Victoria (1901) became
considerably more rational than it had been, but was still traditional in complexion
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 987
until about 1930, when Continental influence at length began to turn it into the
Modern path.
British nineteenth-century architecture after 1830 may be considered as ‘Vic-
torian’ (William IV, 1830-7; Victoria, 1837-1901) and divided into three phases:
(A) Early Victorian, 1830-50; (B) High Victorian, 1850-75; and (C) Late Victorian,
1875-1901. These will be examined in turn, and (D) Twentieth Century architec-
ture thereafter.
(A). The various types of ‘Antiquarian’ expression prevalent in the earlier part
of the nineteenth century have been considered in the previous chapter (p. 877). In
monumental architecture, Greek Revival and Graeco-Roman had been particularly
important. The Greek Revival had passed its peak in the eighteen-twenties; but
certain of the exponents mentioned previously remained productive in the present
period, including Sir Robert Smirke, Thomas Hamilton and W. H. Playfair of
Edinburgh, and John Dobson of Newcastle-upon-Tyne. Yet to be noted are the
younger Hardwick, Philip (1792-1870), and a Scot, Alexander Thomson (1817-75),
known as ‘Greek’ Thomson, who at Glasgow belatedly produced some extremely
fine instances of the style. Other architects of the older generation, mentioned be-
fore, were Professor C. R. Cockerell (p. 878) and Decimus Burton (p. 877), and
there was also George Basevi (1795-1845), an English architect despite his name
and a pupil of Sir John Soane, these continuing to produce fine work of a Graeco-
Roman character nearly to the middle of the century. With them must be included
a much younger man, Harvey L. Elmes (1815-47), who died at so early an age that
he has little more than the one splendid building to his credit, S. George’s Hall,
Liverpool (p. 1020). With these latter personalities monumental Graeco-Roman
architecture came virtually to an end in England.
Sir Charles Barry (pp. 877, 956) is yet another of those born in the previous
century who continues to be of high importance in the present period. His Greek
Revival Royal Manchester Institution building has been referred to already (p. 956),
as also has his Travellers’ Club, London (1829-31) (p. 956), but we must recur to
the latter here for it was a building which confirmed his reputation, and moreover
it was in the Italian High Renaissance style, a new departure in revivalism so far
as urban architecture is concerned, although it had been presaged in villa design and
in the simple Brunswick Chapel (now S. Andrews), Hove, built by Barry in 1827-8.
A book was published on the subject of the Travellers’ Club in 1839. The building
at once turned the attention of designers to the Italian High Renaissance source.
In earlier life, Barry had had useful professional training before he spent three
years (1817-20) in extensive travel in Italy, Greece, Turkey, Asia Minor and
Egypt, but none of these latter studies was of immediate advantage, as on setting
up in practice on his return, his earliest works were ‘Commissioner’ and other Gothic
Revival churches. The best of these was S. Peter, Brighton (1824-8) won in competi-
tion in 1823. After the Travellers’, Barry also built the Reform Club (1837-41) and
the Athenaeum, Manchester (1837-9). But it was in the course of a busy practice
that he carried out, in Tudor Gothic, the work for which he is the most famous,
the Houses of Parliament or Westminster New Palace, London (1840-c. 1860)
(p. 1022D). This now is a much loved building, but it is significant too in having
given sanction to the use of revived Mediaeval architecture for public buildings.
The medley of old buildings that had constituted the earlier palace mostly had been
burnt down in 1834; and as the Westminster Hall had been saved, it was decided
that the new structure ought to be ‘either Gothic or Elizabethan’. A two-stage
competition was held in 1835-6, ninety-seven designs being submitted and four
offered to the scrutiny of William IV, who chose Barry’s.
Barry was aided in the competition and in the early stages of erection by the
988 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

youthful Augustus Welby Northmore Pugin (1812-52), who contributed his un-
rivalled knowledge of Mediaeval decorative detail and skill in design in these
terms; he was one of the most brilliant and picturesque figures of the Gothic
Revival, outstanding even when measured against any of the whole group of remark-
able personalities born in the same decade as himself, which included not only
Elmes and Alexander Thomson already referred to, but Gilbert Scott, William
Butterfield, J. L. Pearson and John Ruskin, destined to be leaders in the High
Gothic period. Son of an architectural draughtsman who himself influenced the
course of the Gothic Revival through the volumes of drawings that he published, an
even more superb and facile draughtsman than his parent, A. W. N. Pugin was a
high-strung, fanatically intense person who drove himself to insanity and death with
his unremitting labours. He developed a passionate interest in church architecture
and religious affairs, becoming a fierce controversialist on ritual and the proprieties
of church design. His writings, notably his Contrasts, published in 1838, com-
paring most unfavourably the buildings of the day with those of the Middle Ages,
and The True Principles of Pointed or Christian Architecture of 1841, were of
tremendous importance in securing popular favour for the Gothic style. It was he
and the ecclesiologists of the Oxford Movement and the Cambridge Camden
Society (p. 984) who sought to restore the fervour of faith and the self-denying
spirit which were the foundations of the artistic creations of the Middle Ages. This
study of Mediaeval church building inaugurated a new era in the Gothic Revival,
and had the effect of converting churches from the preaching boxes that they had
become, once again into meaningful, articulated structures possessing all the parts,
adornments and fittings deemed to have been customary in former times. Pugin
erected over sixty-five churches in the United Kingdom, and many in the colonies,
besides convents, monasteries, mansions and schools.
Other architects active at this time were Edward Blore (1787-1879), who com-
pleted Buckingham Palace (1846), begun by John Nash (later refaced by Sir Aston
Webb), and restored various castles, cathedrals and churches, besides building
houses and many new churches; Antony Salvin (1799-1881), pupil of John Nash,
an authority on Mediaeval military architecture and restorer of many old castles,
as well as an able designer of churches and country mansions; and Benjamin Ferrey
(1810-80), biographer of the Pugins, father and son, but not particularly distin-
guished in his practice.
Urban architecture in general soon followed Barry’s Italian Renaissance lead,
and many new buildings were modelled on Italian palaces. Like Barry’s, these were
at first usually astylar, but afterwards, the stylar exemplars began to receive atten-
tion, particularly those with Orders in superimposed tiers, or with stylar tiers over
rusticated basement storeys, for the giant Order was not greatly favoured. Whatever
the type, there was a strong tendency to descent in scale, for to gain greater natural
light, as was necessary in northern urban conditions, compared with the Italian,
windows were made proportionally larger, and already by 1850 facades began to have
a crowded, busy and bitty air. In the countryside, countless unassuming residences
and farmhouses continued to be built, but the castles and mansions of the social
élite frequently were remodelled or new residences created. When a Mediaeval
nucleus existed, its character usually was reasonably well preserved in any altera-
tions or extensions, but sometimes such remodellings were carried out in ‘Tudor’
or the ‘Jacobethan’ style which was still at this time normal for new residences,
though used with considerably greater archaeological verisimilitude than in the
previous period. (‘Jacobethan’ is a modern term telescoping ‘Elizabethan’ and
‘Jacobean’, two historical architectural styles which are not very dissimilar and
which usually are indistinguishable in nineteenth-century revivalism). In the
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 989

ae ae the Renaissance Revival and Puginesque Gothic made themselves

elt:
This was the period of greatest activity in railway building, but the railway
stations up and down the country conformed to the prevailing styles, without any
special distinction apart from one or two of the greater terminals; and in those it
was mainly the workaday rear parts that bore the innovations. Great progress had
been made in the constructive use of cast iron since the later eighteenth century.
Beginning with an iron bridge at Coalbrookdale in 1777-9, facility in the use of the
material developed apace, and bridges of many types, for roads, canals and, at
length, railways, were used in ever greater numbers and increasing spans. The
emphasis was upon utility, and while many were sightly and even impressive by
reason of their dimensions and the confident skill to which they bore witness, they
were rarely deliberate architectural conceptions. Large-span’roofs in wood and glass,
then iron and glass, arose in the railway developments, and again were usually
utilitarian. These remarkable technical”advances were due to the early engineers :
Thomas Telford (1757-1834); John Rennie (1761-1821); George Stephenson
(1781-1848) and son Robert (1803-59); Sir William Fairbarn (1789-1874); and
I. K. Brunel (1806-59). Yet at the same time iron, and iron and glass in combina-
tion, were reaching recognition as normal building or decorative materials. Cast-
iron pillars and beams appeared in mills by 1800, with filler joists supporting
jack-arches of fire-resisting brick or‘tile, or the pillars supported church galleries
and roofs. Decoratively, iron was used extensively in the Regency period for such as
balconies, awnings, window grilles, and even for vaulting, as in the Gothic Revival
conservatory added to Carlton House, London by Thomas Hopper in 1811-12
(p. 1022B). As already noted, iron was extensively used in Rickman’s churches both
decoratively and constructively (p. 877), but the great era for cast iron, eked out
with wrought iron where tensional stresses were to be anticipated, was that towards
the end of the present Early Victorian period and the beginning of the next.
Constructional ironwork in buildings was usually internal and hidden from sight,
as in the case of roof principals, but there are great station halls, conservatories,
and exhibition halls extant to show the courage with which the material was
employed. The Crystal Palace (p. 1041) by Sir Joseph Paxton, was one of the most
remarkable feats. It was a little later (1854-7) that the domed, circular reading room,
framed wholly in metal, was added to the British Museum (p. 956) by Sydney
Smirke (1799-1877), brother of Sir Robert. The unreliability of cast iron as manu-
factured at this time, and its behaviour in the case of fire, discouraged new adven-
tures in the structural use of ferrous metals until after the commercial exploitation
of steel in the last decade of the century, though cast and wrought iron continued
to be extensively employed in all the established connections. Terra-cotta came back
into popularity, re-introduced in 1846 by Edmund Sharpe (1809-77).
(B). High Victorian architecture, in the period 1850-75, is characterized by the
spread of the Gothic Revival into virtually every architectural field. Anglican
churches were almost exclusively in this style, though nonconformist churches and
chapels often preserved the Classical expression and almost invariably their meeting-
house arrangements. Precedent having been established by the Houses of Parlia-
ment, public buildings as well as domestic, commercial and even industrial,
increasingly succumbed to the Gothic, and whatever was not Gothic—and there
was still a great deal—was mostly Renaissance Revival, this astylar for the most part,
made up of serried tiers of large windows with one or other of the types of
architrave enframement which historicism permitted. In commercial buildings
especially, windows tended to expand at the expense of the enframing wall, the
device of the mock arcade becoming an increasingly popular expedient.
990 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

The symbolic figure of the High Victorian Period is Sir George Gilbert Scott
(1811-78), younger son of a clergyman, who, after initial training, was at first in
practice with a partner, W. B. Moffat, during the years 1834-45, the firm gaining
commissions for as many as fifty workhouses in this period—these arising from the
Poor Law Act of 1834—as well as others for new churches. The churches were
mostly undistinguished, but meantime Scott was gaining in archaeological know-
ledge as well as developing his undoubted business ability and professional
capacity, which were superior to his artistic talent, though he himself had every
confidence in it. He was an industrious, tenacious and devout person, insatiable in
building up the enormous practice that came to be his. His reputation was made when
in 1844 he won an international competition for S. Nicholas’ Church (Nikolaikirche)
at Hamburg (p. 1081A). Thereafter he hada hand in some seven hundred and thirty
buildings, including a great many new or restored churches, thirty-nine of the latter
being of cathedral status. As a restorer he was almost as drastic as James Wyatt
(p. 876), imposing his own favourite Decorated Gothic wherever possible. He was
essentially a Gothicist, having no enthusiasm for classical architecture.
Not an architect but extremely influential in relation to the Gothic Revival was
John Ruskin (1819-1900), social reformer, critic, writer and lecturer on art and
architecture. Well to do, imperious, deeply religious, brilliant and intense, his
reason became impaired at the end of his long life. At first concerned in his writings
with the relationship between art and morals, he extended his exposition into the
field of architecture, especially in two of his many books, The Seven Lamps of
Architecture (1849) and The Stones of Venice (1851 and 1853). In the earlier of the
two, he advocated that instead of striving for novelty or searching for a new style,
as architects were doing, they should fix upon one style and stick to it whether for
secular or church architecture, and proposed four alternatives: Pisan Romanesque;
Early Gothic of the Western Italian Republic; Venetian Gothic; or ‘English
earliest decorated’. At this time his own choice fell upon the last, but later (1851), he
veered to the Venetian Gothic. His counsels were immediately followed; not
scrupulously, for to many, they appeared to give sanction to northern Italian
Mediaeval architecture in general. Polychrome striated patterning with stone,
coloured bricks, marble or terra-cotta; squat cylindrical columns with bunchy,
foliated capitals; bifurcated windows with non-concentric extradoses and pied
voussoirs ;marble sheathing ;ornamental medallions and lozenges; billet mouldings;
all soon became part of the regular Gothic Revival stock-in-trade.
As to polychromy, Ruskin may have been anticipated by William Butterfield
(1814-1900), the most original designer of the period, who in his All Saints’
church, Margaret St., London (1849-59) (p. 1008) had used stripes and patterns of
black brick upon red brickwork, and stone bands on the spire, while internally
rich permanent polychrome patterns in the nave arcade spandrels and chancel arch
were contrived by the same method. Up to this time, his ecclesiastical work had
been orthodox revived Gothic, but in a number of his later schemes the polychromy
is still more sharply accentuated. He liked stark colours and harsh, angular forms.
Other Gothicists of note were R. C. Carpenter (1812-55), who died young, and
J. L. Pearson (1817-97), expert on vaulting, who restored and built many churches
in discreet style. Rather younger, born in the twenties, were G. F. Bodley (1827-
1907), brought up in the Scott tradition, but influenced to some extent by French
Gothic; and William Burges (1827-81) very much more so, almost completely
drawing his inspiration from French sources. More important was George Edmund
Street (1824-1881), who spent five years in Scott’s office before setting up in practice
in 1849. Highly successful in church building both at home and abroad, restorer of
five cathedrals and author of two books, Brick and Marble in North Italy (1855) and
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 991

Gothic Architecture in Spain (1865), he is best known for his Law Courts, London
(p. 1025), won in competition in 1866 but not finished until after his death. Reputedly
this was the last notable public building in revived Gothic; but there were later
ones in the provinces. Yet the style was declining, and architects born in the
thirties mostly turned away from it in their later careers. One of these was Alfred
Waterhouse (1830-1905).
Of considerable significance was the talented William Morris (1834-96), not an
architect but a designer, who brought a fresh outlook in decorative design, establish-
ing in 1861 a firm for the manufacture of furniture, fabrics, wall-papers and other
furnishings. In 1884 he founded the Art Workers’ Guild, and in 1877, the Society
for the Protection of Ancient Buildings. He also took a leading part in the Arts and
Crafts Movement, initiated in 1887. As early as 1859 he had commissioned a house
at Bexley Heath, Kent (p. 999), built for him by Philip Webb (1834-96), which
represents a new trend, towards simplicity and away from the extravagances of
contemporary historicism. Though it still has the flavour of the Gothic Revival it
marks a move in the direction of the ‘functional’ architecture of the twentieth cen-
tury. A similar restraint had appeared a decade earlier in the work of George Devey
(1820-86), who built a great many country houses, and contemporaneously in that
of W. Eden Nesfield (1835-98), which instead has a ‘Queene Anne’ character, later
developed strongly in the individualistic architecture of Norman Shaw (1831-
1912), who became extremely influential in the Late Victorian period. To the same
train of development belongs also the output of E. W. Godwin (1833-86). At
Liverpool are two remarkably advanced commercial buildings of the sixties by Peter
Ellis (d. 1884) (p. 1047), quite unhistorical in design and wholly framed in cast iron.
(C). In the Late Victorian period, while the principal mode was the so-called
Queen Anne, popularized by Norman Shaw, the range of historical sources tapped
by designers broadened almost to include every known style. Old favourites variously
strongly maintained their appeal, while others came freshly into favour, notably,
towards the end of the century, Romanesque, Byzantine and Baroque, while Flemish
Early Renaissance became a special favourite for buildings in terra-cotta, a material
never more extensively employed than at this time. There was, however, progres-
sively less concern with historical accuracy, and progressively more with the quest
for novelty and for architectural expressions more in keeping with the age. On the
one hand the outcome was an enhanced eclecticism, elements of different styles
being blended or combined in the one building, and on the other, the sporadic
appearance of new motifs for which there was no historical precedent, or even of
whole buildings conceived in a new spirit. In the latter, attempts were made to
design buildings rationally rather than to cast them in bygone moulds, and to allow
ornament to proceed naturally from structure. The invigorating influences pro-
duced the Arts and Crafts Movement mentioned previously, yet as also we have
seen, were equally if less obviously at work upon domestic, commercial and
industrial architecture. In turn, the Arts and Crafts Movement generated ‘Art
Nouveau’, a decorative movement of such vitality that for a brief span of years,
from about 1892 to 1905, it assumed the consequence of an architectural phase.
This was almost wholly Continental European, thoroughpaced British examples
being relatively few. In Britain, a principal exponent was Charles Rennie Mackin-
tosh (1868-1928) of Glasgow, in his own day more famous on the Continent than at
home. Despite the seeming contradiction, Art Nouveau, even at its most extrava-
gant, was part and parcel of the same rationalistic movement as was affecting the
work of progressive architects in general. It clearly expresses antipathy towards
historic ornament, and as events in Continental Europe were later to show, repre-
sents a positive step in the development of the ‘organic’ architecture of modern
992 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

times; for what is not so obvious is that the external exuberance masks a transforma-
tion taking place in spatial planning and a growing appreciation of the aesthetic
virtues of simple geometrical forms. When the excessive ornamentation was stripped
away, as happened in due course, the potentialities of the essential structural forms
became more fully apparent and were seized upon and developed. That story,
however, belongs to a following chapter (p. 1062 ff.).
In Britain, logical planning and simple, direct expression already has been
substantially achieved in at least one class of building. The houses by Webb, Shaw
and Godwin were variously strongly reminiscent of the historic styles (Godwin’s
interiors were influenced by Japanese Art); others, by younger men like A. H.
Mackmurdo (1851-1941) and W. R. Lethaby (1857-1931) somewhat less so,
while the best of those of Charles Frank Annesley Voysey (1857-1941) show
scarcely a trace. Voysey thus stands out very importantly in the train of evolution
of the-progressive architecture of today. A Yorkshireman, he had at one time been
assistant to George Devey (p. 991), beginning his own practice in 1882, this chiefly
concerned with houses of modest dimensions. All these personalities carried con-
siderable influence upon the Continent, but over the turn of the century none more
so than Voysey and Mackintosh, earlier named. Another who achieved direct
simplicity in his best houses was Edgar Wood (1860-1935), though these are more
obviously related than Voysey’s to Art Nouveau. Baillie Scott (1865-1945) and
George Walton (1867-1933) are others who continued to build homely dwellings
into the new century.
British Art Nouveau was very much more subdued than the Continental mode:
indeed it is impossible to draw any strict line between it and the preceding Arts and
Crafts movement. Both had some effect upon buildings of all classes, whatever
their type of expression, be it Gothic, Classic or Romanesque Revival, sometimes
inducing a comparative simplicity or a note of asymmetry, though usually only
traceable in the dressings and ornament. C. H. Townsend (1850-1928) was more
adventurous than most in introducing the new spirit into urban building, and Edward
S. Prior (1852-1932), pupil of Norman Shaw, was original in most of his work,
which at the height of his career was strongly infused with Art Nouveau feeling.
Prior was the author of History of Gothic Art in England (1900) and Cathedral
Builders in England (1905). The majority of buildings remained firmly ‘old-style’,
pretentious, fussy and crowded with detail, like interiors in general at this time,
which were never more overloaded with knick-knackery. Notable for their fine
Gothic designs were Basil Champneys (1842-1920) and John Francis Bentley
(1839-1902), the latter far better known, however, for his last and greatest work,
Westminster (R.C.) Cathedral (p. 1011). For Neo-Baroque, in a brief phase over-
lapping the end of the century, there is John Belcher (1841-1913), author of
Essentials in Architecture (1907), a book on architectural theory which takes up the
principles defined by Ruskin in 1849; and the brilliant Edwin Alfred Rickards
(1872-1920) while a partner in the distinguished firm of Lanchester, Stewart (d.
1904) and Rickards. Alfred Waterhouse did some of his best work in the period.
Norman Shaw, also active throughout and beyond the period, was not consistent in
the character he imparted to his buildings. Some of his earliest houses were respon-
sible for the ‘half-timber’ vogue still tenuously surviving in suburban residences
today. His churches and urban structures have excellent quality and many innova-
tions, while being eclectic or strongly based on one or other of the historic styles.
(D). After the Victorian era, Britain lost its lead in most architectural matters.
For long, the U.S.A., France and other Continental manufacturing countries had
been vying with her in technological developments, and in the second half of the
nineteenth century had been keeping a generally similar pace, innovations being
BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 993

B. Cliveden, Buckinghamshire (1849-51). See p. 996

994 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

A. Bridgewater House, London

(1847-57). See p. 996

E. The Vicarage, S. Saviour’s, Coalpitheath, ) F. doors: Shropshire (1877)

Gloucestershire (1844-5). See p. 996 ; See p. 999
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 995

due sometimes to one nation and sometimes to another. Now, in the early twentieth
century, it was Continental Europe that assumed the role of pioneer, in architec-
tural design as well as in constructional method.
Up to the war of 1914-18, architecture in Britain merely maintained the trends
noted in connection with the previous, Late Victorian, phase; and after that war,
before economic recovery could fully take place came the depression centred around
1932. Revivalism remained paramount, the various modes so blended or
loosely interpreted as almost to defy definition except as ‘Free Classic’ or—for
churches—‘Free Gothic’. Commercial buildings became higher and their window
areas expanded still more, as they could well do, since the steel frame, supporting
the masonry shell rather than buried within it as was normal with the cast- and
wrought-iron frames quite extensively used in the previous phase, came into use
about the beginning of the century. The first steel-framed building of this nature in
London is reputed to have been the Ritz Hotel (1905-6), by the architects Mewés and
Davies, and it is perhaps significant that the first of these, Charles Mewés (1858-
1947), was a Frenchman, of international reputation. (However, the method already
had been used in the U.S.A. by W. Le B. Jenney as early as 1883-5, in the early
stages of development of the sky-scraper (see p. I1152)). The advent of reinforced
concrete, the most significant building material of the twentieth century, was
delayed by restrictive building regulations, and the initial appearance of the material
in a building of importance was in the extensions to the General Post Office, London
(1907), by Sir Henry Tanner. There were, of course, quite a few individual
buildings of merit erected during the period, and two architects in particular, Sir
Edwin Lutyens (1869-1944), whose work included buildings in Delhi, Washington
and Rome, and Sir Giles Gilbert Scott (1880-1960), grandson of Sir George Gilbert
Scott of mid-nineteenth century fame, had their own admirable personal interpre-
tations of traditional architecture, the one favouring Neo-Classic and the other Neo-
Gothic. Lutyen’s first commission was in 1887 and Scott’s in 1903, both being active
through most of the first half of the century. Sir Robert Lorimer (1864-1929), Scottish
architect, completed much of his best-known work within the period. Notable
for his domestic architecture and far more for his sterling contributions to Town
Planning was Sir Raymond Unwin (1863-1940), author of Town Planning in Practice.
Between the World Wars I and II taste and the economic depression at first
occasioned an architecture of stripped Classicism, or its Gothic parallel, but by the
nineteen-thirties, the Modern architecture evolved on the Continent was beginning
to be understood and emulated (the nature of this architecture will be more fully
explained in Chapter XXVIII). The British architects, and those from the
Commonwealth working in Britain, who first practised it included Wells Coates
(1895-1958), E. Maxwell Fry (b. 1899), A. D. Connell (b. 1901), B. R. Ward (b.
1902), C. A. Lucas (b. 1906) and F. R. S. Yorke (b. 1906). They were joined by cer-
tain distinguished foreigners, most of whom stayed in Britain only a few years; B.
Lubetkin (b. 1901), of Russian birth, Erich Mendelsohn (p. 1068), Walter Gropius
(p. 1066)and Marcel Breuer (p. 1159), coming from Germany, and Serge Chermayeff
(b. 1900). Most buildings, however, remained essentially traditional until after
World War II when, after the country had recuperated, Modern architecture
expanded rapidly and is now ascendant in all classes of structure.

EXAMPLES
DOMESTIC BUILDINGS
In the Early Victorian period (1830-50), revivalist classical architecture turned
from ‘Antiquarian’ to Italian High Renaissance character, while the Gothicists
21 H.O.A.
996 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

generally favoured what was known as “Tudor’, which was in fact mostly freely
imitative of the Elizabethan and Jacobean English phases, and is sometimes
therefore known today as ‘Jacobethan’.
Harlaxton Hall, Lincolnshire (1834-55) (p. 1004A), by Antony Salvin, is a
picturesque, strongly-modelled and ornate mansion, reasonably authentic in its
‘Jacobethan’ detail. By the same architect was Scotney Castle, Kent (1837-40), a
much plainer but pleasant building.
Highclere Castle, Hampshire (1842-4) (p. 993A) is a refacing by Sir Charles
Barry of an existing mansion. Also ‘Jacobethan’, it is formal and severe in its
modelling if not in its detail. It is a four-square block with serried two-light
transomed windows in three tiers, demarcated by pilastered Orders and crowned
by pinnacled pierced parapets. Angle towers rise a storey higher, and a massive
principal tower rises in further stages to command the whole.
Bridgewater House, London (1847-57) (p. 994A), a town house of grand scale
by Sir Charles Barry, is in the Renaissance Revival mode he first introduced in his
Travellers’ Club (pp. 956, 987, 1019). The house is arranged around a high, galleried
central hall (in lieu of the Italian ‘cortile’), and has some splendidly-decorated
formal apartments on the ‘piano nobile’. It is astylar, with regularly-spaced con-
soled segmental-pedimented windows over a rusticated basement. There are
bolder rustications at the building’s angles, their lines carried up above the cornice
by chimney stacks. The second floor windows are set in the deep, panelled frieze
of a bold, astragal-type entablature, with balustrade over.
Cliveden, Buckinghamshire (1849-51) (p. 993B), a stately country house by
Barry, stands very graciously on a raised terrace, its astylar, arcaded basement
storey extended into colonnaded short wings. Above, rhythmically-spaced Ionic
pilasters closely embrace a range of consoled triangular-pedimented tall windows,
these having smaller windows above them.
Scarisbrick Hall, Lancashire (1837-52) (p. 994c), by A. W. N. Pugin, Gothic
enthusiast, was completed by his son, E. W. Pugin, between 1860-8. Its attractive
picturesque grouping may have been deliberate, but the building incorporates some
Mediaeval remains which already had been partially restored in 1814. The son’s
work was principally at the east end, including the upper part of the inordinately
high tower, and that of the parent mainly in the centre, around the hall proper.
Pugin’s extraordinary decorative ability gave the Gothic Revival a new turn.
The House at Ramsgate, Kent (1841-3) (p. 994B), built for himself by Pugin
in his own version of the Gothic (he had built an earlier residence, of eccentric
design, S. Marie’s Grange, near Salisbury, in 1835-6, which he had occupied for
the previous five years), is of flint on the road elevation, with stone dressings, and
grey-yellow brickwork for the toothed quoins and for the walling elsewhere.
Notable features are the studied asymmetry, the steep, barge-boarded gables and
the general informality of the arrangements. Only the more important windows
have label-moulds, transomes and traceried heads, and there is a first-floor oriel of
timber of quite unorthodox design.
The Vicarage, S. Saviour’s, Coalpitheath, Gloucestershire (1844-5) (p. 994E),
an early design by William Butterfield, is a freely-planned composition of stone
rubble with ashlar dressings. The main rooms are reached from the living-hall,
as was normal in the traditional yeoman’s house. The roofs, which have gable
parapets, are steep, and there are casually-disposed angle-buttresses as well as a
square, shallow bay.
High Victorian domestic architecture (1850-75) still included many ‘Jacobethan’
buildings, but the phase is particularly notable for the expansion of the Gothic
Revival at the expense of the Classical, and the beginning of a rational movement in
BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

A. The Red House, Bexley Heath o) Kent (1859-60). See p. 999

B. Glen Andred, Groombridge, Sussex (1866-7) See p - 999

998 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

Seen ie as

A. Alford House, London (1872). B. 196, Queen’s Gate, London

See p. 999 (1875). See p. 1000

Dp. Old Swan House, London

(1876). See p. 999

E. The Pastures, North Luffenham, Rutland F. 180, Queen’s Gate, Lon

(1901). See p. 1000 don (1885). See p. 1000
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 999

which interest in homely craftsmanship and the inherent qualities of building

materials tended to replace the prevailing fashionable preoccupation with ostenta-
tious stylar display.
The Red House, Bexley Heath, Kent (1859-60) (p. 997A) built by Philip Webb
for William Morris, sociologist and decorative designer, so named because of its
materials, red brick and tiles, represents a striking change from the normal preten-
tious and heavily stylized dwelling of the period. Although its high-pitched roofs
and occasional pointed arches are faintly reminiscent of English Mediaeval archi-
tecture, it is informal and novel in its arrangements, intimately domestic in appear-
ance and convenient to the requirements of the day.
Another fine brick and tile-roofed house by Webb is Smeaton Manor, York-
shire (1877-9), much more formal but equally direct, simple and unadorned,
deriving its qualities from the materials, neat arrangement and excellent propor-
tions.
Glen Andred, Groombridge, Sussex (1866-7) (p. 997B), was the first wholly
personal design by Norman Shaw, though he was at that time still in partnership
(to 1868) with W. Eden Nesfield. Shaw’s style was not as yet fully formed, and the
effect is somewhat restless, due to the crowding of certain of the features and the
use of tile-hanging on the upper part of the house. Yet the house has an honesty
of expression which compares favourably with the products of most of his fellow
architects. In it there are hints of the so-called ‘Queen Anne’ style which he was
later to make so popular. Much more romantic is his Leys Wood, Groombridge
(1868-9), a large brick and partly tile-hung structure arranged around three sides
of a court, embodying Mediaeval motifs, including half-timber elements. Half-
timber appears also in a number of houses that followed: Grim’s Dyke, near
Harrow (1872); Wispers, Midhurst, Sussex (1875); and Pierrepont, Farnham,
Surrey (1876). In these and several others Shaw’s indebtedness to late Mediaeval
and Elizabethan architecture is patent, whether the main materials be brick,
timber or stone. In the last material is Adcote, Shropshire (1877) (p. 994F).
Alford House, London (1872) (p. 998A), by Sir M. D. Wyatt, evidences French
‘Second Empire’ influence (p. 1063) upon English architecture at this time, evident
in Classic design, as here, as well as in Gothic. This town house is of brick with
luxuriant terra-cotta dressings and a mansard roof.
Cardiff Castle (1865) and Castle Coch, near Cardiff (1875) were recon-
structed for the Marquess of Bute at the dates given, the architect being William
Burges, in an extraordinarily fantastic personal version of the Gothic Revival,
flavoured with French and oriental notions (p. 994D). The profusion of detail and
ornament is representative of Late Victorian architecture in general, even if these
particular concoctions are unique to Burges.
Late Victorian domestic architecture is generally more restless and congested
than at any other time, bygone styles of whatever country being ransacked for
novel ideas. A coarse Gothic Revivalism survived longer in domestic than in public
architecture, especially among the lesser dwellings, before succumbing to one or
other of the Classical modes. For the larger residences the ‘Queen Anne’ and
Flemish Renaissance became particularly popular, and the best versions were
relatively simple and had qualities expressive of their own time. Towards the end
of the period, and beyond, quite a few houses were affected in greater or less degree
by Art Nouveau.
Old Swan House, Chelsea (1876) (p. 998D) by Norman Shaw, is a dignified
brick mansion the design of which owes quite a little to historical Georgian
architecture, yet is original in many ways. The cantilevered upper portion is
carried upon an iron frame. Shaw’s No. 170, Queen’s Gate, London (1888)
1000 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

(p. 998c), square-built, plain and unadorned save for stone quoins and shutters to
the triple tiers of sash windows, is more truly ‘Queen Anne’, while his No. 196,
Queen’s Gate, London (1875) (p. 9988), wholly of brick, rising in five twin-
pilastered storeys to a scrolled, windowed and pedimented gable had a considerable
influence upon the domestic architecture of the time. Another example, again of
brick and with an arcaded angle porch, is No. 180, Queen’s Gate, London (1885)
(p. 998F). In 1876-7 Shaw laid out Bedford Park, London, an early experiment in
suburban planning, and he and several other well-known architects, including E.
W. Godwin, built modest and pleasant houses there, mostly in the Queen Anne vein.
An earlier nineteenth-century venture in town-planning had been the industrial
village of Saltaire, Yorkshire (1851-3) in relation to a mill built for Sir Titus Salt by
William Fairbarn; and it was followed in 1888 by the model industrial town of Port
Sunlight, near Chester. All these were greatly admired on the Continent.
The Forster House, Bedford Park (1891) (p. 1001B) by C. F. A. Voysey, was
one of the first in which a definite breakaway was made from traditional concep-
tions. As nearly as possible the house was reduced to its elemental components,
presenting externally its white stuccoed fronts with low, casement windows
disposed informally to the greatest internal advantage. The plan is neat and com-
pact and the general air of the house ‘cottagy’ and comfortable. The topmost of the
three tiers formed a studio. The wide eaves, supported at intervals by light iron
stays, the canopied entrance door and the tapering chimney stacks are features
which were to become popular in English Art Nouveau. Similar in style but larger
and low-crouching, a style made familiar by countless imitations, are Broadleys,
Gill Head, Windermere (1898-9) (p. I00IA), with three bow-windows of two
storeys penetrating a low Westmorland-slated dormered roof, and The Orchard,
Chorley Wood, Herts (1899), the latter having shallow sloping buttresses at the
principal end of the long rectangle of the house. Others, long, low, with ranges of
casement windows of a varying number of lights, white walls and stone-slated roofs,
gabled or hipped, extended into the next century, The Pastures, North Luffen-
ham, Rutland (1901) (p. 998E), The Homestead, Frinton, Essex (1905) and S.
Winifred’s Quarry, Coombe Down, near Bath (1909) being further examples. A
feature of certain of Voysey’s houses was the large and comfortable living-hall, the
stair at The Orchard rising informally out of it (p. 10024).
The Barn, Exmouth, Devonshire (1896) (p. 10034), by E. S. Prior, has an ap-
proximately symmetrical blunted-V-shaped plan, entered in the inner angle. In
character it is dominantly Art Nouveau, the composition having little or no historical
allusion. The house has varied floor levels, walls of local stone textured and patterned
and in part stuccoed or tile-hung, tiled steep roofs forming a complex geometrical
pattern, large cylindrical chimney stalks tapering slightly to lidded caps which have
side outlets between stone balls, and extensive transomed windows on the terraced
garden front. Part of the hall rises through two storeys. Somewhat similar in plan is
his Home Place, Kelling, Norfolk (1904) (p. 1003B),an elaborate symmetrical com-
position with splay wings, the main entrance here being upon one outer flank. The
generously-large, axially placed hall again goes through two storeys. Prior’s ob-
session with wall patterning and the use of miscellaneous local materials here gives
the house an extraordinarily garish and restless air, bricks of various colours being
used to diversify the flint-built walls. The numerous prominent chimney stalks are
vaguely Elizabethan in their intricate detail.
Up to the Great War of 1914-19, the previous Classical trends were maintained,
though dwellings became plainer than they had been. Gothic Revivalism concluded,
and the promise held out by the Arts and Crafts Movement and Art Nouveau
faded: the new functional or ‘Modern’ architecture, developed on the Continent,
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1001

A. Broadleys, Gillhead, Windermere (1898-9). B. The Forster House, Bedford

See p. 1000 Park, London(1891). See p. 1000

c. Exterior nce hall

Hill House, Helensburgh, Dumbartonshire (1902-3). See p. 1007

E. Upmeads, Stafford (1910). F. Derngate, Northants

See p. 1007 (1916). See p. 1007
1002 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

B. Hous’Hill, Nitshill, Glasgow (c.51906): music room. See p. 1007

BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1003

fe see: aa. ae

A. The Barn, Exmouth, Devonshire (1896). See p. 1000

€s Sy Z mei ms

B. Home Place, Kelling, Norfolk (1904). See p. 1000

1004 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

c. Temple Dinsley, Herts (1909). See p. 1007

BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1005

B. House near Halland, Sussex (1938). See p, 1007

 1006 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

A. Highpoint 1, Highgate, London B. House in Newton Road, Paddi

(1934-5). See p. 1008 ton (1939). See p. 1007

c. Belem Tower, Sefton Park, Liverpool Dp. Alton Estate, Wandsworth, London
(1958-9), See p. 1008 (1954-6). See p. 1008
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1007
made little or no progress before c. 1930, and even in the post-wars period Britain
has remained somewhat in arrears. Yet under its influence historicism consistently
diminished and today the practices opposed to Modernism can only be summed
up loosely as ‘traditional’.
Hill House, Helensburgh, Dumbartonshire (1902-3) (p. 1001C, D) is one of
several houses by C. R. Mackintosh, the most distinguished of the few Britons who
practised architectural Art Nouveau. It has a similar directness and homely
character to Voysey’s houses, with white walls, informally disposed casement
windows and an absence of historic ornament, though here the composition is
tinged with a Scottish ‘Baronial’ flavour. The house embodies innovations in
interior design (p. IOOID), as also does the same architect’s Hous’ Hill, Nitshill,
Glasgow (c. 1906), where the Music Room (p. 1002B) shows his extraordinary
sense of volume and spatial values.
No. 78, Derngate, Northampton (1916) (p. IooIF), an alteration and extension
of an existing terrace house by C. R. Mackintosh, is a remarkable anticipation,
unique for Britain, of the Modern architecture of the future, with its forthright
geometrical composition, white walls, enclosed balcony, plain vertical balusters
and, in general, genuine structural expression, unencumbered with ornament.
Upmeads, Stafford (1910) (p. I001E), by Edgar Wood, has a symmetrical front,
unadorned, parapeted brick walls, flat roof and plain casement windows so arranged
as to accentuate the stone entrance porch and centre feature. Like other houses by
the same architect, it is in most respects a progressive design showing Art Nouveau
traits and a tendency towards functional expression.
Hampstead Garden suburb (begun 1906), Letchworth Garden City (begun 1903)
and Welwyn Garden City (begun 1920), the latter two following the principles laid
down by Sir Ebenezer Howard (1850-1928), founder (1899) of the Garden City
Movement, were important developments in which modest, neatly-designed dwel-
lings were set in pleasant, green surroundings. Howard’s principles were adapted
for the governmental policy embodied in the New Towns Act of 1944.
The Deanery Garden, Sonning, Berks (1900-1) (p. 10048) is one of the many
fine works of Sir Edwin Lutyens. His designs regularly were based upon tradition
but invariably infused with fresh, contemporary feeling. He used building materials
—brick, terra-cotta or stone—with the greatest attention to their natural properties,
and paid scrupulous attention to detail. Many of his designs follow historical
vernacular styles, though some, like Temple Dinsley, Herts (1909) (p. 1004c) have
the character and qualities of the historical greater houses. Others by him are
Marsh Court, Stockbridge (1901); Heathcote, Ilkley (1906); Gledstone Hall,
Skipton (1923); and some at the Hampstead Garden suburb (1907-9).
The Sun House, Hampstead, London (1935) (p. 10054), by E. Maxwell Fry, is
an early instance of English ‘Modern’ domestic architecture. The flat roof, white
walls, metal-and-glass ribbon windows, metal handrails, balustrades and gates,
concrete canopies and balconies, all are significant features. The main rooms on the
first floor have a virtually unimpeded glass wall, while the bedroom windows are
appropriately reduced in height. The house is attractive in its play of form and
contrast of solid and void, and needs no ornament to enhance its domestic virtues.
Other notable late inter-war examples are a further House at Hampstead (1938),
by Connell, Ward and Lucas, a House near Halland, Sussex (1938) (p. 1005B),
by Serge Chermayeff, a simple, two-floored, timber box-frame structure standing in
park-like spacious grounds, and an urban House in Newton Road, Paddington,
London (1939) (p. 1006B) by Denys Lasdun, which has the service quarters on the
ground floor, together with a garage, the living rooms and bedrooms respectively
on the first and second floors and a studio and balcony on the top floor. Only the
1008 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

south (entrance) front of the latter is in concrete, the rear walls being in eleven-
inch brickwork.
Highpoint I, Highgate, London (1934-5) (p. 1006A), by Tecton, is an eight-
storey group of flats, standing on pillars or ‘pilotis’, made up of wings thrown
outwards to catch the sun and air. There are generous windows and balconies on
each storey, and the flat roof is turned to useful account.
Since World War II flats have been a much more common form of civic housing
than formerly in cities and large towns, complementing housing schemes of the
normal two-floored types. Among the many fine flat blocks erected in the post-wars
period are the Spa Green Estate, London (1949) by Tecton; the Churchill Gardens
Development, Pimlico, London (1951) by Powell and Moya; the Tower Block,
Harlow New Town (1951) by Frederick Gibberd; the Belem Tower, Sefton
Park, Liverpool (1958-9) (p. 1006c) by Ronald Bradbury; and the Alton Estate,
Wandsworth, London (1954-6) (p. 1006D) by H. Bennett, Sir J. L. Martin, R. H.
Matthew; H. J. Whitfield Lewis and others.

CHURCHES
S. Wilfred, Hulme, Manchester (1839-42), by A. W. N. Pugin, largely of red
brick, was designed in accordance with the architect’s ecclesiological principles,
and was described by him in his book The Present State of Ecclesiastic Architecture
in England. It differs from the average ‘Commissioner’ Gothic Revival church of
the preceding period in having separately articulated parts—nave, aisles and south
porch, together with eastern lateral chapels divided from the aisles and chancel by
ornamentally-painted screens. It was to have had an asymmetrical tower at the
north-west corner, which would have made it the first Revival church to depart
from the axial principle, but funds gave out before it was built. Intended to demon-
strate that a Gothic ‘correct’ church need not be more costly than a classical one,
it is in fact mean and pinched and of little architectural merit.
S. Giles, Cheadle, Staffs (1841-6) (p. 1009A), by Pugin, is stone built and finely
finished. Its composition profits by the presence of a commanding axial western
tower and spire. Not unduly ornamented outside, its interior retains all the rich
furnishings and polychromatic painted decoration that the designer intended.
S. Giles, Camberwell Church Street, London (1842-4) (p. 1009B), by Scott and
Moffatt, the commission for which was won in competition before George Gilbert
Scott had set up on his own account, is a large stone structure seating I,500 persons.
Cruciform in plan, it rises to an impressive, spire-crowned central tower over 200
ft high, the spire patterned in dressings of a lighter-coloured stone, which give a
somewhat disturbing effect. Designed in Geometrical Gothic style, it demonstrated
Scott’s powers and also provided a model for certain of his own later churches as
well as for those of fellow architects. Other notable Gothic Revival churches,
slightly later in date, are S. Paul, Brighton (1846-8), by R. C. Carpenter; S.
Stephen, Rochester Row, London (1847-50), by Benjamin Ferrey; and Holy
Trinity, Bessborough Gardens, London (1849-52), by J. L. Pearson.
All Saints, Margaret Street, London (1849-59) (p. I009C), by William
Butterfield, was the first and most outstanding of the High Victorian churches. It
stands on a cramped site, with a parsonage and choir school adjacent. It was built
by public subscription as a model church of the Camden Society. Typical of Butter-
field are the harsh angularity of the forms, the hard-faced enduring materials and
the strident “constructional polychromy’ found externally and internally. Vaguely,
the design was based upon the ‘Middle Pointed’ or fourteenth-century Gothic,
this being the popular model of the day. The facades and the high and rather
narrow tower, turning abruptly to an octagonal spire, are banded and patterned
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1009

S. Giles, Cheadle, Staffs (1841-6). B. S. Giles, Camberwell Church Street, London

See p. 1008 (1842-4). See p. 1008

‘ iy =, LULL
tr rit

. Church, Choir School and Parsonage D. Interior: nave and chancel

All Saints, Margaret Street, London (1849-59). See p. 1008
IO1O BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

A. Truro Cathedral, Cornwall (1880-). B. The Chapel, Lancing College, Sussex

See opposite page (1854-). See opposite page

c. Keble College, Oxford: chapel (1873-6). See opposite page

 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE IOII

with black brick on bright red, the spire being further varied with stone (p. 1009C).
Inside, there are geometrical patterns and frescoes on the walls, ornament brilliant
in the varied colours of marble, alabaster, brick and glazed tiles, stained glass
windows and gilded ironwork and woodwork (p. 1009D). The church had its critics,
but was enormously influential. Constructional polychromy became a mark of the
High Victorian period. Among many other churches by Butterfield are Keble
College Chapel, Oxford (1873-6) (p.1010c), and S. James, Baldersby, Yorkshire
(1856), a fine composition upon an unencumbered site, with a dominating spire
located asymmetrically over the south porch.
The Chapel, Lancing College, Sussex (1854-) (p. 1010B), by R. C. Carpenter,
had been barely commenced at the architect’s death in 1855, like the college of
which it forms a part. The grand asymmetrical west-end tower he intended was
never carried out. The chapel evidently owes something to French influence, as it
has soaring proportions and double flying-buttresses externally, spanning the aisles,
though not at the half-octagonal east end, where the aisles are not carried round.
The Caledonia Road Free Church, Glasgow (1856-7) (p. 1013A), by Alexander
Thomson, is an admirable if belated example of the Greek Revival, this style having
survived much longer in Scotland than in England. However, it has the asymmetri-
cal western tower normal to High Victorian Gothic, an impressively massive struc-
ture terminating rather weakly above an open belfry in an inset, heavily-corniced
attic. The hexastyle west porch, of faultless Classical proportions, is raised upon a
high podium adorned only with lateral entrance doors. Two other Presbyterian
churches by Thomson, also in Greek Revival style, are in S. Vincent Street (1859)
and Queen’s Park (1867), Glasgow.
Truro Cathedral, Cornwall (1880-) (p. IoIoA) by J. L. Pearson, was not
wholly completed at his death and was continued by his son. A granite structure,
it is typical of the architect’s style; grand, plain and bold. He was expert in vaulting,
not often used in churches in his time. There are spired central and western
towers, and powerful vertical emphasis is given to the transept fronts and east end.
Westminster (R.C.) Cathedrai (1895-1903) (p. 1013B, C), by J. F. Bentley,
was based upon Byzantine precedents for the practical reason that in this particular
style the main structure could be finished reasonably quickly and the internal
decorative veneers applied afterwards when the church had been put into service.
That process has actually been followed. There is a spacious nave, 60 ft wide,
covered by three pendentived domes, 112 ft above the floor to the crown, flanked
by aisles with side chapels—or, in the case of the easternmost dome, by transepts—
bringing the full width to 98 ft (p. 1013c). A fourth, slightly smaller, dome covers
the sanctuary and choir, and the full length to the apse is 342 ft. The grey-brown
bricks of the walls are being progressively sheathed with similar marbles to those
used in S. Sophia (p. 280), chapel by chapel, and the vaults covered with mosaics.
Over the altar is a white marble baldachino supported on yellow marble columns.
Externally (p. 1013B), the brick walls are patterned horizontally with stone, and near
the N.W. angle rises the sheer campanile known as S. Edward’s tower.
Liverpool Cathedral (1903-) (p. 10144, B) by Sir Giles Gilbert Scott, who won
the commission by competition at the early age of twenty-two, is still incomplete,
though it has now progressed from the east end westwards well beyond the central
tower. It is in many ways original but essentially is in Free Gothic style of the
Decorated period. It is untraditional in having a double-axis symmetry—apart from
relatively minor masses at the east end—dominated by a great central tower
(p. 1014A), on either side of which lie double transepts. The spaces between the
double transepts are bridged over by arches to form northern and southern
porches. The material mostly is red sandstone, the vaults being covered by upper
 1012 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

roofs of reinforced concrete. The eventual floor area will be about 100,000 square
ft, greater than any existing cathedral in England (S. Paul, London, is 63,000 sq.
ft), the internal length being 480 ft and the width, including the aisles, 87 ft, the
vaults rising to 173 ft.
S. Andrew, Roker, near Sunderland (1906) (p. 1015), the masterpiece of E. S.
Prior and a great testimony to his interest in the qualities of building materials, is a
fine, strong and masculine Free Gothic church with many Art Nouveau charac-
teristics, standing on an elevated site commanding the neighbouring coastline.
Insofar as it is Revivalist, it is eclectic, combining Norman and Gothic traits. ‘The
massive walls flanking the nave, this 43 ft wide and 105 ft long, are pierced by
shallow aisles in their 7 ft 6 in thickness, the inner faces of the splayed piers
demarcating the lateral windows being carried on paired ‘Norman’ pillars of
original design; from their lintels spring diaphragm pointed arches supporting the
open roof (p. 1015c). The arches spanning the short transepts are splayed inwards
to embrace the choir space and to connect with the narrow chancel, 24 ft wide,
above which is a dignified tower, with hexagonal angle turrets (p. 1015B). The mul-
lions and embryonic tracery of the ample windows are powerfully strong, admirably
in keeping with the whole vigorous design. The fitting, furnishings and decoration
were contributed by persons eminent in the Arts and Crafts movement.
S. Jude, Hampstead Garden Suburb (1910) (p. 1014C), by Sir Edwin Lutyens,
is eclectic, but the historically-discordant elements are handled in the designer’s
unfailingly brilliant fashion to form a most agreeable composition. Latin cross in
plan, a central tower with open belfry and crowning spire dominates the massing,
and a vast pitched roof, similarly of Mediaeval aspect, broken by tall dormer win-
dows, sweeps down almost to the ground over the aisles, though for the rest the
design is of Classical, Renaissance, character.
The Church of the Annunciation, Old Quebec Street, London (1912) (p.
I016A), by Sir Walter Tapper, is one of the best examples of late Gothic Revivalism.
It has few novel features, but is a dignified structure, of brick with stone dressings,
of excellent proportions.
The War Memorial Chapel, Charterhouse School (1922-6) (p. 1016B) by
Sir Giles Gilbert Scott, is in the Gothic Revival mode yet has refreshingly original
dispositions. Rectangular in plan and high-proportioned, the severity of the longi-
tudinal walls is relieved by angle turrets and tall, slot-windows in buttress-like
projections.
S. Nicholas, Burnage, Manchester (1931) (p. 1016C), by Welch, Cachemaille-
Day and Lander, instances the endeavours being made at this time to break away
from revivalism and to secure the right qualities by contemporary methods and
materials. The interior effects are contrived by simple means: the wall openings
are skilfully disposed, certain of the pillars within them being left in exposed
brickwork, the walls otherwise being finished in tinted plaster; the Lady Chapel,
partitioned off by a metal grille, is raised above the sacristy and vestries; and below
is the altar, against the brick-faced podium wall. Very important to the effect is the
panelled, darkly-coloured wall-board ceiling. Equally original for the period is
S. Saviour, Eltham, Kent (1932) (p. 1016D), by the same architects.
The Cathedral, Guildford (1936-) (p. 10174), by Sir Edward Maufe, the subject
of a competition, still is only partially completed. Traditional in its cruciform,
central-towered composition, and Gothic Revival in theme, it is extremely broad
and bold in scale, the massive simplicity of the towering brick walls contrasting
powerfully with the traceried tall windows.
The Cathedral, Coventry (1951) (p. 1018),by Sir Basil Spence, the major ecclesi-
astical building of the post-wars period, as yet unfinished, lies on a N.S. axis at
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1013

A. Caledonia Road Free Church, B. Westminster Cathedral (1895-1903):

Glasgow (1856-7). See p. IOII exterior from south-east. See p. IOII

wmeneraien
comrageaersra
hamster
Pont

c. Westminster Cathedral: interior from west

1014 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

Y
A. Central tower from south B. Interior: bay below tower
Liverpool Cathedral (1903-). See p. IOII

c. S. Jude, Hampstead Garden Suburb, London (1910). See p. 1012

 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1015

B. East front, showing tower c. Interior, looking east

over chancel
S. Andrew, Roker (1906). See p. 1012
 1016 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE
Lo 4
a

A. Church of the Annunciation, Old 8. War Memorial Chapel, Charterhouse School,

Quebec Street, London (1912). See p. 1012 Surrey (1922-6). See p. 1012

c. S. Nicholas, Burnage, Manchester (1931): D. S. Saviour, Eltham, Kent (1932):

interior. See p. 1012 interior. See p. 1012
BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1017

A. Guildford Cathedral, west front (1936-). See p. IoI2

B. Church at Tile Hill, Coventry (1957). See p. 1019

1018 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

A. Perspective view. See p. I0I2

TAPESTRY
REFECTORY

CHAPEL OF
UNITY
ie

RUINSOF OLD
CATHEDRAL
B. Interior of model looking north Gay Plan
Coventry Cathedral (1951-). See p. 1012
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1019

right angles to the former church, of which the spired tower and ruined walls are
being preserved to form a ceremonial approach to the new cathedral, which other-
wise is reached from an adjacent double-sided porch astride the axis. The Cathedral
is a modern version of a hall-church, 250 ft long by 80 ft wide, the high-propor-
tioned nave and aisles being divided by slender, downward-tapering pillars, fanning
out at the head into a faceted vault, pierced with decorative patterns (p. 10188).
The side walls are formed in oblique short sections, joined by tall stained-glass
windows running the full height, which throw the incoming light towards the altar.
Behind the altar is the Lady Chapel, the rear wall of which is to be clothed with a
vast tapestry. A ‘Chapel of Unity’, of circular plan, projects westward near the
entrance end, and a smaller, circular, Guild Chapel lies beyond the east side of the
Lady Chapel.
The Church at Tile Hill, Coventry (1957) (p. 10178), by Sir Basil Spence, is one of
three churches built to serve a new community. It is a simple rectangle, walled in
‘no-fines’ concrete, the low, open timber roof being sustained on concrete frames.
The latter afford the only decorative relief to the body of the church internally,
apart from the entrance door, small side windows and tall, lattice-framed windows
which admit a flood of light on either side of the altar, illuminating a fine tapestry
filling most of the east wall. Adjacent to the church is a church hall and a concrete,
openwork belfry.

PUBLIC BUILDINGS
The Travellers’ Club, Pall Mall, London (1829-31) (p. 10214, B), by Sir Charles
Barry, initiated the Renaissance Revival in England. The two-storey facade
(p. 102IA) is astylar, with toothed angle-quoins, regular architecturally-enframed
windows—those of the upper floor being of the aedicule type—and a console-
corniced, asymmetrically-placed doorway. The storeys are divided by an ornamen-
tal string, and there is a crowning astragal cornice. The main features are said to
have been derived from Raphael’s Palazzo Pandolfini at Florence (p. 756). On the
garden front (p. 1021B) the windows have a Venetian grouping, those of the first
floor being round-headed and those of the lower square-headed and ornamentally
rusticated.
The Reform Club, Pall Mall, London (1838-40) (p. 1021C, D), by Barry, adjoins
his Travellers’ Club and is similar in design but has a central doorway and is larger
and three-storeyed, the upper range over the regular, aedicule, windows being em-
braced in the astragal frieze below the main cornice. Barry’s Athenaeum, Man-
chester (1837-39), actually the earlier of the two, is a further variant upon the same
‘palazzo’ theme.
The Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge (1837-47) (p. 1022c), by George
Basevi and C. R. Cockerell, is a fine flourish of the departing ‘Antiquarian’ mode,
still continuing in this period in the more monumental work of a few architects.
Cockerell continued the work after the death of Basevi in 1845. The building is
vigorous in modelling but coarser in detail than Neo-Classical monuments of the
first quarter of the century. The facade comprises a giant Corinthian portico
extended into pilastered, buttress-like wings.
Westminster New Palace (Houses of Parliament), London (1840-60)
(p. 1022D), by Sir Charles Barry, with the assistance of A. W. N. Pugin, is Neo-
Tudor in decorative detail although axial and classical in plan. The plan is in
some respects asymmetrical, partly in order to accommodate Westminster Hall,
which had survived the fire of 1834. Substantially, the architectural dispositions are
Barry’s and the busy detail Pugin’s. The buildings extend along the Thames side
a distance of rather more than 9oo ft, the river terrace being on the east side, where
1020 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

the front is symmetrical, ending in angle pavilions. The formal approach from the
west or landward side is via S. Stephen’s Porch, which also gives access to West-
minster Hall and delivers into the Central Hall, where a cross-axis leads south to
the House of Lords and north to the House of Commons. Subsidiary suites of
chambers are arranged around a series of courts. In the S.W. corner rises the
massive Victoria Tower, 336 ft high, and at the northern end is the Clock Tower,
316 ft in height, the clock faces of which are 23 ft across, wherein is a 13-ton bell,
‘Big Ben’. There is a further ‘Middle Tower’ or spired lantern over the Central
Hall, rising to 300 ft in height. This great complex of buildings, with its wonder-
fully intricate Tudor detail, had great influence upon the course of the Gothic
Revival, though during the long period of its building Tudor Gothic largely went
out of fashion in favour of fourteenth century precedents.
The Ashmolean Museum (University Galleries) and Taylor Institution,
Oxford (1841-5) (p. I1021E), by C. R. Cockerell, a confirmed classicist, is an exten-
sive, southward-facing building breaking forward at the ends into wings. It is
ornamented with a giant Ionic Order, pilastered mostly but with slightly-free-
standing or attached columns at the principal points. The monumental qualities
are most apparent on the east front of the east wing (p. 1021E), where the Order is
the Ionic of the Temple of Apollo Epicurius at Bassae (p. 124), with its extra-
ordinarily deep capitals, which Cockerell had himself studied in Greece in his youth.
The entablature returns above the columns, which carry only statues.
S. George’s Hall, Liverpool (1842-54) (p. 1023C), was the outcome of a com-
petition won by the youthful H. L. Elmes in 1839. After his untimely death in 1847,
the work was continued successively by Sir Robert Rawlinson and C. R. Cockerell,
who each made their contributions to this, the most splendid monument of the
century. The main axis of this Classical building runs north-south, and the two
long fronts are essentially symmetrical; the south short front has an octastyle porch
and the north is rounded and faced with attached columns. The overall dimensions
are 420 ft by 140 ft wide, the centre portion being occupied by the Great Hall,
and the two wings by court rooms. The principal front is the east, where a grand
portico of sixteen Graeco-Roman Corinthian columns matches the length of the Hall.
The Royal College of Physicians, Edinburgh (1850-4) (p. 1021F), by Thomas
Hamilton, has a Graeco-Roman facade with an entrance porch flanked with
columns of the type of those of the Tower of the Winds, Athens (p. 140).
The National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh (1850-4) (p. 10234), by William
H. Playfair (1789-1857), is a monumental building in Ionic Greek Revival style.
Among other important buildings in the city Playfair also designed the Royal
Institution (1833-6) (p. I023B), in a cumbrous version of the Greek Doric.
The University Museum, Oxford (1855-9) (p. 1024A, B), by Sir Thomas Deane
(1792-1871) and Benjamin Woodward (1815-61), is a landmark of Victorian High
Gothic architecture, regarded by Eastlake as ‘one of the first fruits of Mr. Ruskin’s
teaching’. The main front (p. 10244) has a narrow, steeply-roofed central feature,
containing the entrance door, flanked by two-storey wings in which there are
regularly-spaced windows of Italian Gothic type. In the steep roofs of the wings
there are triangular dormers in two series, the upper extremely small. The walls
are of cream-coloured Bath stone, with inset marbles around the doorway head and
upper-window arches, and the roofs are patterned in purple and grey-green slates.
Internally, there is a quadrangle roofed with iron and glass (p. 10248), the ironwork
decoratively ‘Gothicised’ with elaborate ornament. The roof is carried upon
clustered and banded iron pillars, from which spring arcade ribs and steeply-pointed
transverse ribs, the latter reaching to the apex of the glazed, pitched roof. As the
covered quadrangle is itself walled about by polychrome arcades, the total effect
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1021

A. Pall Mall front (right) B. Garden front

The Travellers’ Club, Pall Mall, London (1829-31). See p. 1019

c. Exterior Dp. Saloon

The Reform Club, Pall Mall, London (1838-40). See p. 1019

SS ‘a

E. The Taylor Institution, Oxford F. Royal College of Physicians,

(1841-5): east front. Edinburgh (1850-4).
See p. 1020 See p. 1020
 1022 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

A. Royal Manchester Institution Building (1824-35), now the City Art Gallery.
See pp. 877; 956; 987

B. Carlton House, London: c. The Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge (1837-47).

conservatory (1811-12). See p. 1019
See p. 989

D. Westminster Palace, London (1840-60). See p. 1019

BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1023

c. S. George’s Hall, Liverpool (1842-54). See p. 1020

1024 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

¥ ee i ee ee
ae

B. The University Museum, Oxford: c. The Albert Memorial, London

interior (1863-72). See p. 1025
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1025
is extremely busy and ill-calculated to afford effective contrast with the exhibits.
The Foreign Office, London (1860-75) (p. 1027), by Sir George Gilbert Scott,
is in Neo-Renaissance, High Victorian style. It has no great merit, being irresolute
and diffuse, perhaps for the reason that Scott was here obliged to adopt the Classical
style against his will by the Prime Minister, Lord Palmerston, who abhorred the
Gothic. Scott adapted his rejected Gothic designs to serve for the hotel buildings
fronting S. Pancras station (p. 1039D).
The Albert Memorial, London (1863-72) (p. 1024), by Scott, marks the zenith
of the Gothic Revival and is its best known and most representative monument.
The seated figure of the Prince is covered by a pointed-arched spired canopy of vari-
coloured marbles, adorned with numerous free-standing sculptures and a bas-
relief of 178 famous artists around the base, the whole monument standing on a
high flight of steps. The total height is 175 ft, higher by five feet than the Nelson
Column in Trafalgar Square, London, erected in 1843 from the designs of
William Railton (1803-77) (the lions were added in 1867). The Albert Memorial
had been the subject of a competition held in 1862, won by Scott, and in the same
year Thomas Worthington won a similar competition for the Albert Memorial,
Manchester (p. 1028A), producing a design which bears a remarkable likeness, though
it is simpler and of English rather than Continental Gothic inspiration. Which was
the prototype is not clear.
The Assize Courts, Manchester (1859-64), by Alfred Waterhouse, were
irreparably damaged in World War II and demolished in 1959. It was by this
building, won in competition, that Waterhouse first made his name. After its
completion, it was said to ‘unite considerable artistic merit with unusual advan-
tages in regard to plan and internal arrangement’. A symmetrical two-storey
building, over a windowed basement, with an arcaded central entrance block,
slightly-projecting angle pavilions and a bell-tower rising axially behind, it was
typical High Victorian Gothic in its admixture of English, Lombard and French
characteristics, the latter shown especially in the high-pitched and pavilioned roofs.
Of somewhat similar character is Waterhouse’s Town Hall, Manchester (1868-77)
(p. 10284), placed fourth as regards its ‘thirteenth century Gothic’ elevations in the
two-stage competition concluded in 1867, but deemed much superior to others ‘in
the supply of light, the facility of ventilation, the ease of access and the general
excellence of the plan’. Waterhouse was also the architect of the Gothic Owens
College (University), Manchester (1870-1902). In his Natural History
Museum, South Kensington, London (1879-80), he turned to the Romanesque.
The Town Hall, Congleton, Cheshire (1864-7) (p. 1029B) by E. W. Godwin,
is in Italian Gothic style. It is a two-storeyed scheme, arcaded below, with a
central machicolated and battlemented tower rising vertically from the facade. A
modest and pleasant building, it is much superior to his larger, asymmetrical and
elevationally-congested Town Hall, Northampton (1861-4), otherwise of similar
character. ‘Constructional polychromy’ is employed in both buildings.
The Law Courts, London (1874-82) (p. 1028B), by G. E. Street, one of the last
important buildings to be erected in the Gothic style, is a huge, vigorously modelled
and romantic composition, attractive but inconvenient.
New Scotland Yard, London (1887-8) (p. 1027B), by Norman Shaw, is a well-
known building in which the lower storeys are wholly stone-faced and the upper
of brick with stone horizontal striations. At the angles there are domed turrets
reminiscent of Scottish castle architecture, and the steep, dormered roofs finish in
gables on the front, their apices embellished with architecturally-enframed decora-
tive niches. In the latter and the elaborate asymmetrically-placed doorway there is
something of the vigorous character of the English Baroque.
1026 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

The Rylands Library, Deansgate, Manchester (1890-9) (p. 10294), by Basil

Champneys, is a splendid if belated example of secular Gothic Revival. It is a much
lighter and more gracious Gothic than was normal in the High Victorian period, the
richly-ornamented centre-piece and the great bay-windows of the recessed upper
stage contrasting effectively with the relatively plain walls on the lower flanks, in
which deep, traceried windows are set in studied asymmetry. For the materials and
the craftsmanship in stone, wood and metal, no expense was spared.
The School of Art, Glasgow (1897-1909) (p. 1030A, B, C) by C. R. Mackintosh,
is one of the few examples in Britain of Art Nouveau, being almost completely
novel in its forms and evidencing only the barest trace of historicism. It faces
north and was built in stages, the eastern half in 1897-9 (p. 1030A), and most of the
remainder in 1907-9, after some modifications of the original design which affected
the west end, the rear and the interior. Most dramatic is the west end (p. 1030B),
which anticipated developments on the Continent by more than a decade, being
comparable with some of the work of de Klerk and Kramer (p. 1067) at Amsterdam.
Still more striking are some of the interior effects, especially the library (p. 1030C),
which shows a remarkable feeling for spatial values, evidenced also in the architect’s
commercial and domestic interiors (pp. IOOID, I002B).
The Whitechapel Art Gallery, London (1897-9) (p.1030D), by C. H. Townsend
(1850-1928), has a facade of Art Nouveau character in which a very large dual portal is
placed asymmetrically in the composition, the remaining features, too, having
novel dispositions and treatment. Local asymmetry of features became a fashionable
practice in the following decade, and may be seen also in the centre-piece of the
Glasgow School of Art (p. 10304): it led eventually to the comprehensive asymmetry
common in Modern architecture.
The Town Hall, Colchester (1898-1902) (p. 1029c), by J. Belcher (1841-1913),
is a fine example of Neo-Baroque, of which there are quite a few notable instances
of about this period, including the City Hall and Law Courts, Cardiff (1897-
1906) (p. 1031B) and the Methodist Central Hall, Westminster (1906-12), both
by Lanchester and Rickards.
The London County Hall (1912-22) (p. 1031A), by Ralph Knott (1878-1929), isa
Thames-side building of strong Free-Classical design showing some Frenchinfluence.
New Delhi, India (1913-30) (p. 1031C), agreat administrative centre laid out
by Sir Edwin Lutyens, who also designed the Government Buildings there, is a
scheme of far greater splendour than any carried out during the same period in
Britain. The city plan follows classical axial principles and is connected with old
Delhi, seven miles distant. It has an axis running east and west two miles in length,
flanked by lawns and canals, at the foot of which is the colossal All India War
Memorial Arch, and to the westward lies an open space ornamented with six
fountains. Off this, to the north, lies the circular Council Chamber, by Sir Herbert
Baker (1862-1946). The axis, continuing westward between the two Secretariats
designed by Baker, leads up to the principal monument of the new city, the
President’s House (1920-31), a splendid building of enormous size. The general
view (p. 1031C) indicates this magnificent lay-out in which Indian architectural
motifs with domes and minarets are bound together in a design almost western
in character.
The Cenotaph, Whitehall, London (1920) (p. 1032c), by Lutyens, is the
principal instance of great numbers of memorials erected to commemorate the
Fallen in World War I, and which served as prototype for many of the others. An
annual service of remembrance is conducted there on the Sunday nearest to Armistice
Day (November 11th). It is a tall, simple monument of Portland stone, of Classical
character, mounting in slightly receding stagesto a tomb-shaped terminal.
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1027

B. New Scotland Yard, London (1887-8). See p. 1025

2K
1028 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

B, The Law Courts, London (1874-82). See p. 1025

 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1029

A. The Rylands Library, Manchester B. The Town Hall, Congleton, Cheshire

(1890-9). See p. 1026 (1864-7). See p. 1025

¢. Town Hall, Colchester (1898-1902). Dp. The Municipal Buildings, Norwich

See p. 1026 (1938). See p. 1035
1030 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

A. North front (1897-9) B. West end (1907-9)

The School of Art, Glasgow (1897-1909). See p. 1026

c. School of Art, Glasgow: D. The Whitechapel Art Gallery, Lond

the library (1907-9). (1897-9). See p. 1026
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1031

She eo e elem ee

A. London County Hall, Westminster (1912-22). See p. 1026

B. Cardiff Civic Centre: Aerial View. See p. 1026

Law Courts (/eft) and City Hall (centre), 1897-1906; National Museum of
Wales (right), 1910-27

a a

c. New Delhi: Aerial View looking W. (1913-30). See p. 1026

1032 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

A. The Bank of England, London (1788-1833) with upper portion added,

1923-33. See p. 1035

B. R.I.B.A. Building, London (1932- c. The Cenotaph, Whitehall, London

1934). See p. 1035 (1920). See p. 1026

D. The City Hall, Swansea (1930-4). See p. 1035

BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1033

SS

B. The Royal Corinthian Yacht Club, Burnham-on-Crouch,

Essex (1930). See p. 1035

c. The Pentley Park Primary School, Welwyn, Herts (1948-50).

See p. 1035
1034 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

c. The Finsbury Health Centre, London (1938-9). See p. 1035

 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1035

The Bank of England, London (1923-33) (p. 1032A). Additions were made at
this time by Sir Herbert Baker in the form of a new block rising in the rear of
Soane’s facades, with a columned centre feature projecting from it towards the
street line.
The City Hall, Swansea (1930-4) (p. 1032D) by Sir Percy Thomas (b. 1883),
the Municipal Buildings, Norwich (1938) (p. 1029D) by C. H. James and Roland
Pierce and the R.I.B.A. Building, Portland Place, London (1932-4) (p. 1032B) by
G. Grey Wornum (1888-1957) are leading instances of traditional classical design in
an aesthetically-economical and refreshedmode, current in the later inter-wars period.
The Senate House, London University (1933-9) (p. 1033A) by Charles Holden
(1875-1960), consists of two large four- and five-storey rectangular blocks, 248 ft by
166 ft, joined together by a massive tower, I20 ft wide at the base and 210 ft high.
Forecourts on the east and west sides of the tower lead to a vestibule in its base,
above which are the libraries and stack rooms. The southern block contains the
administrative rooms and the northern certain other University elements. All the
walls are load-bearing, being of stone-faced brickwork, although there is a steel
frame in the tower to take the weight of the book stacks. In elevational character
the building is not very dissimilar to the London Passenger Transport Building,
Westminster (p. 1048), by the firm of which Charles Holden was a member.
The Royal Corinthian Yacht Club, Burnham-on-Crouch, Essex (1930)
(p. 1033B) by Joseph Emberton, is one of the earliest English buildings of its class to
attain a non-stylistic expression, the south front towards the river Crouch being
wholly functional and comprising tiers of deep balconies with continuous ribbon
windows behind. Of steel-framed construction, the walls of the main block are of
stucco-faced cavity brickwork.
Impington Village College, Cambridgeshire (1936) (p. 1034A) by E. Maxwell
Fry (b. 1899) and Walter Gropius, the latter having reached England from Ger-
many in 1934 (p. 1066), represents a new departure in school design. An attractively
informal and mainly one-storey structure, it caters for adult education whilst also
serving the normal purpose of a schooi.
The Finsbury Health Centre, London (1938-9) (p. 1034c) by Tecton, is
unaffectedly symmetrical in mass arrangement, having been designed to fulfil its
purpose in a thoroughly efficient and economical manner. A ‘Modern’ design in the
full sense, it has a concrete frame and facades faced with glazed tiles, the windows
of the two-storey wing blocks being linked vertically with opaque glass panels.
In the years following the Second World War the national policy for new
building was concentrated strongly on the erection of schools and dwellings, and
many fine, yet economical, schools were erected.
The Pentley Park Primary School, Welwyn Garden City, Herts (1948-50)
(p. 1033C) by C. H. Aslin (1893-1959), the County Architect, instances the trend in
post-wars schools design for younger children, away from institutional formality
and towards a domestic intimacy of scale and character. Full advantage is here
taken of an undulating wooded site: the buildings cannot be viewed compre-
hensively. The individually-arranged classrooms are generously lighted and the
walls are of pre-cast concrete slabs on a light steel frame. The Day Nursery,
Garston, Herts (1951-2) (p. 1034B) by Aslin, admirably fulfils similar objectives.
The structure is a light steel frame, the supports being within the thin walls of metal
and glass and laminated plaster, these protected above by a deep fascia of fluted
asbestos. The Hallfield Primary School, Paddington, London (1955) (p. 10374);
by Drake and Lasdun, is another possessing excellent qualities. Built on a well-
treed site, its concrete buildings are diversified in character and shape, presenting
many intriguing and attractive facets,
 1036 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

The Royal Festival Hall, London (-1951) (p. 1037B), by R. H. Matthew,

Sir J. L. Martin, Peter Moro and Edwin Williams, prepared for the ‘South Bank’
Exhibition of that year, brought an entirely new kind of architecture to the Thames
river front. Its principal contents are a large auditorium to seat 3,000, primarily for
orchestral and choral concerts, and a smaller hall for recitals, chamber music,
ballet and the like, but also there are the attendant promenades, foyers and refresh-
ment bars and a spacious restaurant—this facing the river—an exhibition gallery
and meeting rooms, together with all the requisite ancillary accommodation for the
respective elements. The structural frame is of reinforced concrete, and the
auditorium is suspended above a grand foyer approach. There are no solid load-
bearing walls, all the work being done by reinforced-concrete pillars, the interior
partitions and outer sheath being of glass and metal or light materials. The whole
endeavour was to make it a gay, cheerful and sparklingly-refreshing building. The
exterior successfully fulfils this objective and expresses the nature of the con-
struction, which plainly appears as a sheath upon a caged frame. Patterns are con-
trived in the sheathing by the disposition of the window and void areas, and the
terraced setting, with diverting look-out features inclining over the river bank, and
made gay with slender masts, adds further variety to the total effect.

INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS

The Royal Arcade, Newcastle-upon-Tyne (1831-2) (p. 1038A), probably from
the designs of John Dobson, was a part of the town-planning enterprises of Richard
Grainger and Dobson, carried out from c. 1824 onwards, which gave the streets of
the city centre their fine complexion. The arcade leads through a building block
which architecturally has the same tasteful Greek Revival character as many others
forming part of the scheme, the Monument of Lysicrates (p. 139) here having
provided the inspiration for the Corinthian capitals used for the attached columns
forming the upper part of the external facade, though the entrances and the
arcade itself are Doric. The arcade was designed to provide professional and
commercial premises, and is arranged in a series of bays with circular glass-and-
iron top lights standing over pendentives. John Dobson also designed the monu-
mental Central Station, Newcastle-upon-T yne (1846-50).
The Entrance Screen, Euston Station, London (1835-7) (p. 1038c) by Philip
Hardwick, was at first the only frontispiece to the then very simple building which
comprised the station. Four pavilions stand side by side (now adjoined by later
structures), and centrally between them stands the enormous and impressive Doric
Gateway (p. 1038c) which formerly led to elongated porticoes flanking the approach
way, where arriving passengers might descend from their carriages. In their
thoroughpaced Greek garb, the screen and gateway represent an already departing
fashion in the metropolis. Behind them the present Station Buildings, Euston
(1846-9), again by Philip Hardwick, assisted by his son, P. C. Hardwick (1822-92),
are Graeco-Roman. The Great Hall (p. 1038D) is particularly impressive.
The Sun Fire Office, Threadneedle Street, London (1841-2), by Professor
C. R. Cockerell, with its three-storeyed rusticated facades, stylar only on the top
floor, is nearer to the new Italian Renaissance ‘palazzo’ mode than the majority of
Cockerell’s monumental buildings, for he usually adhered in these to a bold
Graeco-Roman character. In 1833 he had become architect to the Bank of England
in succession to Sir John Soane, and made alterations there in 1834-5 and again in
1845, whilst also building several branch banks in the principal cities: Plymouth
(1835); Bristol (1844-6) (p. 1039A); Manchester (1845-6); and Liverpool
(1845-58) (p. 1039B). They are similar, both in the composition of their strongly-
modelled fagades and in the classical elements they comprise. Commonly a
BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1037

A. The Hallfield Primary School, Paddington, London (1955).

See p. 1035

pact Otr Sy, ee

B. The Royal Festival Hall, London (—1951). See p. 1036

 1038 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

A. The Royal Arcade, Newcastle-upon-Tyne 8B. The Coal Exchange, Lower Thames Street
(1831-2). See p. 1036 London: interior (1846-9). See p. 1041

c. Entrance Gateway, Euston Station, Lon- Dp. Great Hall, Euston Station, London
don (1835-7). See p. 1036 (1846-9). See p. 1036
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1039

4. Bristol branch, Bank of England (1844-6). B. Liverpool branch, Bank of England

See p. 1036 (1845-58). See p. 1036

c. Bank (now Williams Deacons), S. Ann’s p. S. Pancras Station, London (1866-71).

Square, Manchester (1848-9). Seep. 1041 See p. 1042
1040 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

tae a i phi

Cc, King’s Cross Station, London (1851-2). Original state. See p. 1042
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1041

Greek- or Roman-Doric attached Order brackets the lower storeys and above them
is an attic storey in which at least one of the windows is round-arched, the whole
crowned by a pediment. Each design is in fact eclectic, the Greek and Roman
elements being combined rather than fused, and Renaissance and Baroque elements
are here and there introduced.
The Bank (now Williams Deacons) S. Ann’s Square, Manchester (1848-9)
(p. 1039C), by J. E. Gregan (1813-55), is representative of classical architecture in
the Early Victorian period in being of Italian Renaissance ‘Palazzo’ style. Standing
at the angle of the square, it has a rusticated ground floor storey with Palladian
windows, pedimented aedicule windows on the first floor and square-headed
windows on the second floor, these last being in the frieze of an astragal cornice.
The upper tiers are ashlar finished except that there are rusticated toothed quoins
at the building angles. The entrance doorway is placed in a one-storey structure
which links the bank proper with a rear building, of brick with stone dressings,
forming part of the same scheme.
The Conservatory, Chatsworth, Derbyshire (1836-40; demolished 1920)
(p. I040A), was an early venture in iron and glass by the gardener-architect Joseph
Paxton, assisted by Decimus Burton, in the grounds of this sixteenth and late
seventeenth-century mansion (p. 872). It was not the first of its kind, except in its
extraordinary magnitude, being 277 ft long, and 123 ft wide, rising to a height of 67
ft in the form of a double vault, one cloister vault being raised upon another. The
glass ridge-and-furrow sections anticipated those of the famous Crystal Palace.
The Palm House, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (1845-7) (p. 1040B), by
Decimus Burton and Richard Turner, resembles the Chatsworth design in its
central part—except that all the glass follows the vault section precisely, and that it
is crowned by a shallow, continuous apex feature—but has extended wings of
slightly ovoid section, rounded at the ends, again bearing the continuous apex
feature. The central portion spans 106 ft and rises 62 ft; the wings 56 ft for a height
of 33 ft. Kew is substantially smaller than Chatsworth in the floor area covered, yet
makes a much more handsome structure.
The Coal Exchange, Lower Thames Street, London (1846-9, scheduled for
demolition) (p. 1038B), by J. B. Bunning (1802-63), was a corner block presenting
Italian Renaissance facades linked by a be-columned tower over the angle entrance.
It was notable for its internal iron-framed glass dome over the circular court, the
dome being 60 ft in diameter and 74 ft high, with cantilevered access balconies
serving each of its three upper tiers. The whole structure, walls and dome, was
metal-framed, and no masonry at all appeared. A comparable domical building is
the Reading Room, British Museum (1854-7), added there by Sydney Smirke,
the structure similarly being of iron but of much greater dimensions, the room
being 140 ft across and 106 ft high.
The Crystal Palace, London (1850-1) (p. 1043), by Sir Joseph Paxton, was
the most remarkable building of the High Victorian period. Originally erected in
Hyde Park, to house the Great Exhibition of 1851, it was moved to Sydenham in
1852-4 and destroyed by fire in 1936. The idea of holding a great exhibition was
conceived in 1849, and public subscriptions invited. An international competition
was launched in 1850 and 245 designs were received. On the score of cost and the
time needful to complete, all were set aside in favour of an idea of Paxton’s, after
an attempt to combine the best features of the more promising of the competition
designs in a single official project. The working drawings were hurriedly prepared
in a seven week period after the contract actually had been let in August 1850, and
the structure was wholly completed nine months later, May Ist 1851. Paxton’s idea,
arising from his experience at Chatsworth and elsewhere, was a giant conservatory.
1042 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

In cross section the building somewhat resembled a double-aisled basilica,

rising in three tiers, the lowest 408 ft wide, the next (the inner aisles) 264 ft and the
nave or topmost, 120 ft. However, the ‘aisles’ and ‘nave’ were divided from one
another by tiered open galleries 24 ft wide, so that the actual span of the ‘nave’
was only 72 ft (the same as its height). Symbolically, the total width was made up
of fifty-one of the 8 ft-wide bay units, and the length was 1,848 ft, this being as near to
1,851 as the 8 ft-units would allow. The roofs were supported by openwork hori-
zontal girders carrying Paxton’s favourite ridge-and-furrow glazing. About the
middle of the length a ‘transept’ was introduced, as a last-minute modification of
the working design, to allow the enclosure of a growing tree. The transept had the
same width as the nave but was barrel-vaulted. In this colossal project of pre-
fabricated building, requiring vast quantities of iron and glass and other materials
as well as scrupulous organization to allow the work to be completed in so short a
time, Paxton had as engineer-associates Sir Charles Fox (1810-74) and his partner,
while Owen Jones (1809-74), author of the well-known book Grammar of Orna-
ment (1856), was responsible for the decoration. Changes were made when the
Palace was re-erected at Sydenham, the nave then being given a barrel roof, like
the transepts (p. 1043B).
King’s Cross Station, London (1851-2) (p. 1040C), by Lewis Cubitt (1799-?),
has an entrance facade which is part and parcel of the station sheds behind, reflect-
ing them in a pair of vast brick arches in receding orders, with a clock-tower rising
on a buttress-like mass between. Before the station acquired the untidy medley of
miscellaneous structures in front of it, there could be seen the triple-arcaded
porticoes below each of the great arched windows which lent a Roman scale and
dignity to the unassuming composition. The two iron-and-glass barrel vaults over
the tracks are carried on laminated-timber arches rising 72 ft to bridge the 105 ft
spans.
Paddington Station, London is of interest principally for its station sheds
(1852-4) by the celebrated engineer, I. K. Brunel and the architect M. D. Wyatt
(1820-77), the rich and fussy ‘High Victorian’ Great Western Hotel forming the
frontispiece (1851-3) being an independent conception by P. C. Hardwick. The
sheds are of three spans totalling 238 ft, the centre one being wider than the others.
Each of the coverings is carried on semi-elliptical wrought-iron ribs, without
principals, glazed only over the central third. The three are joined together by cross
vaults at two points in the length.
S. Pancras Station, London, like Paddingtoa, was conceived independently
of the (former) Midland Hotel and offices which front it. The shed (1863-5), by the
engineer W. H. Barlow (1812-1902), is the largest and most spectacular of the High
Victorian period, being a single span of 243 ft, rising 100 ft high in a slightly pointed
arch. The total length is 700 ft. At the base the arched vault is secured by 3 ins
diameter rods under the platforms. The Hotel and Station block (1866-71) (p.
1039D), by Sir George Gilbert Scott, is the prime example of High Victorian secular
Gothic. Won in competition in 1865, the building allowed free rein to Scott’s
prediliction for the style. The frowning frontages rise through tiers of crowded
pointed-arched openings to a steeply-pitched roof busy with jagged dormers, massive
chimney-stalks and soaring pinnacled and spired towers.
The Warehouse, Jamaica Street, Glasgow (1855) (p. 1044), with its cast-iron
facades, illustrates the great popularity of the material about this time. Iron was
economical of floor space and allowed virtually continuous runs of large windows.
The small scale of the parts and the extended repetition of a single motif are
typical of the period.
The Boatstore, Royal Naval Dockyard, Sheerness (1858-60) (p. 1045), by
BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1043

B. Revised structure, re-erected (1852-4) at Sydenham, London

The Crystal Palace, London. See p. 1041
1044 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

A. Warehouse, Jamaica Street, B. Oriel Chambers, Liverpool

Glasgow (1855). See p. 1042 (1864-5). See p. 1047

c, Deller’s Café, Exeter (1900): destroyed. See p. 1047

 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1045

ob Rhee | 2 ;

) Bad GH BD WB smahg
1 4
Meee Hae i=
at
ere

B. Boatstore, Royal Naval Dockyard, Sheerness: interior

 1046 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

A. The Piccadilly Hotel, London B. The Horticultural Hall, London

(1905-8). See p. 1047 (1923-6). See p. 1047

c. The Eagle Insurance Dp. The Shakespeare Memorial Theatre, Stratford-on-Avc

Building, Birmingham (1900). (1928-34): river front, with later additions.
See p. 1047 See p. 1047
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1047

G. T. Greene, who from 1850-64 was Director of Engineering and Architectural

Works to the Admiralty, is among the earliest known tiered iron-framed buildings,
particularly advanced in the details of its construction. Being a utilitarian building, the
external panels could be lightly infilled with sheeting. It is 210 ft long and 135 ft
wide, arranged internally as a top-lit ‘nave’ running the whole length of the building,
and double ‘aisles’ on each side with floors at each of the four storeys, The stan-
chions already have the ‘H’ section which came regularly to be adopted later on.
Oriel Chambers, Liverpool (1864-5) (p. 10448), by Peter Ellis, is another re-
markably advanced building for the period, both in construction and architectural
character. It has a complete cast-iron frame, stone cladded on the front in thin stone
piers, between which are iron frames carrying delicately-detailed shallow oriels in
each panel. There is little or no historical allusion in the forms employed, save a
suggestion of collegiate Gothic in the cresting. No. 16, Cook Street, Liverpool
(c. 1866), also by Ellis, is of similar construction and equally original.
The Eagle Insurance Building, Birmingham (1900) (p. 1046c), by W. R.
Lethaby and J. L. Ball, has a facade which shows a little influence of Art Nouveau
and the Romanesque Revival but is superior to many buildings of the day in the
quality of its design and the honesty of expression. The upper storeys have large
efficient windows between stout piers capped with powerfully-moulded strings,
that at the top being undulated to suggest alternating segmental and triangular
pediments, each with an indented billet moulding supplanting the lower member.
The attic is decorated with slightly-projecting roundels. The ground storey has
an enormous five-light transomed window, awkwardly truncated at pavement level,
flanked by symmetrical doorways with paired windows and small ornamental
panels over them.
Deller’s Café, Exeter (1900, destroyed) (p. 1044c); the Ingram Street (1901)
and the Willow (1904) Tea-rooms, Glasgow, the latter two by C. R. Mackintosh,
are among the few genuine instances in Britain of Art Nouveau.
The Piccadilly Hotel, London (1905-8) (p. 1046A), by R. Norman Shaw, was
the architect’s last major work. It is one of the best instances of the Neo-Baroque
mode which, along with other expressions, was current over the turn of the
century. A series of grand, vigorously-rusticated arches embodies shops at pavement
level, and together with a shallow balconied tier immediately over serves as a podium
for an open Ionic colonnade, linking pavilions behind which rises the main mass of
the building.
The Ritz Hotel (1905-6), the ‘Morning Post’ Building (1906, demolished) and
Kodak House (1910), London, the first two by Mewés and Davies and the last by
Burnet, Tait and Lorne, are early instances, for Britain, of the use of the complete
steel frame.
The Midland Bank, Piccadilly (1922) and Britannic House, Finsbury
Circus (1922-4) London, by Sir Edwin Lutyens; and the Wolseley Building—
now Barclay’s Bank—Piccadilly, London (1921-2), by Curtis Green, are among
the best instances of modulated historicism in the early inter-wars period.
The Royal Horticultural Hall, London (1923-6) (p. 1046B), by J. Murray
Easton (b. 1889) and Sir Howard Robertson (b. 1888) shows development towards
Modern architecture, particularly in the internal arrangements. Tall, diaphragm
arches span the hall and support a series of concrete flat decks, stepped inwards
concentrically with the arches and connected vertically with ribbon windows,
diminishing in height towards the top of the hall. The deck above the apex has a
cone-shaped top light in each bay. Heating is by hot water pipes embedded in the
ceiling-decks, an early instance of the method of heating from above.
The Shakespeare Memorial Theatre, Stratford-on-Avon (1928-34) (p. 1046D),
1048 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

by Scott, Chesterton and Shepherd, was the outcome of a competition won in 1928
by Elizabeth Scott. A café and restaurant were added on the river front a few
years later. Brick is the main material, chosen to harmonize with the architectural
character of the small town, and a gracious and dignified effect is contrived without
recourse to historical sources for inspiration for the features and detail.
The London Passenger Transport Building, Westminster (1929) (p. 1049A)
by Adams, Holden and Pearson, has an external character rooted in classicism
but so simplified as to exclude the customary detail almost completely. The
massing is cleverly contrived along the diagonals of the site, thus obviating courts
and giving the maximum amount of natural light; it builds up pyramidally to a
height presaging the high city blocks of the future.
The Boots Chemical Factory, Beeston, Notts (1930-2) (p. 1049B), by Sir Owen
Williams, is not particularly attractive but employs on a vast scale the ‘mushroom’
type of concrete construction first used on the Continent by Robert Maillart in
1908 (p. 1066). The supporting concrete pillars swell outwards at the top on each
storey in a form like an inverted pyramid and support a continuous slab floor. No
supports are needed at the margins of the building, so the windows can, if need be,
rise in continuous horizontal ribbons, stiffened by the protruding edges of the
concrete floors.
The Penguin Pool, Regent’s Park Zoo, London (1933-5) (p. 1050C), by
B. Lubetkin, is a spatial adventure in form which was among the earliest wholly
modern designs to be executed in Britain, demonstrating that even the most
improbable subjects are capable of yielding high-quality architecture. The some-
what earlier Gorilla House (1933) there has comparable virtues.
The ‘Daily Express’ Offices, Fleet Street, London (c. 1933) (p. 1049C), by
Ellis and Clarke, with Sir Owen Williams, is a concrete-framed building with
horizontal ‘ribbon’ windows and a facing, most unusual for the period, of polished
black glass, the joints of the sheets being covered with strips of silver-coloured
metal. The colours give the reverse from the normal effect of dark openings in
comparatively light walls, throwing the metal strips into visual prominence and
giving the building a surprisingly cheerful effect, despite the sombre facing
materials. There is a similar Daily Express building at Manchester.
The De la Warr Pavilion, Bexhill, Sussex (1935), by Erich Mendelsohn
and Serge Chermayeff, is a contribution to British architecture by two distin-
guished foreigners, conveying a distinctly Continental and progressive air. The
long body of the hall, its sheer white walls perfectly plain apart from a circular,
decorative inscription, forms a striking contrast with the semicircular bay (p. 1049D)
at the restaurant end, busy in interest with its tiers of balconies and translucent
walls through which the convolutions of the ascending staircase can be seen.
The Peter Jones Store, Sloane Square, London (1935-6) (p. I1050A), by
William Crabtree, J. A. Slater and A. H. Moberly, with Sir Charles Reilly as
consultant, gains much of its attractiveness from the undulations of its facade and
the close-spaced vertical ribs which counter the insistence of the long, horizontal
windows. An incisive crowning member gains in effectiveness by the recession of
the storey immediately below it, giving a band of deep shadow.
The Brynmawr Rubber Factory, South Wales (1945-51) (p. 1053A), by the
Architects’ Co-Partnership, with Ove Arup and Partners, Consulting Engineers,
is a large industrial scheme covering almost three acres, in which the main factory
area is roofed by nine concrete shell-domes, each of a rectangular plan, 85 ft by
62 ft clear span, arranged in a three-by-three block and standing on pillars at the
corners. The general ceiling level is 14 ft above the floor, raised higher locally by
shallow segmental domes, 3} ins thick, sufficiently spaced apart to allow clear-storey
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1049

A. The London Passenger Transport B. The Boots Chemical Factory, Beeston,

Building, Westminster (1929). Notts (1930-2). See p. 1048
See p. 1048

c. Daily Express offices, Fleet Street, D. The De la Warr pavilion, Bexhill, Sussex
London (c. 1933). See p. 1048 (1935). See p. 1048
 1050 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

oo 001Ye a

A. The Peter Jones store, Sloane Square, B. Office building, 93-7 New Cavendish
London (1935-6). See p. 1048 Street, London (1955-7). See p. 1051

The Penguin Pool, Regent’s Park Zoo, London (1933-5). See p.

 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE IO51
lighting through the lunettes below the domes. The external effect is sightly and the
interior impressive.
The ‘South Bank’ Exhibition, London (1951) (p. 10538), for which Sir Hugh
Casson was the Director of Architecture, was an important event in the history of
British Architecture as it served to popularize the Modern movement, none of the
exhibition buildings showing a trace of historicism and all being light, graceful and
gay. Very many able architects and designers contributed. The whole site was
planned on informal lines and enlivened with flowers, trees, shrubs, water gardens,
garden ornaments, statuary and variegated pavings. Numerous fresh ideas were
evolved which since have passed into general currency. The Royal Festival Hall
(p. 1036) formed a part of the Exhibition and from the first was intended to remain
as a permanent building.
The Office Building, 93-7, New Cavendish Street, London (1955-7) (p.
1050B) by Gollins, Melvin, Ward and Partners, is a well-proportioned and attrac-
tively simple edifice of reinforced concrete, comprehensively curtained with glass,
opaque blue-grey in the aprons, in white frames.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. Early Victorian secular urban buildings, such as houses, clubs, learned
societies’ rooms, and public buildings, usually followed a rectangular, Italian
‘palazzo’ plan, the larger having central open or covered courtyards (pp. 994A,
102IA-D). Later, the same principle was maintained, but cramped urban con-
ditions necessitated many individualistic arrangements, and courtyards usually
were abandoned for all but the largest structures, small internal light-wells serving
to light such as staircases, lavatories and minor rooms (p. 998B, D). Plans of public
buildings, needing rooms of very varied dimensions and uses, grew increasingly
complex, and often were made more so by the bays, oriels and other projections
from the peripheral walls demanded by the various stylistic expressions adopted
for the facades (pp. 1028A, B, 1029A). For factories, mills, warehouses and similar
buildings, however, the aim was to provide as much free floor space as possible over
large areas, and for these cast-iron pillars were used for the internal supports from
the beginning of the century. Top-light was a device often called into service. In
the twentieth century similar conditions still obtained in urban building, and the
specifics adopted remained much the same, save that frontages were less broken
than formerly. By far the greater proportion of nineteenth-century dwellings were
terrace houses, and these are specially distinctive of the Industrial Revolution, being
very rare before the late eighteenth century. In the earliest terrace houses for the
working classes, the individual house plans often repeated exactly, but soon they
were arranged in reflected pairs, chiefly to economize in the construction of chim-
neys. In the twentieth century, terrace houses for a time passed out of fashion, the
detached or semi-detached suburban residences becoming the common form of
dwelling. Flats, never popular in England previously, are for various reasons now
becoming more frequent, for whatever social class (p. 1006A, C, D).
The larger Early Victorian country houses also were frequently of the compact
‘palazzo’ plan, though if of ‘manorial’ or ‘castellated’ character more often were
picturesquely irregular (p. 994C), like villas in general. Those of moderate dimen-
sions lacked a centre court, and in arrangement resembled the ‘simple block plan’
of the Georgian period (type (b), p. 937), rooms being arranged on either side of a
longitudinal spine wall, the hall and staircase placed centrally on one long front
(p. 993B). Later, this type of domestic plan acquired a far more irregular and
individualistic outline, and there commonly were service-quarter appendages
1052 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

(p. 997B). In general, the houses of the middle classes were never more tortuously
complicated than in the Late Victorian period. In the twentieth century they
became more simple and regular again (pp. IOOIE, I00§A, B); and since World War
II even the most luxurious have become quite modest in size, due to the lack of
domestic servants, forcing reliance upon labour-saving appliances.
Anglican churches no longer remained the simple galleried boxes they for so long
had been, but recovered the articulated form of the Mediaeval church, with nave,
aisles, chancel, lady-chapel, south-porch, etc., coherently expressed (p. I009A, B);
and any tower or spire, instead of being invariably axial was frequently placed
asymmetrically at the west end (p. 1013A). Nonconformist churches mostly re-
mained of the older type, but certain of the more important followed the same course
as the Anglican. Roman Catholic churches, too, followed suit, except that Byzan-
tine forms of plan were occasionally favoured (p. 1013B, C). Recent small churches,
built for new communities, for economic reasons are often extremely simple and
follow unorthodox lines (p. 1017B).
WALLS. Nineteenth-century facades typically were highly ornate, imitative
of bygone classical or Mediaeval styles (pp. 1028, 1039). Classical facades passed
from a relatively straightforward ‘palazzo’ character (pp. I02IA, C, 1039C), through
a busier and much less coherent phase (p. 1027A) to a semblance of the Baroque
(p. 1046A). Neo-mediaeval secular facades were not prevalent before the High
Victorian period, and were commonly even more restless than their classical
counterparts, romantic asymmetry being popular (p. 1039D). Italian, French and
other Continental influences added a number of exotic features to the regular stock-
in-trade. The Romanesque found some favour at the end of the century (p. 1046c).
In domestic work the principal styles, (other than the ‘palazzo’ style, practised
contemporaneously) were the Tudor or ‘Jacobethan’ (pp. 993A, IO04A), passing to a
‘Queen Anne’ style (p. 998c, D) and thence to an imitation of Flemish Early
Renaissance. At the turn of the century there was a brief flourish of English Art
Nouveau (p. 10034). In the twentieth century all the various surviving expressions
underwent a process of simplification, the decorative and stylistic features being
reduced to a minimum and much more reliance than formerly placed upon the
effects to be gained from the simple geometry of the masses and parts (p. IOOIE).
In Modern architecture after c. 1930 reference to the historical styles ceased com-
pletely (p. 1005A, B).
Throughout the whole period, the chief walling materials were brick and stone,
brick still gaining ground compared with stone. In the High Victorian phase the
two were admixed decoratively, bricks of different colours being worked into
patterns with marbles and stone (p. 1009c, D). This practice was known as ‘con-
structional polychromy’, since the colours were inherent in the materials them-
selves, and not applied superficially. It lent itself particularly to the Neo-Gothic,
voussoirs of arches being of alternate colours (p. 1024A), but was used in other
styles too in the following phase (pp. 1013B, 1027B). Mock half-timber was intro-
duced in the eighteen-sixties, and left a trail for many decades. Nearly always
nineteenth-century walls were ‘load-bearing’ (sustaining the weight of floors and
roof), but some use was made of cast-iron framing, sometimes embedded in the
walls and sometimes free-standing (p. 1044A, B); and after 1906 steel-framed and
then concrete-framed structures became increasingly common for the larger urban
structures. Frames are now almost invariably employed. In framed structure loads
are carried by the frames and the walls are merely weather-proofing panels; con-
sequently walls may be substituted by thin metal-and-glass screens, with suitable
insulating materials behind the parts not used as windows (pp. 1034C, I0S50B).
‘Curtain walling’ is a modern expedient in which a metal-and-glass screen passes
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1053

A. The Brynmawr Rubber Factory, South Wales (1945-51) . See p . 1048

B. South Bank E ib ition, London (1951), general vil ew. See p. 1051
1054 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE
comprehensively over the face of storeyed steel- or concrete-framed structures, in
lieu of solid walls (p. 1050B).
OPENINGS. During the nineteenth century and until World War I, openings
were treated in the manner appropriate to the particular revived style adopted.
Apart from Graeco-Roman designs of the Early Victorian phase (pp. 102IE, 1023C,
1039A, B) and the Baroque interlude at the end of the century (pp. 1029C, 1046A),
colonnades and the giant Order did not often appear. On the other hand, tiered
arcaded windows were popular in the second half of the century as a means of
admitting the maximum possible light to urban buildings. On cast-iron buildings
this device often was used almost exclusively (pp. 1043B, 1044A). In the ‘palazzo’
(p. 994A) and ‘Queen Anne’ (p. 998c, D) styles, tall sash or four-light casement
windows were usual, sometimes with astragals to give them the genuine historical
air, though it was wholly practicable to dispense with them wherever desired, as was
often the case with the less pretentious buildings. Mullioned-and-transomed or
traceried casement windows accompanied the Tudor, High Gothic and similar
expressions, tracery appearing even in secular Gothic buildings in the High Vic-
torian phase (p. 1024A) and to some extent in the next (p. 1029A). In Neo-Gothic
churches, mullioned and traceried windows were, of course, normal. Bays and
oriels appeared in virtually every revived style. Top light metal-and-glass windows
were increasingly employed, and were almost indispensable for such as station-
sheds, factories and similar one-storey extensive buildings (p. 1046B). Windows of
early steel-framed commercial buildings frequently were drawn together by metal
aprons to form large vertical panels between the Classical columns or piers masking
the stanchions. In general in the early twentieth century, the decorative enframe-
ments normal to historical windows were either highly simplified or wholly
suppressed (p. 1032B, D), and in Modern architecture windows are always clean cut,
whether they stand singly or form long ‘ribbons’ of metal and glass (p. I005A).
Also, astragals are dispensed with, windows only being subdivided as necessary for
stability or to accommodate opening lights. Large, unimpeded glass areas are a
leading modern objective (p. 10348).
RoorFs. These in the nineteenth century were as varied as the architectural
styles employed, and for the most part followed the appropriate historical precedent
in each case. ‘Jacobethan’, Neo-Gothic and Flemish-inspired buildings have the
serrated silhouettes endowed by steep ornamental gables, dormers, pinnacles,
turrets and chimney-pieces (p. 1004A), while the Classical buildings have low-
pitched or even flat roofs. All styles however—but especially the Gothic—were to
some extent affected by French influence in the High Victorian period, the roofs in
such cases being mansarded (p. 998A) or very steeply-pitched and perhaps divided
into separate pavilions. Neo-Gothic houses and villas are today often ridiculed for
their excessively diverse and ragged character, the straggling plans with their
numerous excrescences being reflected in the tumultuous roofs, crested with spiky
ridge-tiles and broken with pretentious dormers, tall ornamental chimney stacks
and the inevitable turret or belvedere. Polychromy usually renders the effect still
more disturbing, for roofs frequently were covered in colour-patterned slates or
tiles to match the constructional polychromy of the walls (p. 1024A). In early
twentieth century urban architecture roofs usually were unobtrusive, if not actually
flat (p. 1032B, D). Since World War II the flat roof has been ubiquitous (p. 10508),
save only for churches, suburban houses and large-span structures (pp. 1037B,
1053A).
COLUMNS. These were used throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth
centuries much in accordance with historical precedent, the customary proportions
and parts being maintained (pp. 1023A-C, 1031A). When in cast iron they neces-
 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 1055

sarily were abnormally slender, and the detail was rather coarse, as also was the case
when the material was terra-cotta. From c. 1906-c. 1930 the Orders were used on
steel-framed buildings, raising very difficult constructional problems, as columns
and entablatures coincided with the main members of the frames, and had to be
hung on to them by devious means. Columns of the historical types became rare
in the inter-wars period and disappeared almost completely after World War II.
MOULDINGS. As with columns, these reproduced the respective prototypes
fairly faithfully, so long as historicism lasted. One of the objects of the Arts and
Crafts and Art Nouveau movements was to simplify or evade them, or to invent
substitutes (p. 1030A, B). A similar objective was implicit in the Neo-Romanesque,
this a further manifestation arising towards the end of the nineteenth century, for
the Romanesque is a broad and bold style, in which mouldings are very few and
simple (p. 1046C). In many buildings about this time openings often were shorn of
their customary enframements or label moulds, or decorative variety was obtained
by exploiting the texture and colour of brick and stone rather than by employing
the time-honoured architectural elements (p. 10048, Cc). In domestic architecture at
least, almost total success was achieved in evading mouldings by C. F. A. Voysey
(p. 992), although his method of composing buildings remained largely traditional
(p. IooIA, B). The process of simplifying or evading mouldings continued in much
of the work of the earlier twentieth century, and is complete in the Modern archi-
tecture dating from after c. 1930 (p. I006B).
ORNAMENT. Interior decoration gravely deteriorated in the nineteenth century.
Ornament became coarse and excessive. The more expensive High Victorian
Gothic churches were lavishly finished, the inner walls covered with frescoes or a
constructional polychromy of coloured bricks, marbles and mosaic, the windows
rich with stained glass and the fittings opulently elaborate in their wood, iron and
brass. Colour everywhere and not a square yard of plain wall to lend eye-resting
relief (p. 1009D). Secular interiors suffered much in the same way, and great play
was made with fashionable cast iron (p. 1024B). By the Late Victorian period, when
taste reached its lowest ebb, ornament in domestic fabrics, furniture and fittings
had become chaotically profuse, due to the ease with which machinery could
reproduce patterns (p. 994D). The Arts and Crafts Movement, which had the object
of reviving the handicrafts, and Art Nouveau, did much to reverse the trend.
Interiors by Voysey (p. 1002A) show a restrained homely quality, and those by
Mackintosh (pp. I00ID, 1030C) a wholly fresh approach, the forms used being quite
novel and conceived in three-dimensional terms. Little further progress was made
in the early twentieth century, except in moderating previous excesses, until in the
inter-wars period Continental ideas in furniture and furnishings began to reach
Britain. Taste in interior decoration today favours straightforward, rational and
comfortable furniture and uncrowded effects in bright, cheerful and chaste settings.
Externally, the descent of artistic values was less strongly marked. In the Classical
revived systems at least, tradition was reasonably closely observed, applied orna-
ment mostly being limited to the customary locations. The Neo-Gothic was more
susceptible to over-elaboration. High Victorian Gothic churches were sometimes
nearly as elaborate outside as in (p. 1009C), and secular buildings freely ornamented
at every practicable point of their restless, romantic surfaces (p. 1028). The most
significant and representative monument of the period is the Albert Memorial,
London (p. 1024c). At the end of the century, Art Nouveau was characterized
decoratively by its polychrome ceramics, ironwork, mural displays and stone and
wood carving, the ornament being based on plant forms (p. 1044c). Thereafter, as
historicism waned, so did the practice of ornamenting buildings in whatsoever way,
other than by occasional judiciously-disposed sculptures, symbols or advertisements
1056 BRITISH 19TH-20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE

(p. 1037B), reliance for the rest being placed upon the decorative values of the
materials employed and uniform tints of applied colour.

REFERENCE BOOKS
BARRY, A. The Life and Works of Sir C. Barry. London, 1867.
BLOMFIELD, SIR R. Memoirs of an Architect. London, 1932.
—. Richard Norman Shaw. London, 1940.
BUTLER, A.S.G. The Architecture of Sir Edwin Lutyens. 3.vols. London, 1948.
CASSON, SIR H. Introduction to Victorian Architecture. London, 1948.
CLARK, SIRK. The Gothic Revival. 2nd edition. London, 1950.
CLARKE, B. F.L. Church Builders of the Nineteenth Century. London, 1938.
DANNATT, T. Modern Architecture in Britain. Introduction by Summerson, Sir J.
London, 1959.
DRUMMOND, A.L. The Church Architecture of Protestantism. 1934.
EASTLAKE, C.L. A History of the Gothic Revival in England. London, 1872.
FAIRBARN, SIR W. On the Application of Cast and Wrought Iron to Building Purposes.
4th ed. 1870. London, 1854.
FERGUSSON, J. History of the Modern Styles of Architecture. London, 1862.
GLOAG, J., and BRIDGWATER; D. A History of Cast Iron in Architecture. London, 1948.
GOODHART-RENDEL,H.S. English Architecture since the Regency. London, 1953.
GRILLET, C. Edward Prior. Architectural Review, November, 1952.
HARBRON, D. Amphion, or the Nineteenth Century. Toronto and London, 1930.
—. The Conscious Stone (Life of E. W. Godwin). London, 1949.
HEARN, A. The Methodist Church Builds Again. 1946.
HITCHCOCK, H.R. Early Victorian Architecture in Britain. 2 vols. London, 1954.
HOLME, C. G. (Ed.). Introduction by Bucknell, L. H. Industrial Architecture. London,
1935.
HOWARTH, T. Charles Rennie Mackintosh and the Modern Movement. London, 1952.
HUSSEY, C. The Picturesque. London, 1927.
—. The Life of Sir Edwin Lutyens. London, 1948.
JONES, J. BRANDON. ‘C.F.A. Voysey’, fournal of the Architectural Association, 1957.
JONES, R. P. Nonconformist Church Architecture. 1914.
LETHABY, W. Philip Webb and his Work. London, 1935.
MADSON,S.T. Sources of Art Nouveau. Oslo and New York, 1956.
MCGRATH,R., and FROST, A.C. Glass in Architecture and Decoration. London, 1937.
MARE, ERIC de. The Functional Tradition. Architectural Review, July, 1952.
MILLS, E. The New Architecture in Great Britain, 1946-53. London, 1953.
MUTHESIUS, H. Das englische Haus. 3 vols. Berlin, 1904-5.
PULLAN,A. Architectural Designs of William Burges. 2 vols. London, 1883-7.
RICHARDS, J.M. The Functional Tradition in Early Industrial Buildings. London, 1958.
RICHARDSON, SIR A. E. Monumental Classic Architecture in Great Britain and Ireland
during the XV IIIth and XLXth Centuries. London, 1914.
R.1I.B.A. One Hundred Years of British Architecture, 1851-1951. London, 1951.
SCOTT, SIRG. G. Personal and Professional Recollections by the Late Sir George Gilbert Scott.
London, 1879.
SCOTT-MONCRIEFF, W. ohn Francis Bentley. London, 1924.
STREET, A.E. Memoir of George Edward Street. London, 1888.
SUMMERSON, SIR J.N. Architecture in England since Wren. 2nd ed. London, 1948.
—. Heavenly Mansions. London, 1949.
—. Ten Years of British Architecture. London, 1956.
TRAPPES-LOMAX, M. Pugin, a Mediaeval Victorian. London, 1932.
TURNOR, R. Nineteenth Century Architecture in Britain. London, 1950.
—. The Smaller English House, 1500-1939. London, 1952.
YORKE, F.R.S. The Modern House in England. 8th ed. London, 1957.
See also the list in Chapter XXVIII (Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Architecture in
Continental Europe).
al
enn
1p
ee
eeneee

The Burgher Watch House, Cape Town (1755-). See p. 1058

XXVII. ARCHITECTURE OF SOUTH

AFRICA, AUSTRALIA AND
NEW ZEALAND

THE architectural development of these countries has followed a pattern not

dissimilar to that of the Americas (p. 1119) and may be considered as passing through
four comparable stages: (1) Indigenous, during which building activity was limited to
primitive native forms; (2) Colonial, during which buildings followed prototypes
in the homeland of the British and European colonists but were modified by climatic
factors, the labour obtainable and the materials available; (3) National, extending
from the time that the countries being considered here attained independent
architectural status, generally speaking in the latter part of the nineteenth century,
and (4) Modern, from about 1930.
SOUTH AFRICA
In 1487 Bartholomew Diaz rounded the Cape of Good Hope, marking this impor-
tant exploit by erecting a commemorative pillar at the spot now known as Liideritz
Bay, and ten years later Vasco da Gama, en route for India, landed on the site of
modern Durban. Cape Town was founded by the Dutchman, Jan van Riebeck, in
1650 and from that time Dutch influence in the Cape area has been strong. In
1058 SOUTH AFRICA : AUSTRALIA : NEW ZEALAND

1795 Cape Colony was annexed by Britain to be joined during the nineteenth
century by other provinces. Uneasiness between the Dutch (or Boer) element and
the British was evident until the conclusion of the South African War (1899-1902).
In 1909 the British South Africa Act established the present-day Union of South
Africa.
Colonial buildings in areas of Dutch influence had much in common with con-
temporary examples in Holland (p. 827). Flemish gables, often of a curvilinear
form, decorated with scrolls and ‘strapwork’ (p. 839), are found in surviving
seventeenth- and eighteenth-century examples, while some eighteenth-century
work incorporates charming Rococo details. Brick and stucco were popular building
materials, and thatch, tiles and shingles were used for roofs.
Examples of Dutch colonial work in South Africa include: Burgher Watch
House, Cape Town (1755-) (p. 1057); Lutheran Parsonage, Cape Town (c.
1780); Government House, Cape Town (1682; much altered 1798-3 considerable
later additions); Rhone, Groot Drakenstein (1795—-); Groot Constantia (1691;
rebuilt c. 1780); Groot Schuur (restored by H. Baker in 1898); and the Koopman
de Wet House, Cape Town (c. 1790).
Early in the present century there was a popular revival of the Dutch Colonial
style for domestic work, but at that time most public buildings were designed in the
academic Classical idiom currently fashionable in England. Sir Herbert Baker
(1862-1946) was responsible for the Government Building, Pretoria and
Bloemfontein and Sir Edwin Lutyens (p. 995) designed the Art Gallery,
Johannesburg.
Today South African architecture reflects the stylistic revolution of the 1930’s
(p. 995) and her cities provide examples of excellent modern work, making full use
of the most recent technical advances.

AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND

Discovered by the Portuguese navigator, Luis de Torres, in 1606, systematic
European settlement of Australia was delayed until after Captain James Cook took
possession of New South Wales in the name of the British Crown in 1770. The
colony was founded initially as a penal settlement but in 1793 it was opened to free
immigration. The city of Sydney was founded in 1788 and Melbourne in 1835, and
throughout the nineteenth century the story of modern Australia unfolded, charac-
terized by the pioneering spirit of the settlers and their descendants. Although New
Zealand had been annexed by Cook in 1770, this was disavowed by the British
Government and it was not until 1840 that the country was formally adopted by
Britain. Wellington was founded in 1839, Auckland in 1840 and Canterbury in
1850.
The first important Australian architect was Francis Greenway (1777-1837).
‘Trained in England by John Nash (p. 876), he was transported to Australia in 1814
on being convicted of forgery. Here he became Government Architect and carried
out a number of important buildings in Sydney, among them S. James’s Church
(—1824) since altered, and Fort Macquarie (1817-—), now demolished.
The work of Greenway and his contemporaries is comparable with that of the
English ‘Regency’ (c. 1811-30), often making use of Greek motifs and sometimes
Gothic. Some buildings, however, show a continuation of the older ‘Georgian’
tradition, S. Luke’s Church, Liverpool (1819) and S. Matthew’s Church,
Windsor (1817), both by Francis Greenway, among them. Hyde Park Barracks,
Sydney (1817), by the same architect, but since altered, is Palladian in its layout,
while Greenway’s Stables, Government House, Sydney (1817), now the
Conservatorium of Music, provides an example of Regency ‘castellated’ architecture,
 SOUTH AFRICA : AUSTRALIA : NEW ZEALAND 1059

Generally, early nineteenth-century domestic buildings were low, often of one

storey only, with wide, spreading eaves. Covered, colonnaded verandahs were
popular features, sometimes contained under the main roof of a building and often
displaying great sensitivity in their elegant columnar supports. Lace-like iron-work,
imported from England until the establishment of the Russell foundries at Sydney
c. 1843, became popular for railings and screens. Although the first colonial struc-
tures were of timber, the use of stone and brick (the latter often stucco-faced) soon
became general, while for roofs, geacrelly of a low pitch, tiles, wood shingles and
corrugated iron were employed.
In the second half of the pinerceath century, Australian and New Zealand
architecture again moved parallel with that of Britain. Among numerous examples
the following should be noted: The Houses of Parliament, Melbourne (1856—
1880) by J. C. Knight and Peter Kerr, a monumental, classical building, sur-
mounted by a stately cupola; The Treasury Buildings, Melbourne (-1862) by
J. Clark, also in the classical manner; The Church of S. John the Evangelist,
Toorak (1860-73) by W. W. Wardell (1823-1900) in the English Gothic style and
the same architect’s great Catholic Cathedral of S. Patrick, Melbourne (1860-
1939), also Gothic but of a continental European character. The Catholic
Cathedral, Adelaide (1870—) is based on designs prepared by A. W. N. Pugin
(p. 988), while the Anglican Cathedral, Melbourne (1850-1934) was designed by
William Butterfield (p. 990). S. John’s Anglican Cathedral, Brisbane (190I-)
was carried out by F. L. Pearson to the designs of his father, J. L. Pearson (p. 990).
The Public Library, Melbourne (1909-1913) by Messrs. Bates, Peebles and
Smart, provides a significant and early example of reinforced-concrete construction
in its great dome, measuring 115 ft in diameter.
Today the architectural activity of the two countries is of a high order and
immense in scope, and Australian and New Zealand architects are making contri-
butions of an international nature in all fields of building. In Melbourne alone,
between 1955 and 1958, thirty major city buildings were completed, an indication
of the general architectural activity.

REFERENCE BOOKS
SouTH AFRICA
BAKER, SirH. Architecture and Personalities. London, 1944.
FAIRBRIDGE, D. Historic Houses of South Africa. London, 1922.
PEARSE, G. E. The Cape of Good Hope 1652-1833: An account of its buildings and the life
of its people. Pretoria, 1956.
——. Eighteenth-century Architecture in South Africa. London, 1933.

AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND

BALLANTYNE, J. Homes and Homesteads in the Land of Plenty: A Handbook of Victoria
as afield for emigration. Melbourne, 1871.
BEIERS, S. Homes of Australia. Sydney, 1948.
BOYD,R. Australia’s Home. Carlton, 19§2.
CASEY, M., and others. Early Melbourne Architecture, 1840-1888. Melbourne, 1953.
ELLIS, M. H. Francis Greenway: His Life and Times. Sydney, 1953. (Revised edition.)
HERMAN, M. The Architecture of Victorian Sydney. Sydney, 1956.
—. The Early Australian Architects and Their Work. Sydney, 1954.
SHARLAND, M. Stones of a Century (about Tasmania). Hobart, 1952.
TURNBULL, C., and JACK, K. The Charm of Hobart. Sydney, 1949.

2L H.O.A.
 Aircraft hangar, Orbetello, Italy (1939-40). See p. IIII

XXVIII. NINETEENTH AND

TWENTIETH-CENTURY ARCHITECTURE
IN CONTINENTAL EUROPE
(c. 1830 to present day)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. The developments which took place in European architecture
in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries were bound up with the progress of
industrialization. Circumstances favoured the western, non-Mediterranean
countries. They possessed good soil, suited to intensive agriculture, and for this
reason already were well-populated; they enjoyed admirable central locations to
profit by rapidly-expanding world trade, between the European hinterland on the
one hand and the Atlantic seaboard on the other; and certain among them were rich
in the essential minerals, coal and iron. Northern Italy and Scandinavia were on the
fringes of this favoured zone. Best circumstanced of all were Northern France and
Germany, for it was chiefly there that the best coal measures lay. Outside the
favoured zone, other areas were relatively retarded, in architecture clinging longer
to late-Renaissance practices.
GEOLOGICAL. The direct significance of geolony in relation to architecture
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1061
diminished during the period. Excellent transport, by canal, river, sea, road or rail
made it practicable to distribute natural materials widely, even internationally,
thus mitigating if not actually eliminating the sharp differences of regional practice
which formerly had existed. Vernacular architecture at least, had almost completely
lost its distinctively varied local character by the opening of the period. Then too,
manufactured or processed materials, with their dependable qualities and relative
cheapness, came to be preferred to natural products. Brick, terra-cotta and tiles
gained in popularity at the expense of stone, even in stone-producing districts.
The advent of reinforced concrete, a twentieth-century material, further depressed
the demand for stone, except for the best qualities, used sparingly for wall facings.
Iron, the ‘new’ material adopted widely in the nineteenth century, though circum-
scribed in origin was freely distributed once its virtues had become recognized for
the strong, space-saving structural framing of buildings. Steel, designed and used
in accordance with scientific formulae, offered even greater advantages, and still
competes today with reinforced concrete as an economical medium for load-bearing
structural frameworks. Similarly, modern factory-made synthetic materials have a
universal range of distribution.
CLIMATIC. Climatic differences, ranging very widely between the different
countries, continued to produce their various effects upon architecture, but in
diminishing degree, owing to the measures which progressively were developed to
overcome the drawbacks of climatic extremes. Old direct methods of ‘space-
heating’ by wood, peat, charcoal or coal, in fireplaces or stoves, long continued, and
in the lesser domestic buildings still to some extent remain in use today. However,
the distribution of coal improved enormously in the industrial period, and made
possible the development of heating by the circulation of hot water or steam
throughout a building, while heating by circulated hot air, known from Roman
times (p. 205), followed new lines. Fuels for heat and light included the derivatives
of coal (coke and gas—town gas came into use early in the nineteenth century),
while oil and electricity are popular twentieth-century means. Empiricism in heat-
ing and ventilation gave way to scientific method towards the end of the nineteenth
century. Most buildings now have circulatory systems distributing controlled
heat from a central point, providing hot water too, and ‘district heating’ is some-
times applied to whole groups of houses or associated buildings. By such means
and by insulating devices the rigours of cold seasons or climates can be largely over-
come, and in hot seasons or climates similar methods can be utilized for the cooling
of buildings and the refrigeration of perishables. Gas lighting, normal by mid-
nineteenth century, was generally replaced by electric lighting in the twentieth;
both of these very considerably enhanced the attractions of indoor life.
RELIGIOUS. On the whole, the period was marked by religious tolerance, and
Roman Catholics, Protestants and their sects built churches according to their
needs, foreign communities also being provided for. Demand for new churches
arose from the swollen populations, concentrated principally in the industrialized
towns. In the twentieth century there has been a move towards reunion among
certain of the various non-papal denominations. Early in the nineteenth century
many countries took steps towards the secularization of education, which thereafter
became the responsibility of the state.
SOCIAL. Social changes were immense, owing to the rapid progress of indus-
trialization, which affected the principal countries comprehensively, and all in
some degree. Populations grew most intensively in the broad geographical belt
extending eastwards of the English Channel. The greater part of the industrial popu-
lation was concentrated in towns, and quite a number of new towns arose in loca-
tions favourable for industry. Concentration created a demand for many fresh
1062 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

types of social institution, as well as causing old ones to divide into sub-types.
Marketing, entertainment, sports, welfare, education, medical, public transport,
local government and other service buildings were needed in quantity, besides
commercial and industrial premises. A greater proportion of everyday life necessarily
was spent indoors, whether for employment or leisure, and buildings responded to
this circumstance, becoming not only vastly more numerous and varied but also
generally more convenient, amply serviced and commodious; though not without
very great initial difficulties in the early days of industrial expansion, before suitable
methods and techniques of planning and design had been developed. A feature of
the period was the acceleration of the levelling of the social classes, continuing at
the present time, which progressively reduced the requirement for great houses
while expanding the need for homes for the middle and, particularly, the lower
groups, these in turn tending to merge their standards of space and quality.
Domestic building in repetitive units, whether singly, in pairs or in terraces or flats,
is a special mark of the industrial period, affecting the lesser dwellings at all times.
HISTORICAL. The reconstruction of Europe which followed the congress of the
Great Powers at Vienna in 1814-15, laid down state boundaries which in the con-
cern for the balance of power took too little account of national feeling and thus
occasioned wars and disturbances thenceforward to 1880. In 1814, union was en-
forced between Norway and Sweden and in 1815 between Holland and Belgium,
while in Italy, Austria recovered Lombardy and annexed Venetia. Germany,
however, emerged more nearly unified than formerly, Prussia being the dominant
power. Between the two dates 1815-80 came the independence of Greece and
Belgium (1830); the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire and the emergence of a
number of minor states in the Balkan peninsula; the union of Italy by stages be-
tween 1859-70; and the consolidation of the German Empire, completed 1871.
Norway and Sweden agreed to a separation in 1905. The aftermath of the First
World War of 1914-19 was the readjustment of eastern territories to produce
Finland, Poland and intervening states and the emergence of Czechoslovakia and
Yugoslavia at the expense of a reconstituted Austria-Hungary, thereafter divided.
The Second World War of 1939-45 occasioned a political division of Germany into
East and West States, with different ideological allegiances.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
It has been shown earlier, in the respective chapters on Renaissance Architecture,
that the Antiquarian phase of c. 1750-1830 was common to European countries in
general. At first this retrospective architecture recalled anew the Ancient Roman,
but soon was increasingly tinctured with the Greek, in Germany to the extent that,
as in England, a proportion of buildings of the early nineteenth century can readily
be classed as ‘Greek Revival’. In France, classicism remained mainly Roman,
developing highly individual and sometimes austere traits before turning instead
towards the Italian Renaissance, about the end of the Antiquarian phase. Gothic
Revivalism was merely tentative in France and at this time in Germany too, and
negligible in other continental European countries. The adherence of France to
classicism throughout the century was in some part due to her unique system of
art education, adopted in 1666 and extended to architecture some fifty years later,
by which winners of the Prix de Rome competitions rounded off their training by a
period of years of study at the French Academy in Rome (from 1725-1800 the
Academy occupied the Palazzo Salviati, and from 1801 onwards the Villa Medici,
Rome (p. 713)). From 1806 the architectural designs made in the Ecole des Beaux-
Arts competitions were published, and had an important influence on French taste,
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1063

and thus on that of other countries, for Italy herself, Spain, the Low Countries and
Germany—apart from her deep interest in Greek architecture—tended to follow
the French lead. Another French institution which helped to shape progressive
ideas in the first three decades of the nineteenth century was the Ecole Poly-
technique, founded 1794, which looked upon architectural matters from the engin-
eering side.
The ‘nineteenth and twentieth-century’ period, considered here as beginning
at 1830, may be regarded as falling into two phases, the one from 1830 to 1900 and
the other from 1900 to the present; for. although historicism remained the keynote
down to the First World War of 1914-19, and is not entirely defunct at the present
day, the development of ‘Organic’ or ‘Modern’ architecture is consistently traceable
on the Continent from about 1900.
Period 1830-c. 1900. Continental revivalism, like the British, became less and less
academic, drawing ideas and motifs from past styles yet with a decreasing regard
for the faithful reproduction of them; in quite a few respects it proceeded upon its
own impetus, evolving characteristic arrangements which had no counterpart in
past history. France led the fashions, except that Germany had a strongly com-
jpetitive influence in Central and Northern Europe through the first half century.
Italian Renaissance classicism, modified in the respective countries by their own
historical interpretations of it, superseded the Roman or Greek between 1830-50,
and it is this Neo-Renaissance mode, or that of the Neo-Baroque into which it
developed, which characterizes most Continental architecture through the century.
Gothic revivalism made some headway in France, almost exclusively for ecclesi-
astical buildings, and also in Germany, whereas there wasvery little in other countries,
Where necessary for particular investigation, terms convenient for reference to
Continental architecture as a whole may be taken from French history, since it was
that country that exercised the principal influence through most of the period.
These accord fairly closely with those used for the British (p. 987). The French
‘July Monarchy’ (1830-48) accords approximately with the British ‘Early Victorian’
(1830-50), and the ‘Second Empire’ (1848-70) with the British ‘High Victorian’
(1850-75). The French ‘Third Republic’ (1870-1914) covers British ‘Late Vic-
itorian’ (1875-1900) and the ensuing years to the First World War. The ‘July
IMonarchy’ was a transitional phase, mainly Neo-Renaissance, the ‘Second Empire’
a High Neo-Renaissance phase—marked by a return to mansard and pavilion roofs
—and the ‘Third Republic’, Neo-Baroque. These are very broad generalizations,
as there were distinct time-lags in the countries remote from the French and
German chief centres of influence: also, eclecticism was on the increase throughout
‘the period, and there was no great consistency, anywhere, in the developments.
Though much nineteenth-century architecture was dull, extravagantly ornate,
eoarse or downright ugly, there were many quite fine monuments. The momentous
developments however, were those made in the planning of buildings or in technique,
iim direct response to the now-prevailing industrial economy Especially in France,
numerous courageous experiments were undertaken to discover means of covering
greater spaces and erecting higher and fire-resisting buildings with the maximum
efficiency. Among the available materials, most of which could now be produced
‘and transported in great quantities, the newest was iron, and its possibilities were
cexplored with the utmost zeal, just as in Britain. Constructionally, iron was at first
wsed mainly as a fire-resisting roofing material; with it J.-V. Louis (173 I-1800)
thad roofed the Thédtre Francais, Paris, in 1786-90, and afterwards, bridges,
pavilions, galleries, market-halls, glass-houses and other mainly-iron structures
were built in abundance. Then, in the present period, Henri Labrouste (1801-75)
produced his extraordinarily brilliant Library of S. Geneviéve, Paris (1843-50)
1064 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

(p. 1085) as fine and original in the architecture of its stone exterior shell as in its
cast- and wrought-iron complete inner frame, this last an innovation for a public
building. He followed this with the National Library, Paris (1862-8) (p. 1085),
embodying further developments. Meanwhile, Britain’s Crystal Palace (p. 1041)
had stimulated emulation, and at the first International Exhibition, Paris, of 1855,
there was built a masonry-buttressed glass-and-iron vaulted hall of 158 ft span.
At a similar International Exhibition in Vienna held in 1873, there was an iron
cupola no Jess than 350 ft across, the largest of the century. A different kind of
innovation was that represented by a chocolate factory at Noisiel-sur-Marne, near
Paris (1871-2) (p. 1103), probably the first true skeleton-framed building in France.
It indicates a new, anti-traditional trend in several ways, including the idea of sup-
porting a building entirely upon its structural frame, the walls becoming merely a
weather-resistant sheathing or ‘cladding’. It was influential, as it secured the com-
mendation of Eugéne Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc (1814-79), architect, a famous and
prolific writer, known particularly for his Dictionnaire Raisonné de I’Architecture
Francaise du 11° au 16° Siécle (1854-61) and Entretiens sur l’Architecture (1863), and
for his numerous restorations, considered nowadays to have been over-drastic, of
some of the greatest of France’s mediaeval monuments (p. 549).
Bridges, railway stations, industrial structures and yet more international
exhibitions in Paris in 1867, 1878 and 1889 provided opportunities for the exploita-
tion of structural iron. That of 1889 was remarkable not only for the gigantic Halle
des Machines (p. 1103) but also for that symbol of Paris, the Eiffel Tower (1887-9),
984 ft high, the best-known work of the engineer Gustave Eiffel (1832-1923).
Eiffel also designed the entrance building of the 1878 Paris Exhibition (p. 1103),
largely of metal and glass and highly ornate, comprising a long rhythm of rectan-
gular bays marked at the middle and ends by prominent domed pavilions penetrated
by enormous lunette arches. Such dispositions and features were to remain popular
with the Ecole des Beaux-Arts and typical of French architecture until the end of
the century, as is instanced by the Petit Palais, Paris (1897-1900) (p. 1092B), which
repeats the arrangement, including the domed pavilions, abutted—in the centre—
by similar great arches. The difference, however, is that the Petit Palais is of stone
and of that distinctive Neo-Baroque character representative of the generality of
French major buildings of its period.
Yet towards the end of the century, an increasing proportion of buildings, par-
ticularly those in which iron played an important part, were in process of shedding
Classical traits and developing a free, naturalistic decoration which presaged inter-
national Art Nouveau. A new material too, was coming to the fore—reinforced con-
crete. Mass concrete, an artificial material of sand, shingle and cement, mixed with
water and allowed to set, already had been used for a number of buildings, in the
form of building-blocks or cast im s?tu within containing ‘formwork’; and at the same
time experiments had been proceeding towards strengthening concrete with iron, so
disposed within the concrete as to resist tensional stresses, against which the material
is weak, to complement its very great ability to resist compression. Mathematical as
well as practical problems were involved. French invention achieved a narrow lead
over British, German and American, and in 1892, Francois Hennebique (1842-1921)
produced and rapidly exploited a complete system of reinforced concrete, this
closely followed by many other proprietary systems. Used initially for industrial
projects, the first building of architectural consequence was a church, S. Jean de
Montmartre, Paris (1897-1905) (p. 1080), by Anatole de Baudot (1836-1915).
Thus by the last decade of the century, the several lines of architectural develop-
ment had reached an important stage. They then began to converge, and lead more
or less directly towards ‘Modern’ architecture as understood today. In tectonics
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1065

there were reinforced concrete, the steel frame and ferro-vitreous construction of
the older kind, while in the polite realm the British Arts and Crafts cleansing
movement was on the point of inspiring and giving way to Continental Art Nouveau.
The latter, known in France as ‘Le Modern Style’, in Germany and Austria as the
‘Jugendstil’ and in Italy as the ‘Stile Liberty’, is deemed to have begun in Brussels
with the house No. 6, Rue Paul-Emile Janson (1892-3), by the Belgian, Victor
Horta; though less abruptly than is usually contended as there had been quite a few
portents, some of them already noted. The earlier work of Antoni Gaudi (1852-
1926) at Barcelona, Spain, especially the Palazzo Guell (1885-9) (p. 1071) is to be
reckoned among the anticipations of the style, if not actually its real beginning.
France adopted the style with enthusiasm. In Holland, where Hendrick P. Berlage
(1856-1934) was the leader, the extremes of Art Nouveau were almost unknown,
and the country progressed to a rational architecture, usually expressed in the
native brick, that was substantially her own.
Period c. 1900 to present day. Being essentially a decorative movement, Art
Nouveau was characterized principally by its flowing, attenuated and sinuous
naturalistic ornament, often profuse, concentrated particularly at corners of open-
ings or junctions of features, or other telling points, and by the repudiation of
historic forms. Curvilinear motifs abounded, and were either lineal or plastic
according to the material, and polychromy was favoured. The lineal expression
was well-suited to ferro-vitreous buildings, and thus to department stores, of which
a number were constructed in Paris and other cities at this time, and to light struc-
tures like underground stations, arcades, pavilions and kiosks. Houses and urban
buildings in general were less amenable externally, normally being in stone or
brick, but could express the style in ceramic tiles, mosaic, carved, painted or
plaster ornament or in the ironwork of grilles, balconies and railings; or again,
elements of the facades could themselves be moulded, as in the extraordinarily
bizarre later work of Gaudi (p. 1072). The movement affected Germany and Austria
almost immediately, and the contacts with the English Arts and Crafts were direct
and strong. Early exponents in Germany were August Endell (1871-1925) and
Henri van de Velde (1863-1957), the latter a Belgian who moved to Berlin in 1899.
In Vienna, artists formed a ‘Sezession’ away from the old-fashioned Academy, and
adopted Art Nouveau. Otto Wagner (1841-1918) and J. M. Olbrich (1867-1908)
were principal figures. There, taste was less extreme than at Brussels or Paris, as is
indicated by the fact that Mackintosh of Glasgow (p. 991), whose manner of Art
Nouveau design was relatively economical, was invited to contribute the decoration
of a room for the Sezession’s exhibition of 1900: already he had exhibited at Munich,
Germany, in 1898. The distinguished Austrian-born Adolf Loos (1870-1933),
showed his advanced ideas by declaring himself against all ornament of whatever
nature, as early as 1897/8. Yet it was several years later before the tide of opinion
began to turn in favour of machine art rather than the handicrafts approach
favoured by Arts and Crafts partisans, and led to the formation of ‘Werkbund’
associations devoted to stimulating quality in industrial work, the German founded
in 1907, the Austrian 1910, the Swiss 1913 and the Swedish 1910-17. The English
‘Design and Industries Association’ of 1915 was launched upon the inspiration of
the German Werkbund. In sympathy with the new ideal, teaching in German and
Austrian art schools was fundamentally reorientated, and progressive designers
appointed to direct them. In Germany were Peter Behrens (1868-1938) at Dussel-
dorf, Hans Poelzig (1869-1936) at Breslau, Bruno Paul (1874-1954) at Berlin and
Van de Velde at Weimar, while Josef Hoffman (1870-1956) became Professor of
Architecture in Vienna.
In continental Europe as a whole, the greatest names of the period 1900-16 are
1066 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

those of Perret, Behrens and Loos, respectively French, German and Austrian.
Auguste Perret (1874-1954), not previously mentioned, as he played no great part
in Art Nouveau, began practice about 1895, and throughout much of his long career
devoted himself single-mindedly to the advancement of the technique and art of
reinforced concrete. He quickly appreciated that reinforced concrete should be
used, like timber, on the frame-and-panel method—the frame, outlining the
building, serving to carry all the weight—and was the architect of the earliest
secular building in the material to have its structure expressed visibly in a logical
and sightly manner (1903) (p. 1072). He continued to produce significant architec-
ture in the inter-war and post-war periods, this always showing a respect for
Classical principles of design. Behrens was important in disseminating the machine~-
age style. His work developed from the later stages of Art Nouveau into a clean and
direct expression of orderly structure, and showed that industrial as well as public,
ecclesiastical and domestic buildings could have fine architectural qualities. Loos
unswervingly followed his own precepts, excluding ornament completely and
deriving his architectural effects solely from the necessary tectonic forms. It was in
his domestic work that modern architecture first reached maturity (1910). Progress
in steel and reinforced concrete construction continued. Tony Garnier (1867-1948)
achieved with steel a span of 262 ft in a hall for the cattle market and abattoirs at
Lyons (1913), and Max Berg (b. 1870) the glazed dome of 213 ft diameter of the
Centennial Hall at Breslau (1912-13) (p. 1097) with reinforced concrete. The latter
has massive radial and concentric ribs almost of masonry proportions. Eugene
Freyssinet (b. 1879) used concrete far more economically in his impressive para-
bolic-vaulted airship hangar at Orly, near Paris (1916) (p. 1106), destroyed in the
Second World War, which in the thin zig-zag section of its enormous ribs inaugu-
rated the principle of the ‘folded slab’, a principle widely adopted later on. Another
engineer, the Swiss, Robert Maillart (1872-1940), employed the ‘flat slab’ method
in his splendidly-simple bridge designs (p. 1108), the first in 1906, or in the case of
tiered buildings, used the slab in conjunction with pillar supports in an arrange-
ment known as ‘mushroom’ construction (1908). However, the parabolic vault,
folded slab and slab-and-pillar or mushroom types of reinforced concrete construc-
tion did not come into general use until the inter-war period, the normal early
system being that of the simple box-frame outlining the space to be enclosed.
Four outstanding personalities of the inter-war period and later are Walter
Gropius (b. 1883), Mies van der Rohe (b. 1886), Le Corbusier (b. 1887) and
J. J. P. Oud (b. 1890). Actually, the German-born Gropius already had designed
notable buildings before 1914, including one, the Fagus Factory at Aldfeld-an-
der-Leine (1911-14) (p. 1104), in collaboration with Adolf Meyer (d. 1925), which
has a near equivalent of the modern ‘curtain-wall’, this a glazed framework suspended
across the face of a building in front of the various floors and inner dividing
partitions. The idea already had been current from the 1890’s in America, and the
first true example is said to be that of the Hallidie Building, San Francisco, com-
pleted in 1918 (p. 1156). In 1919 Gropius succeeded Van de Velde at Weimar,
where he founded the ‘Bauhaus’, developing a form of training intended to relate
art and architecture with machine-age daily life. In 1925 Gropius moved to
Dessau, and re-established the Bauhaus there, erecting a new building (1925-6) (p.
1094) to house the school, based on his own advanced principles. His book The New
Architecture and the Bauhaus (1935) explained his system, which had an international
influence. From 1934-7 he was in England, and subsequently lived in the U.S.A.
Van der Rohe, also German and similarly influenced by Behrens, became the
Director of the Dessau Bauhaus in 1930, but went to America in 1937. His personal
interpretation of Modern architecture had matured by 1919. In a competition in
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1067

that year, he essayed a glass-sheathed, twenty-storey Berlin skyscraper and in

1920-1, a model of another, thirty storeys high, designed as a cluster of interpene-
trating circularly-planned elements sustained by an inner steel skeleton supporting
cantilevered floors, the whole entirely glass-faced. These towers anticipated by
very many years his forty-storey Seagram Building, New York (1956-7) built in
collaboration with P. C. Johnson, planned as a simple, colossal rectangular block
(p. 1163). All his mature work has a refreshing simplicity, the respective structural
materials being used frankly according to their nature. Externally, glass is used
extensively, and normally he adheres to the rectangular frame, while interior accom-
modation is contrived by freely-disposed light partitions, interwoven with the inner
pillars of the structural frame.
“Le Corbusier’ (a pseudonym of Charles-Edouard Jeanneret), of Swiss birth but
whose work has centred in France, has dominated the European scene for many
years. In his formative period he worked both with Perret in Paris and Behrens in
Berlin; and being himself a painter, he was receptive to ideas from contemporary
Cubist painting. His earlier interests were in domestic work, and his philosophy
at that time—the early 1920’s—is summed up in his dictum that ‘the house is a
machine to live in’. This was intended to imply not that a dwelling need not be
attractive, but that it should be attractive, diverting and efficient. A prolific writer,
his books, particularly Vers une Architecture (1923—English translation 1927) had
enormous influence. He advocated that the structural frame should be separately
identified from the space-enclosing walls, that a house should be lifted on pillars
(‘pilotis’) so that the garden might spread under it; that roofs should be flat, capable
of use as a garden, as pitched roofs were intrusive on the cubic or rectilineal idea;
that the interior accommodation should be freely planned, each floor according to
the need, since all loading could be taken by the structural frame. The latter was not
a new notion, for Perret had conceived it in 1903, nor (apart from the ‘pilotis’) were
the others, but collectively they constituted a fresh conception, entirely opposed to
the traditional principles still generally obtaining. The relatively thin enveloping
walls could have continuous bands of horizontal windows. From houses, Le
Corbusier went on to produce buildings of virtually all principal classes and schemes
for town-planning, ever provoking international curiosity and controversy yet
ultimately securing general confidence in the tenability of his many stimulating ideas.
J. J. P. Oud is representative of Holland at this time as Berlage had been in the
pre-1914 period. Gropius and Le Corbusier both were influenced by contemporary
painting in their formative years, and so was Oud, having been a member of the
important Dutch ‘De Stijl’ group of abstract artists, formed in 1917, whose tenets
concerned the manipulation of geometrical forms: architecturally, they rejected the
rigid enclosure of buildings in their enveloping walls in favour of the free interplay
of spatial volumes. Oud softened the jagged asperities of the early architectural
ventures of the group and developed a clean, sedate style, markedly horizontal in
stress but with emphasis on the sheer wall, rather than upon the banded windows.
Another coming under the influence of ‘De Stijl’ was W. M. Dudok (b. 1884)
designer of many fine buildings, who, however, went less quickly and less far
towards Modern architectural principles, and chose to work almost exclusively in
brickwork, thus allying himself to some extent with an Amsterdam group of archi-
tects who exploited fine brickwork, the traditional material of Holland, in a dramatic
and romantic manner. Notable among the latter were Michael de Klerk (1884-
1924) and P. L. Kramer (b. 1884). Yet Holland’s greatest building of the period is
the Van Nelle Factory, Rotterdam (1927-30) (p. 1104), by J. A. Brinckmann and
L. C. van der Vlugt (b. 1894): it is unique for its day in the measure of its fulfilment
of modern principles.
1068 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

Thus the new architecture grew in Europe. France, Germany, Austria and Hol-
land, the countries where it originated, have been mentioned, though by no means
all the famous men who contributed to its development. One other, at least, should
be mentioned: Erich Mendelsohn (1887-1953), a pioneer German who left his own
country for England in 1933, spent the years 1934-8 in Palestine and then settled
in the U.S.A. Then too, there were architects of considerable stature in other
European countries. In Sweden, Ragnar Ostberg (1866-1945) produced his
romantically beautiful Stockholm City Hall (1911-23) (p. 1093), and Ivar Tengbom
(b. 1878) likewise showed that the traditional mode could vie in brilliance with the
new, as pursued so effectively by Sven Markelius (b. 1889) or again by Erik Gunnar
Asplund (1885-1940), who effected the transition from historicism superbly in his
own professional span. Asplund helped by his example to quicken the pace in
Denmark too, for there, Neo-Classicism held sway almost to 1930. Finland came
into the picture fairly early, due to the endeavours of Eliel Saarinen (1873-1950),
though he settled in the U.S.A. after 1923. After him Alvar Aalto (b. 1898) was the
dominant Finnish figure. Under Viennese influence pre-wars Italy made tentative
steps towards Modernism in the visionary schemes of Antonio Sant’ Elia (1888-
1917), but no real beginning until the formation in 1927 of ‘Gruppo 7’, this once
again an association of progressive artists and designers such as had led the revolt
against revivalism in so many other countries. Fascism, then in the ascendant,
tolerated the Modern movement, but the new architecture developed in the late
inter-war period was largely impersonal, apart from the fact that Pier Luigi Nervi
(b. 1891) already had begun his remarkably distinguished career, and produced
impressive monuments.
After the Second World War, the new architecture extended rapidly in Europe,
while under its influence the buildings still designed on traditional lines tended to
shed stylistic ornament and mouldings and to share its directness and simplicity.
Steel and reinforced concrete frames became common for all but the smallest
structures. Multifarious fresh departures were made in the servicing and equipment
of buildings and in the methods of cladding and weather-proofing. Synthetic
materials played a large part in these developments. In the field of structure,
‘shell’ vaulting offered—and continues to offer—the greatest opportunities for
architectural exploitation. Long ago, Perret and Freyssinet separately had appreci-
ated that the need for bulk is greatly diminished when reinforced concrete is used
for arched vaults, particularly those of parabolic section, since the stresses then are
mainly compressional, with a consequent considerable saving in the load to be
supported. In domes, the conditions are especially favourable, as was discovered by
Walter Bauersfeld in 1922. After experiments, the first sizeable shell-dome was
constructed at Jena, Germany, in 1925, spanning 82 ft, with the concrete no more
than 23 ins thick. An octagonal dome at Basle market hall spans 197 ft, at a thick-
ness of 34 ins. After hemispherical domes, segmental domes and then barrel
vaults were essayed, the latter sometimes running with the length and sometimes
in a series, side by side, across a hall; and with these too, enormous unobstructed
spans were at length achieved. Sometimes the transverse barrel vaults were allowed
to protrude beyond their seating on the longitudinal walls, cantilevered to provide
a serrated crest or awning. In the case of all these types there were problems of
stiffness to be resolved, for arches or vaults, however light, exert thrust, which has
to be buttressed, contained or countered.
Before the War of 1939-45, the shell vault was used mainly for purely utilitarian
structures; it was in the post-war world that it emerged definitely as a reputable
feature in polite architecture, and remarkable feats have been accomplished with
it, great roofs striding almost from the ground in varying degrees of geometrical
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1069

‘<i
A. Rue de Rivoli (west), Paris (1811-35). B. No. 11, Rue de Milan,
See p. 1071 Paris (c. 1860). See p. 1071

c. The Palazzo Guell, Barcelona (1885-9). p. No. 6, Rue Paul-Emile

See p. 1071 Janson, Brussels (1892-3):
staircase. See p. I07I

= Se

E. Workers’ Houses, Hook of Holland (1926-7). F. Apartment House, Rue

See p. 1075 Raynouard, Paris (1929-32).
See p. 1079
1070 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

ee RMN

A. The Majolica House, Vienna (c. 1898). B. The Casa Battld6, Barcelona
See p. 1072 (1905-7). See p. 1072

c. The Casa Mila, Barcelona (1905-10). See p. 1072

 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1071

simplicity or complexity. Thus the curvilinear note has been restored again to
organic architecture, after decades of rectilineal modernism, bringing with it a
charm, even delicacy, hitherto frequently lacking. A vast new field still remains only
partially explored. However, it is not only in reinforced concrete that further
potentialities have been discovered, for steel, while remaining the most suitable
structural material for the framing of high ‘sky-scraper’ and other cellular buildings,
is now often used over great halls in unified ‘space-frame’ arrangements, composed
in three dimensions instead of as a series of principals or trusses supporting longi-
tudinal members (purlins, etc.) on the age-old method. Then too, it has been
discovered that the natural deficiencies of timber can be overcome by lamination,
the glueing together of many overlapping layers of the material to provide beams
and arches of calculable capacities vastly beyond the range of timber in its natural
state. Glass, which plays so large a part in current architecture also has been
developed so as to remove many of the former deficiencies and present a variety of
new properties.
Many of the notable architects practising in the inter-war period continued active
in the post-war phase, though, as we have seen, quite a number of the more famous
had left Europe for the U.S.A., where economic and other circumstances have been
more propitious for architecture. In France, Perret maintained for the rest of his
lifetime his devotion to reinforced concrete; and his zeal for prefabrication still
further accentuated the reticulated air, which together with the Classical disposi-
tions always remained a mark of his authorship. Factory prefabrication, allowing
speedy erection upon the site, steadily increased in Europe, and in France in 1960
accounted for about five per cent of the total building production. Le Corbusier
remains France’s outstanding figure, with an international reputation and an inter-
continental practice, while Nervi similarly retains his place in the forefront of
Italian architecture and engineering. In all countries, the younger generation of
designers has adopted organic architecture enthusiastically, and new leaders are in
the process of emerging from a host of gifted practitioners.

EXAMPLES

DOMESTIC BUILDINGS
The Houses, Rue de Rivoli (west), Paris (1811-35) (p. 1069A), by Percier and
Fontaine, have five storeys, the lowest arcaded and the upper a mansard, and
illustrate the quiet classicism of the ‘Empire’ style at the opening of the present
period. The ‘Nouveau Louvre’ extensions, Paris (1850-7) (pp. 775C; D, E; 793B),
by Visconti and Lefuel, show a far richer Neo-Baroque. In European cities and
large towns, flats had become the chief type of dwelling: the Flat-block, No. 11,
Rue de Milan, Paris (c. 1860) (p. 1069B), by A.-F. Mortier, has a typical Neo-
Baroque fagade, fine and vigorous but crowded with features and with scarcely a
trace of unrelieved wall.
The Palazzo Giiell, Barcelona, Spain (1885-9) (p. 1069C), by Antoni Gaudi, is
indicative of a revolt against historicism and presages Art Nouveau. The building
presents many novelties. The first floor is cantilevered, and the twin portals are
parabolic, infilled with iron grilles, which at the top make a very rich filigree of
swirling and convoluted forms. Between the portals is an elaborate heraldic
ornament over a small, grilled window. Neither the heraldic ornament nor that at
the door-heads is precisely symmetrical. There are more iron grilles in the series of
first-floor windows, divided by simple post-mullions. In the whole of this part of
the composition there is scarcely any recognizable historical feature.
No. 6, Rue Paul-Emile Janson, Brussels (1892-3) (p. 1069D) by Victor
1072 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

Horta, is accounted the first house and the first complete building in full-fledged Art
Nouveau. It is narrow-fronted and deep, the rooms planned rather more freely
than normal and with some exploitation of floor levels. The facade is unexciting but
novel for its day, being almost wholly non-traditional: the main element is an oriel
segmental bay, with metal mullions and window-heads and decorative ironwork
balustrades. The new character is much more evident internally (p. 1069D) particu-
larly in the stair-hall and salon, where iron work is used lavishly both for the struc-
ture and for free-flowing, plant-like ornament in linear intertwinings. Ornament of
similar character springs from the angles of the walls, which otherwise are refresh-
ingly plain and simple.
The Majolica House, Vienna (c. 1898) (p. 1070A), a block of flats by Otto
Wagner, has a six-storey facade ornamented on the upper part with a rich floral
pattern worked in coloured tiles, and delicate ironwork elsewhere. The simple
dignity of effect contrasts with the florid character of contemporary expressions of
Art Nouveau in the western countries of Europe.
The Casa Battl6, Barcelona (1905-7) (p. 1070B), by Antoni Gaudi, instances the
bizarre mature manner of this Catalan architect. The stone dressings of the lower
facade are modelled plastically into ovoid and sinuous shapes, echoed in the metal
upper balustrades, while the wall surfaces around the rectangular upper windows
are studded with coloured glass fragments. The Casa Mila, Barcelona (1905-10)
(p. 1070C), a block of flats, also by Gaudi, is even more extraordinary in that its
stone facades undulate to enclose an irregular mesh of polygonal rooms, no two
alike and none with right-angled corners. The external walls are swept into heavy
brows over the tiers of roll-edged, round-angled windows, and the ironwork of the
balconies resembles tangles of brushwood. Gaudi’s Art Nouveau is exceptional in
being dominantly plastic, for elsewhere it is mainly planar, with linear adjuncts and
decorations.
The Apartment-block, No. 25b, Rue Franklin, Paris (1903) (p. 10734), by
Auguste Perret, is the earliest instance of frank architectural expression of rein-
forced concrete framed construction in an important secular building. The block
is trapped between other frontages, and to avoid internal light wells, the centre of
the facade is deeply recessed, the wings at the same time having projecting bays.
The concrete is faced externally with ceramic slabs, plain where the essential frame
was to be expressed and around the windows, but ornamented with floral or pebble
patterns on the non-load-bearing panels between. Ceramic tiles were a usual method
of facing concrete at this time, but the floriated decoration is one of the few con-
cessions made in the building to the still-fashionable Art Nouveau. Glass bricks,
invented about 1890, were used on the staircase outer wall at the rear. The floor
loads are taken upon internal pillars instead of the dividing walls, and this innova-
tion had an important influence upon later domestic architecture.
The Stocklet House, Brussels (1905-11) (p. 1073B), by Josef Hoffmann, is an
opulent asymmetrically-composed mansion, lavishly marbled internally and elegant
externally, with white walls patterned by rhythms of neat windows. A feature much
imitated later on is the tall staircase window running the full height of the house,
accentuating the vertical lines of the dominant tower.
The Steiner House, Vienna (1910) (p. 1073C), by Adolf Loos, is the first wholly
Modern dwelling. It is strictly functional, the designer being strongly opposed to
ornament in whatever form. Elevationally it is symmetrical and flat-roofed, its plain
white walls broken by stark windows devoid even of the hitherto normal astragals,
yet carefully proportioned to give a balance and restfulness to the whole facade.
The Dageraad Housing Estate, Amsterdam (1918-23), by Piet Kramer, is
represented by the tenement blocks erected in 1922-3 (p. 1073D), which show the
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1073

i} x
7 ;
ped :

oui

B. The Stocklet House, Brussels (1905-11).

See p. 1072

ese
A. Apartment Block, No. 25b, Rue c. The Steiner House, Vienna (1910-). See p. 1072
Franklin, Paris (1903). See p. 1072

Dp. The Dageraad Housing Estate, E. Group of Flats, Henriette Ronnerplein,

Amsterdam (1922-23). See p. 1072 Amsterdam (1920-2). See p. 1075
1074 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

.
3
*

B. The Villa Savoye, Poissy, S. et O., France (1928-31). See opposite page
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1075

clever and ornamental treatment of fine brickwork evidenced by the Amsterdam

school of architects at this time. The block of Flats on the Henriette Ronnerplein,
Amsterdam (1920-2) (p. 1073E) by Michel de Klerk, offers a further example.
The Workers’ Houses, Hook of Holland (1926-7) (p. 1069E) by J. J. P. Oud,
comprising two terraces, represent the Dutch Rotterdam school, more genuinely
functional and progressive than the foregoing. The white facades are linked by long
balconies which curve to form canopies over shops at the ends. The plinths are of
yellow brick, and colour is applied to some of the wood and the iron elements.
The Villa ‘Les Terraces’ at Garches, near Paris (1926-7) (p. 1074A) by Le
Corbusier and Pierre Jeanneret (b. 1896—Le Corbusier’s cousin, who practised
with him until 1943) is the most famous of the many houses by this celebrated
architect, and embodies his principles. There are two main floors, the first floor
providing the kitchen and living accommodation and the second the bedrooms.
The ground or entrance floor includes the garage and remaining domestic offices,
while the roof has terrace gardens, a guest suite and servants’ bedroom quarters.
As a whole, the villa forms a rectangle, the concrete floors being carried on the end
walls and upon sparse internal pillars, but projecting forward on the two long sides
as cantilevers, so that none of the main structural supports is visible in the long
horizontal ‘ribbon’ windows. Since there are no internal load-bearing walls the
accommodation could be freely planned, differing on each floor. The living floor is
treated as a single lightly-divided space, the elements being demarcated by doorless
and movable curved or straight partitions. Each main floor includes a covered
garden, that of the first floor being related to the external garden by a projecting
terrace, supported on a squat round column, and a flight of steps.
The Villa Savoye, Poissy, S. et O., France (1928-31) (p. 1074B) follows similar
principles to ‘Les Terraces’, but differs in design. The main floor is raised upon
‘pilotis’, approached by a dog-legged long ramp or inclined way instead of a stair-
case. Most of the accommodation is on the first floor, which also includes a large
covered terrace. Above, there is a roof garden, with curvilinear screens to the
access stair and small pavilions. The ground floor is cored by a spacious, round-
fronted hall, from which the ramp leads, and also accommodates servants’ quarters,
a guest suite and a large garage for three cars. The upper floors are cantilevered at
the two ends, but on the sides of the rectangular house-block the pillar supports
pass immediately behind the first-floor wall-screens, the latter pierced by almost
continuous horizontal ribbon windows.
Other interesting houses of about the same date were those built for their own
occupation by Walter Gropius at Dessau (1926) and Erich Mendelsohn at Berlin
(1929).
The Tugendhat House, Brno, Czechoslovakia (1930) (p. 1076) by Ludwig
Mies van der Rohe, is celebrated for its gracious effects in internal open planning.
The house stands on a southern steep slope, and is entered from the top partial
storey, which contains the entrance hall, bedrooms and guest suite, besides the
garage block at the west end. The stair descends to the main floor, of which an area
of about 80 ft by 40 ft is lightly divided into study, living room, dining room, and
pantry areas by free-standing partitions (p. 1076B). One of the screens is of pale
onyx marble, and another, forming a semicircle around the dining space, is of
ebony, while the steel pillars supporting the upper floor are finished in chrome
bronze. The service quarters project outwards to the west. The continuous great
windows on the cantilevered south and east sides of the block may be lowered
electrically into the storage basement which elevates the main floor above the
terrace and hillside. Externally (p. 1076A), the house has that grand elegance which
regularly distinguishes the work of the designer.
1076 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

A. The Tugendhat House, Brno (1930): exterior. See p. 1075

B. The Tugendhat House, Brno: interior

 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1077

B. The Stockholm Exhibition, 1930. See p. I11II

1078 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

The Unité d’Habitation, Marseilles (1946-52). See opposite page

 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1079
The Swiss Hostel, Cité Universitaire, Paris (1931-2) (p. 10774) by Le
Corbusier, is a dormitory block standing impressively upon enormous double
‘pilotis’ of concrete which leave the site almost completely open at ground level.
Above, the building is steel-framed, faced with concrete slabs, with bands of large
windows facing south-west to light the single-banked study-bedrooms. The ends
of the block are devoid of windows, as also is the concave north-east face of a rear
wing which juts out to contain the communal rooms.
The Apartment Block, 51-5, Rue Raynouard, Paris (1929-32) (p. 1069F) by
Auguste Perret, contrived on an awkward wedge-shaped site, is very representative
of this architect’s mature style, of which the distinguishing traits are the emphasis
of the vertical and horizontal lines of the reinforced-concrete frame, the use of pre-
cast infilling slabs between, the upright, traditional form of the windows and the
Classical symmetry and character of the features. Together, these give a busy,
reticulated effect.

In post-war Europe, though many fine houses have been constructed, they
contribute no particularly new principle: the main developments have been in
great housing schemes, especially of flat-blocks.
The Unité d’Habitation, Marseilles (1946-52) (p. 1078) by Le Corbusier, is
an enormous apartment block designed to house a complete community. It
stands on massive coupled ‘pilotis’, and is concrete framed, faced with prefabri-
cated slabs or units. Near the centre of the height is a floor devoted to shops and
communal services, complemented by other facilities on the roof—swimming
bath, gymnasium, nursery school and play and sun-bathing areas. The apartments
are ingeniously interlocked between front and back of the block so that each
dwelling can occupy a floor and a half of height, including a two-storey living room.
Covering the front and back faces of the block are concrete frames, which shield
the rooms from glare and provide balconies on both fronts to each dwelling.

CHURCHES
The Gothic Revival, never as important on the Continent as in England, affected
church building more strongly than it did other types. In France and Germany
it found some favour during the period of the July Monarchy (1830-48), replacing
the Neo-Classic, and a good deal more in that of the Second Empire (1848-70),
though mostly for the restoration, completion or extension of existing cathedrals
and churches. The rest of Europe was variously strongly affected, roughly accord-
ing to the distance from the two main centres. English contemporary architecture
had a not inconsiderable influence. Representative Continental churches are:
S. Clotilde, Paris (1846-57); the Petrikirche (1843-9) and the Nikolaikirche
(1845-63) (p. I081A), Hamburg, the latter built from the winning competition
designs of Sir G. G. Scott (p. 990); the Votivkirche, Vienna (1856-79) (p. I081C),
a rich and attractive compcsition with twin western spires, also from a competition
design, by H. von Ferstel; S. Denys de l’Estrée, S. Denis, Seine, France (1864-7),
by the influential restorer and writer, Viollet-le-Duc; and the very large Fiinfhaus
Parish Church, Vienna (1868-75), by F. von Schmidt, a domed, centralized com-
position with two western spires.
S. Eugéne, Paris (1854-5) (p. 108ID), by L.-A. Boileau (1812-96) is France’s
first iron-framed church, much of the detail being in that material too. The
interior, with its slender, single-shafted arcades, is well-lit, spacious and elegant.
Other ‘iron’ churches are S. Eugéne, Le Vesinet, S. et O., (1863), by Boileau;
S. Augustin, Paris (1860-7) by Victor Baltard (1805-74); and Notre Dame du
Travail, Paris (1899-1901), by Anstruc,
 1080 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

The Church of the Sacré Coeur, Paris, begun 1875-7 on the plans of Paul
Abadie (1812-84) and largely completed before the end of the century, though not
wholly finished until 1919, famous as a landmark, stands with its cluster of gleaming
white domes on the heights of Montmartre; it reflects Byzantine influence through
the medium of the Mediaeval S. Front, Perigueux (p. 290).
S. Jean de Montmartre, Paris (1897-1905) (p. 1081B), by Anatole de Baudot, is
the first building of major architectural importance to have been designed in rein-
forced concrete, though the architect already had completed some houses and a
school in the material. In the system used, the compression elements were of
reinforced brickwork and the tensional elements of reinforced cement, without a
stone aggregate. The design is Mediaeval in general complexion, yet with many
novel forms and with considerable play externally and internally with interlaced
arches, those of the inner gallery being decorated with mosaics.
The Church of the Sagrada Familia, Barcelona (crypt 1882-91; chevet,
1887-1891; transept facade designed 1891-1903 and built 1903-26) (p. 1082A), by
Antoni Gaudi, who took over the work in 1884, still largely unfinished, is just as
fantastic as others of this architect’s principal buildings. The ‘south transept’
facade (the church is abnormally orientated), comprises a trio of steeply-gabled,
deeply-recessed porches, the two lesser ones on the flanks corresponding to the
transept aisles, dominated by four skittle-shaped openwork spires. The porches
are profusely ornamented with sculptured naturalistic floral and figure ornament
which, although in stonework, has the effect of having been modelled in soft,
melting snow. Enormous faceted finials, studded with broken coloured tiles, cap
the four towers. The inner arcades were to have been inclined towards one another
and were intended to give the semblance of weird, angular trees, stark branches
reaching upwards to sustain a stalactite vault over the nave and flat roofs over the
double aisles, again with stalactites, between which scores of circular ‘eyes’ would
admit shafts of daylight. Art Nouveau was never more dramatic, plastic or eccentric.
The Grundvig Church, Copenhagen (designed 1913, completed 1921-6)
(p. 1082D) by P. W. Jensen Klint (1853-1930), has an impressively-composed
western front which well represents progressive architecture of its day yet retains
something of the traditional Baltic flavour. Indeed the vertical grooving and the
‘crow-steps’ of the tripartite gable recall the brick fourteenth-century church at
Ystad, on the southern tip of Sweden, in the area which once belonged to Denmark,
The traditional note is present too in the admirable Engelbrekt Church, Stock-
holm (1908-14) (p. 1082B) by L. I. Wahlman, which has a brick parabolic vault,
and the equally fine Hégalid Church, Stockholm, Sweden (1918-23) (p. 1082)
by Ivar Tengbom.
The Church of Notre Dame, Le Raincy, S. et O. (1922-3) (p. 10834, B) by
Auguste Perret, is the first in which reinforced concrete finds direct architectural
expression. The simple, single-aisled ‘hall-church’ plan, 185 ft by 63 ft wide, is
formed by four rows of slender, vertically-reeded tapering pillars, 37 ft high,
supporting a flat segmental concrete vault, 2 ins thick, over the nave, and transverse
shallow segmental vaults over the bays of the aisles. Being so thin, the nave vault
is stiffened by transverse fins protruding above the vault, themselves covered by
large, curved tiles. The church floor falls towards the east. The slight walls clasp
the outer lines of columns, and are constructed of pre-cast concrete elements
forming trellis-like ‘claustra’, glazed with stained glass to their full height over a
plain dado. There is a shallow segmental apse at the east end, and the chancel is
raised 5 ft above a basement containing vestries and sacristies, eastward of a flight
of steps extending across the church. At the west end, where there is an organ
gallery, a tower rises from cruciform pillars, each compounded of four columns
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1081

A. The Nikolaikirche, Hamburg B. S. Jean de Montmartre, Paris

(1845-63). See p. 1079 (1897-1905). See p. 1080

c. The Votivkirche, Vienna (1856— D. S. Eugéne, Paris (1854-5).

1879). See p. 1079 See p. 1079
 1082 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

*
*
ie
<
i
“
*
‘G
-
‘
s
u
*vi
¥

A. Church of the Sagrada Familia, Barce- B. The Engelbrekt Church, Stockholm

lona: ‘south’ transept (1903-26) seen from (1908-14). See p. 1080
the inner side. See p. 1080

c. The Hoégalid Church, Stockholm D. The Grundvig Church, Copenhagen

(1918-23). See p. 1080 (1921-6). See p. 1080
 19TH 20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1083

Wah a8 Va FaPal768
ae:

seeere anes:

A. Exterior B. Interior, looking W.

The Church of Notre Dame, Le Raincy, S. et O. (1922-3). See p. 1080

c. S. Antonius, Basel (1926-7). See p. 1085

 1084 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

A. The Chapel of Notre Dame, Ronchamp, Haute Saone

(1950-5). See p. 1085

aIO
NN

B. S. Thérése, Montmagny, S. et O. (1925-6). c. The Steel Church, Presse, Colo;

See p. 1085 (1928). See p. 1085
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1085

similar to those supporting the vaults. Externally (p. 1083A), the tower rises 140 ft,
and has clustered angle-shafts which are inset in stages towards the top, resulting
in a weak, inconclusive finish. All the structural concrete in the church is left as it
came from the formwork, without facing. S. Thérése, Montmagny, S. et O.
(1925-6) (p. 10848), by Perret, is a similar if less attractive church.
'S. Antonius, Basel, Switzerland (1926-7) (p. 1083c) by Karl Moser (1860-
1936) Owes its inspiration to the Le Raincy church. It is plainer and much less
subtle, its square, tall pillars supporting a concrete barrel vault over the nave and
flat ceilings over the narrow aisles, these coverings being heavily ribbed into square
coffers. Its tower, on the other hand, is more successful than Perret’s.
The Steel Church, Presse, Cologne (1928) (p. 1084c), by Otto Bartning
(b. 1883), with steel and glass walls, and S. Matthew, Diisseldorf (1930-1), by
Wach and Roskotten, are other interesting examples of the inter-war period.

Since the Second World War, traditional character in church design has been
almost entirely abandoned, yet the many new churches built have been extra-
ordinarily diverse in the nature of their plans, structural systems, forms of con-
struction and materials, having little in common one with another.
The Chapel of Notre Dame, Ronchamp, Haute Saéne (1950-5) (p. 10844), by
Le Corbusier, is a surprisingly plastic and sculptural work for this advocate of
functional precision in architecture. Standing on the crest of a hill, the chapel is
compact and massively walled, the south wall battered inwards and containing an
intriguing pattern of slot windows of varying dimensions and proportions, some
square and inert, others with vertical or horizontal trends. Round, soft-contoured
angle towers contain minor chapels, and with the help of a south-eastern great
spur-buttress sustain a billowing roof, sweeping outwards and upwards to form an
enormous canopy. On the east wall is an outdoor pulpit. Internally, the deep-set,
jewel-like splay-jambed windows send shafts of richly-coloured light across the
crepuscular gloom, while at the wall top a thin band of light demarcates wall from
roof, the latter being slightly elevated on metal supports.

PUBLIC BUILDINGS
The Library of S. Geneviéve, Paris (designed 1843, built 1845-50) (p. 1087) by
Henri Labrouste, is a significant building in several ways. It is a fine design
externally, within its Neo-Renaissance astylar terms (p. 1087A); is the first French
library to be designed as an individual building; and inside the stone shell it has a
complete iron frame running from bottom to top of the building, including a
metal double roof. The outer iron pillars, however, are embedded in the thickness
of the masonry walls. It is a long, rectangular building, 263 ft by 75 ft, with a rear
projection containing a double staircase. The lofty main floor stands above a shallow
ground floor, and is covered by two longitudinal barrel vaults, with iron decorative
arch-ribs, supported centrally by a line of slender metal columns (p. 10878).
Between the vault ribs the panels are of thin, reinforced plaster. A metal, low-
pitched upper roof spans the full width of the building. The building served as a
model for the Boston Public Library, U.S.A. (p. 1151).
The Thorwaldsen Museum, Copenhagen (1839-48) by M. G. B. Bindesboll
(1800-56), and the Opera House, Hanover (1845-52), by G. F. L. Laves (1789-
1864) are approximately contemporary with Labrouste’s building, the first a
refined astylar design following the still-continuing German Greek-Revival mode,
the other an elaborately correct version of stylar Italian High Renaissance, with a
slightly French cast.
The National Library, Paris (1862-8) (p. 1088), by Labrouste, shows further
1086 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

structural advances. The reading room (p. 1088A) is covered with pendentived
simple domes of terra-cotta, nine in all, with ‘eyes’ for top light at the crown,
supported by twelve slim columns, arranged in four rows, the outer columns
standing close to the walls. The vaults, arch-soffits and the wall faces above book-
stack level are ornamented with delicate decorations. Adjacent is the Stack Room
(p. 10888), formed of tiers of top-lighted stacks with openwork metal floors, to allow
the light to pass through (p. 1088c), flanking a central space bridged at intervals by
communicating passages. This light and airy arrangement foreshadows twentieth-
century developments.
The Opera House, Paris (1861-74) (p. 1089), is the architectural masterpiece of
Charles Garnier. Though commenced in the ‘Second Empire’ period it establishes
a type of Neo-Baroque which is typically French. Opulent to a degree far beyond
modern taste, it shows supreme skill in the handling of the age-old Classical
elements. The facade (p. 1089A) has monolithic coupled columns, with a lesser
Order threaded through, the flanking pavilions being crowned with segmental
pediments; and under the entablature are circular windows and portrait busts.
Above is a bold attic storey sculptured with festoons and gilded masks, while beyond
is seen the low dome over the auditorium. The ornate treatment of the interior is
indicated by the imposing escalier d’honneur (p. 1089C) and the sumptuous foyer
(p. IO89B).
The Opera House, Cologne (1870-2) (p. 1090B), by J. Raschdorf (1825-1914),
a building of modest dimensions, destroyed in the 1939-45 war, had French Neo-
Baroque affinities, recognisable in the steep mansard roof, the ‘lucarne’ or dormer
windows and the disposition and nature of the highly-decorative pavilion-like
features on the otherwise astylar facades.
The Palais de Justice, Brussels (1866-83) (p. 1090A), by Joseph Poelaert
(1817-79), stands weightily on a height overlooking the city, and builds up pyra-
midally to a massive central tower. Vast, heavy, and coarse in its ragged, over-
crowded Classical rhythms, it compares very unfavourably with the brilliantly-
ornate Paris Opera House.
The Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (1877-85) (p. I09IA), by P. H. J. Cuijpers
(1827-1921), has French massing, with steep roofs which are pyramidal over the
end pavilions and the twin towers flanking the entrance feature, but emulates
sixteenth-century transitional Gothic in its detail. The Town Hall, Copenhagen
(1893-1902) (p. 1091B), by Martin Nyrop (1849-1923) is similar in emulating transi-
tional Gothic but is a compact block, of finer and more original design.
The Victor Emanuel II Monument, Rome (1885-1911) (p. 1092A), on the
slope of the Capitol, was designed in 1884 by Giuseppe Sacconi (1854-1905) and.
completed by others after his death. It consists of a vast platform with a terrace
supporting an equestrian statue of the king, backed by columns 50 ft high and.
having a total height of over 200 ft. French Beaux-Arts influence is apparent.
Of facile Neo-Baroque design, it dwarfs its surroundings and is vulgarly over-
rich,
The Petit Palais, Paris (1897-1900) (p. 1092B), an art gallery, by Charles Girault,
was designed for the International Exhibition of 1900, along with the neighbouring
Grand Palais and the Pont Alexandre III. It has a finely-balanced trapezoidal plan
and a Neo-Baroque exterior which is among the best of the day, much imitated
abroad. Between the end and central domed pavilions, the latter abutted by an
imposing entrance portal, are regular Ionic colonnades standing on a shallow,
windowed basement. Ornament and sculpture are fittingly disposed. Internally,
two subsidiary semicircular staircases are in reinforced concrete, an early and suc-
cessful experiment.
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1087

B. The Library of S. Geneviéve, Paris: reading room

 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

B. Stack room c. Detail of stacks

The National Library, Paris (1862-8). See p. 1085
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1089

ed
)
ss)
ite>.

B. Foyer c. Grand staircase: upper flight

The Opera House, Paris (1861-74). See p. 1086
1090 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

B. The Opera House, Cologne (1870-2). See p. 1086

 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

U8 ree Ry
ow beuentd
Seiriethi
a ditt

B. The Town Hall, Copenhagen (1893-1902). See p. 1086

1092 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

A. The Victor Emanuel II Monument, Rome (1885-1911). See p. 1086

ae aS f

B. The Petit Palais, Paris (1897-1900). See p. 1086

 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1093

The Stock Exchange, Amsterdam (1898-1903) (p. 1095A) by H. P. Berlage, the

commission for which was won in competition, brought the architect widespread
renown beyond his own country. It is of red brick with limited stone dressings,
and shows that honesty and simplicity of expression which marks the trend towards
true Modern architecture. Internally, the glass and metal roof is frankly exposed, as
also are the brick and stone of the galleried tiers rising from the hall floor. The style
throughout, has Romanesque associations, as has alsothe Diamond Workers’ Union
Building, Amsterdam (1899-1900) (p.1118) by the same architect. The exuberance
of Art Nouveau was not favoured in Holland, and the Romanesque, unaffectedly
robust and direct, offered a suitable vehicle for the designer’s aspirations. A similar
recourse to this style is found in England and the U.S.A. at about the same period.
The Post Office Savings Bank, Vienna (1904-6) (p. 1095B), by Otto Wagner,
marks a further step towards the new architecture. The architect had been a
follower of Art Nouveau, and the interior still retains in the semi-elliptical form of
its metal and glass roof a trace of the lightness associated with that style, but
otherwise bears no readily-identifiable historical associations, the character pro-
ceeding solely from the essential structure.
The City Hall, Stockholm (1911-23) (p. 1096), by Ragnar Ostberg, is the last
important romantically-traditional Swedish building, wonderfully rich, spectacular
and impressive. Though eclectic, motifs being drawn from many historical sources,
it is composed with remarkable skill and striking originality, so much so that it
was considered ‘modern’ in its day and widely imitated abroad. It stands on the
lakeside (p. 1096A), its south and east sides towards the water, and is arranged as a
slightly wedge-shaped rectangular block around two unequal courts, the larger open
at ground level by arcades towards the broad, lakeside terrace, resplendent with
gardens, fountains and statues. The building material is red brick, with sparing
stone dressings. At the south-east corner rises a dominant tower, with inward-
sloping sides, sheer brickwork for 230 ft and 354 ft to the apex above the openwork
cylindrical lantern and its delicate, three-crowns terminal. The principal chambers
are on the first floor, the largest being the Assembly Room or ‘Golden Chamber’
(p. 1096B), magnificent with mural mosaics, dividing the two courts and approached
by an open ceremonial staircase from the smaller court, covered over to form the
‘Blue Hall’. The Council Chamber occupies the middle of the south side.
The Champs-Elysées Theatre, Paris (1911) (p. 1106B) was in the first place
designed by Henri van de Velde, but as completed is almost wholly due to the
Perret brothers. It is of reinforced concrete, faced externally with thin slabs of
marble. Internally, the actual structural frame determines the essentials of the effect,
the concrete merely being covered with plaster. The building has the Classical
dispositions and character normal to Auguste Perret’s work, but in the foyer seems
even more than usually austere, lacking colour and having little decoration apart
from the balustrades and low-relief panels. The facades, with relief sculpture by
Bourdelle, are a modification of Van de Velde’s original design.
The Centennial Hall, Breslau (1912-13) (p. 1097), by Max Berg, one of the
most daring structures erected before the First World War, is covered by a vast
concrete dome (p. 1097B), 213 ft diameter, springing from the ground, its upper
part comprising a series of heavy radial ribs, serving to carry tiers of continuous
windows, which mask the dome externally and give it the much lighter appearance
of a stepped cupola. Here, reinforced-concrete structure itself makes the design.
The approach and entrance porches however, are fashioned into slender colonnades
of Classical complexion (p. 10974).
The Einstein Tower, Potsdam, near Berlin (1920-1) (p. 10998), by Erich
Mendelsohn, an observatory and astrophysical laboratory, is a wholly plastic
1094 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

expression, completely devoid of historical allusions, its forms being symbolic of

optical instruments. Designed for poured concrete, it is actually executed in
cement-covered brickwork.
The City Library, Stockholm (1924-7) (p. 1099A), by E. Gunnar Asplund, has
a high cylindrical lending hall rising above a contrasting rectilinear arrangement of
lesser apartments, the whole making a very dignified, reticent composition, showing
only the barest trace of Classical historical allusion.
The Bauhaus, Dessau (1925-6) (p. 1098A, Cc), by Walter Gropius, was erected
to provide studio-dormitories, assembly and dining-hall, workshops, administrative
and social rooms and the school of design for this famous pioneer establishment, and
is itself expressive of the Bauhaus aims of uniting art with industrial production.
The design consolidates the new developments made in architecture up to this time.
The various elements of the accommodation are linked together into an asymmetri-
cal composition, the living quarters projecting towards the rear. The three upper
of the four floors of the workshop block are cantilevered, and sheathed with a metal-
and-glass curtain, while the administrative wing has long, horizontal ribbon win-
dows. Between them is a two-floored link standing over a wide bridge, and towards
the rear the projecting hostel wing presents a pattern of wide windows joined to
individual cantilevered balconies (p. 1098A). Throughout, the flat-roofed elements
are designed with the utmost regard for their respective functions, yet manipulated
in mass and detail to present an attractive composition.
The Vondelschool, Hilversum (1926) (p. 1098D), by W. M. Dudok, is one of
his many buildings, including other schools, at this new town, south-east of
Amsterdam, founded shortly before the First World War, of which he was appointed
chief architect. The Vondelschool—which received an extension at the entrance
end in 1931—is very characteristic of his mature style, which still echoes his early
contact with the ‘De Stijl’ group of artists (p. 1067). Like the architects Klerk and
Kramer and the Amsterdam group in general, he adheres to fine brickwork as his
principal medium, but unlike them avoids fanciful effects, instead giving his
buildings a serene dignity, stressing the horizontal lines and opposing the restful-
ness of large plain areas of brickwork to the pungent rhythms of long, banded
windows. There is usually an element of cubism in his compositions, as is plainer
to see in his Town Hall, Hilversum (1929) (p. 1098B), and they are normally
asymmetrical, their essential horizontality being compensated by a strong tower or
vertical feature.
The Tuberculosis Sanatorium, Paimio, Finland (1929-33) (p. 1099C), by
Alvar Aalto, is an early and advanced demonstration of the adaptation of modern
structural resources to the design of hospitals. Of reinforced concrete, this large
establishment is freely and openly planned, the various units receiving the ideal
orientation for each of them, the wings thus running on different alignments. The
material permits widely-projecting balconies, ample windows, and light, cheerful
appearance.
The Casa del Popolo, Como (1932-6) (p. r101A) by Guiseppe Terragni (1904-
1943), a member of the original ‘Gruppo 7’, shows Italian Modern architecture too
to have reached maturity about this time. Finely finished and studiously propor-
tioned, this reinforced-concrete building achieves a distinctively Mediterranean
character.
The Musée de l’Art Moderne, Paris (p. 1100A) by A. Aubert and others, and
the Palais de Chaillot, Paris (p. 1100B), were designed for the International
Exhibition of 1937. Both are attractive, with admirably designed settings and fine
sculptural and garden embellishments, yet are essentially traditional, the Classical
ancestry being plainly visible.
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1095

B. The Post Office Savings Bank, Vienna (1904-6). See p. 1093

1096 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

A. Exterior

B. The Golden Chamber

The City Hall, Stockholm (1911-23). See p. 1093
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1097

B. Interior

Centennial Hall, Breslau (1912-13). See p. 1093

1098 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

A. The Bauhaus, Dessau: B. The Town Hall, Hilversum (1929).

Hostel wing. See p. 1094 See p. 1094

D. The Vondelschool, Hilversum (1926 and (right) 1931). See p. 1094

 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1099

me,

ome wen ranmane i

Zegh
igee:

— ousOoFae om! wv

B. The Einstein Tower, Potsdam c. The Tuberculosis Sanatorium, Paimio,

(1920-1). See p. 1093 Finland (1929-33). See p. 1094
II0O 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

B. The Palais de Chaillot, Paris (1937). See p. 1094

 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN IIOI

B. The Musée des Travaux Publics, Paris c. Garage, Rue de Ponthieu, Paris
(1938-). See p. 1103 (1905-6). See p. 1104
1102 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

c. The Palazzo dello Sport, Rome: interior

 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN I103
The Musée des Travaux Publics, Paris (1938-) (p. 1101), an office of works
museum in reinforced concrete by Auguste Perret, was still not quite finished at his
death. It stands on a wedge-shaped island site, entered at the narrow end, where the
entrance vestibule surrounds a semicircular auditorium. The composition is
symmetrical about the long axis, and the design clearly bears Perret’s personal
stamp, being conceived throughout on Classical lines. The elements of the design,
however, are carefully attuned to the material, both in the decorative and structural
sense. Externally there are concrete colonnades, their shafts tapering downwards for
logical reasons, and these correspond with similar columns internally, together
carrying the load of the coffered ceiling and superstructure, the thin outer walls
carrying nothing but their own weight.
The Palazzetto dello Sport, Rome (1956-7) (p. 1102A), by P. L. Nervi and
Annibale Vitellozzi, is of circular plan, 200 ft diameter, covered by a shell-concrete
shallow dome with a rippled edge, the thrusts at the base taken by forked flying
buttresses. The stadium was designed to accommodate about 5,000 spectators and
to serve the Olympic Games of 1960. It was made of pre-fabricated elements, the
dome proper having been erected in the space of forty days. The much larger
Palazzo dello Sport, Rome (1959) (p. 1102B, C), also by Nervi and for the 1960
Olympic Games, is again circular and domed, capable of accommodating 15,000
people in three tiers of seats, one of them descending below ground level, along with
the arena (p. 1102C). The construction and method of lighting are similar, there
being a large central ‘eye’ and peripheral vertical windows near the base. Externally
it differs in having a surrounding open, skeletal colonnade (p. 11028B).

INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS

The Galleria Vittorio Emanuele, Milan (1865-77) (p. 1105A), by G. Mengoni
(1829-77), is one of the many iron-and-glass-roofed arcades that have been built
since the late eighteenth century, mainly in France and England. It is a very large
and ambitious project, arranged on a cruciform plan, broadening out to a domed
octagon at the intersection. The style of the facades is Classical, bordering on the
Neo-Baroque.
The Chocolate Factory, Noisiel-sur-Marne, near Paris (1871-2) (p. I105B),
by Jules Saulnier, is thought to be the earliest skeleton-framed building in France.
It stands upon massive stone piers over the river Marne, borne upon iron double
girders which carry an iron frame comprehending the floors and pitched roof. The
upright stanchions and diagonal braces show externally, the panels infilled with
wooden tiles bearing a polychromatic floral pattern.
The Entrance Pavilion, International Exhibition, Paris, 1878 (p. I1105D)
(destroyed), by Gustave Eiffel, showed iron and glass used with full architectural
pretensions externally. There was here more glass than wall, the reverse from
traditional building and an anticipation of Modern architecture. The domed
central and end pavilions had large glazed lunettes, one on the centre pavilion being
projected downwards to form a dominating portal. The glazed, projecting canopies
over the lateral terraces in front of the building were a further innovation.
The Halle des Machines, International Exhibition, Paris, 1889 (p. I1105F)
(destroyed 1910), by the engineer Contamin (1840-93) and the architect F.
Dutert (1845-1906), was a remarkable building, spanning 375 ft, 1,400 ft long and
150 ft high, consisting of steel principals forming four-centred arches, hinged at the
apex and at the base, where they tapered to their bearings. The principals were
steel-braced longitudinally and the building was completely glazed. For the same
exhibition was built the celebrated Eiffel Tower, 984 ft high, named after the
designer.
1104 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

The Metro Station, Place Bastille, Paris (1900) (p. I105E), by Hector Guimard
(1867-1943), is one of the minor iron-and-glass constructions which well illustrate
the characteristics of Art Nouveau. The linear expression of the metal, curved,
sinuous or convoluted wherever structure allowed; the naturalistic, vegetable-like
nature of the ornament; the lack of imposts on arches, as here on the dual, horse-
shoe entrance; and the exclusion of historical references, are all significant of the
style. Art Nouveau denied tradition; the Arts and Crafts respected it.
The Samaritaine Department Store, Paris (1905-6) (p. 1105C), by F. Jourdain
(1847-1935), is of a class of commercial establishment which in France had its
beginnings early in the nineteenth century, and from the nature of the enterprise
lent itself readily to external expression in metal and glass. The Samaritaine is
thoroughpaced Art Nouveau. The knots of metal foliage swirl sinuously over the
functional structure, softening the strictness of its lines, aided in this object by bold
patterns of coloured faience, filling the unglazed panels.
The Garage, Rue de Ponthieu, Paris (1905-6) (p. I101C) by Perret, contrasts
markedly with the foregoing. It is of reinforced concrete, totally unadorned, a
direct expression of the functional structure, organized to present a fine, orderly
and appropriate effect.
The Turbine Factory, Berlin (1909) (p. 1107A), by Peter Behrens, is important
in having shown that industrial buildings can make good architecture solely by
meticulous organization of the structure and materials, without recourse to orna-
ment or other non-essentials. Great windows provide the flood of light needful, set
between steel uprights, exposed externally, to which the metal roof principals are
framed, and taper downwards onto hinged base-plates. Apart from the metal and
glass the walls are of concrete, with horizontal striations on the angle masses.
The Railway Station, Stuttgart (begun 1914, completed 1919-27) (p. I1107B)
by P. Bonatz and F. E. Scholer, is a fine, masculine design, based on tradition but
stripped of superfluous ornament, great decorative value being secured from the
rusticated stonework.
The Fagus Factory, Alfeld-an-der-Leine (1911-14) (p. I1110B), by Walter
Gropius and Adolf Meyer, is of brick, but on the main fronts tall windows project
beyond the intervening piers and give the impression of continuous curtain walls,
an impression heightened by the use of angle windows. Though there are actually
three floors of height, the intermediate floors are concealed behind opaque panels
in the window frames.
The Airship Hangar, Orly, near Paris (1916) (p. I1106A) (destroyed), by the
engineer Freyssinet, was a remarkable concrete vault, parabolic in section, com-
prised of a thin skin of reinforced concrete given stiffness and strength by being
undulated to form great ribs, lattices of window apertures being formed on the
backs of the ribs.
The Salginatobel Bridge, Switzerland (1929-30) (p. 1108A) by Robert
Maillart, is one of the many fine reinforced-concrete bridges by this distinguished
engineer, which gain their elegance and beauty from the functional simplicity of the
means employed, here a curved slab supporting a flat one, other slabs spanning
between them vertically.
The Market Hall, Leipzig (1928) (p. 11088) by Deschinger and Ritter, is
covered by two octagonal shell-concrete domes of 248 ft span, 34 ins thick. The
earliest shell-concrete dome was that of the Jena Planetarium (1923), spanning 82 ft.
The Van Nelle Factory, Rotterdam (1927-30) (p. 1109A), by J. A. Brinkmann
and L. C, van der Vlugt, architects not otherwise especially known, for a firm of
tobacco, tea and coffee merchants, is Holland’s finest Modern building of the first
half of the century. Of reinforced concrete, the main eight-storey block is in
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1105

A. The Galleria Vittorio B. The Chocolate factory, Noisiel-sur-Marne, near

Emanuele, Milan (1865-77). Paris (1871-2). See p. 1103
See p. I103

E j eee Se
=. . ote a :

c. The Samaritaine Depart- D. The Entrance Pavilion, International Exhibition,

ment Store, Paris (1905-6). Paris, 1878. See p. 1103
See p. 1104

E. The Metro Station F. The Halle des Machines, Paris (1889).

Place Bastille, Paris (1900). See p. 1103
See p. 1104
I106 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

A Airship Hangar, Orly, near Paris (1916) ~ seep. II04

EN
see
PO

wi
ere od
yg
a

¥
Poe
a
De
ay

B. The Champs-Elysées Theatre, Paris (1911). See p. 1093

 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1107

A. Turbine Factory, Berlin (1909). See p. 1104

B. The Railway Station, Stuttgart (1914-27). See p. 1104

 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

B, The Market Hall, Leipzig (1928). See p. 1104

 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1109

A. The Van Nelle factory, Rotterdam (1927-30). See p. 1104

B. The Station, Amstel Suburb, Amsterdam (1939). See p. IIII

 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

me
\\, \ oe

\
3 es
e
Oraid

ANY
oot (nes
Fagus factory, Alfeld-an-der-Lei
—
e get (1911-14). See p. 1104
emiti

NN
eect

poe

WAVY

A. Pirelli Office Block, Milan (1957-60). c. Exhibition Hall, Turin: interior (194§
See p. IIII 1949). See p. IIII
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN IIII

‘mushroom’ construction (a system used by Maillart as early as 1908), the respective

floors being carried on internal pillars which fan outwards at the top, the outer
walls being non-load bearing and supported by the floors. Externally, the horizontal
ribbon windows are admirably balanced by the flow of form of the projecting tower
blocks, and afford an effective contrast of panels of plain wall. Linked to the main
block is a less high wing which sweeps on a pleasant curve.
The Stockholm Exhibition, 1930 (p. 1077B), by Gunnar Asplund, admirably
illustrates the capacity of modern architectural forms, aided by colour, to produce
gay, graceful and delicate effects.
The Station, Amstel suburb, Amsterdam (1939) (p. 1109B), by H. G. J.
Schelling, is an attractive, economical structure built of brick, with very large panels
of glass on the two long sides, and a low-pitched roof.
The Aircraft Hangars (1935 and 1939-40) (p. 1060) (destroyed) which were
located on various sites, several of a standard type designed by P. L. Nervi,
330 ft by 135 ft internally, involved a three-dimensional conception of structure, a
segmental barrel vault of pre-cast reinforced-concrete ribs forming a diagonal
lattice being sustained on only six buttressing supports. The lower edges of the
hipped roof were stiffened by triangular ‘space-frames’ on the open side.
The Exhibition Hall, Turin (1948-9) (p. 1110C), by P. L. Nervi, is the larger
and slightly the earlier of two constructed there, and is a rectangular building of
312 ft span, bridged by a segmental vault of concrete springing from the ground.
Forked buttresses fan into ribs near the base, and these support corrugations of 8
ft interval carrying pre-cast shell units 2 ins thick, braced by fins and embodying
shallow, strip windows. This remarkable structure took only eight months to build.
The Stazione Termini, Rome (1947-51) (p. 1113), by E. Montuori and
associates, includes a vast concourse, of imposing simplicity, fronting a ‘slab’ office
block with narrow, horizontal ribbon windows. The concourse ceiling, finished in
white glass mosaic, stands on multiple slender pillars of granite-faced concrete,
and undulates in logical accord with the stresses resisted; the latter are asymmetri-
cal, since the ceiling continues externally to form a great, cantilevered canopy over
the entrance front, ending in a thin fascia slab.
The Jespersen Office Block, Copenhagen (1956) (p. 1117), by Arne Jacobsen,
has a facade of ultimate simplicity, a curtain wall fronting cantilevered floors being
divided uniformly into panels. Each of the windows reproduces the proportions
of the block as a whole. The opaque panels underneath the ribbon windows are
differentiated from them solely by change of colour.
The Pirelli Office Block, Milan (1957-60) (p. 1110A), by P. L. Nervi, Gio
Ponti and others, with its thirty-two storeys above ground, towers to such a height
as to constitute a skyscraper. Skyscrapers are as yet fairly few in Europe, though
they are commonplace in America. In all European cities there has been a general
tendency since the Second World War for commercial and apartment buildings to
reach far greater heights than ever before.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS
Nineteenth Century. The common form of town dwelling became the flat block
(p. 10698), often preserving the ‘hotel’, courtyard, arrangement (p. 788E) but
generally becoming larger and higher than formerly, though in Paris height was
restricted to 65 ft, above which further tiers had to be set back in stages. Rooms were
not ordinarily assigned to particular uses until the later part of the period. Public
building plans continued mostly to follow traditional Classic formulae, but neces-
sarily became more extensive and complex in response to social developments,
1112 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

while building types proliferated for similar reasons. Office blocks, commercial
undertakings and department stores developed apace, factories became even more
numerous on the outskirts of towns and the railways created new nodes of attrac-
tion around the station locations. Church plans varied little from the old, except
in being derived from several different historical traditions.
Twentieth Century. The former tendencies continued, but increasingly were
affected by the development of framed structure, which from beginnings in the
nineteenth century became commonplace after 1900 and preponderated after about
1930. Thus wall thicknesses became progressively lighter—the steel or concrete
pillars or ‘stanchions’ being at first embedded in the walls—and at length might
be no more than thin, insulating veneers (p. 1074A, B). Solid internal walls similarly
tended to disappear, substituted by light partitions, all load being taken by relatively
slender pillars (p. 10768). In some constructional systems the pillars could be
wholly internal, floors being cantilevered from them towards the thin fagades (p.
II09A). The ‘free plan’ affected all classes of building, including individual houses
(pp. 1074, 1076), though despite occasional exceptions (p. 10834, B) churches fol-
lowed old patterns until after the Second World War, since when they have become
excessively varied in their dispositions, based on a wide range of geometrical or
asymmetrical patterns. In general, symmetry dominates nineteenth-century plan-
ning and asymmetry that of the twentieth. The development of heating systems,
distributing heat from a single point, largely removed the need for fireplaces and
their flues, these being a serious obstacle to free planning.

WALLS
Nineteenth Century. Solid, load-bearing walls remained normal, constructed of
the various traditional materials. Brick, of variegated colours, terra-cotta and
faience tiles were favoured in the second half of the century, especially towards its
end. Polychrome faience was almost a hall-mark of Art Nouveau (p. 1070A). Though
metal stanchions, when used, were usually embedded in external walls throughout
the century, there were occasional iron and glass facades (p. 1105D), popular for
department stores at and beyond its end (p. 1105c) and for many types of minor
structure (p. IIO5E). Generally, walls were increasingly loaded with architectural
features, the Classical system being the most favoured (pp. I089A, I092A), pro-
gressing from Neo-Renaissance (p. 1087A) to Neo-Baroque (p. 1092B), though
with less and less faithfulness to the historical prototypes. Except for churches
(p. Io8IA, C), the Gothic Revival played no great part.
Twentieth Century. With the advent of systematic framed structure in steel and
reinforced concrete in the opening years of the century, walls began to lose their
chief function of supporting floors and roof. In the early stages of realization of this
circumstance, the walls, still solid, were partly or wholly carried on the frame, but
the exterior effects gave little or no evidence of the fact, still being designed as
though they were performing their time-honoured tasks to the full, dressed in
reminiscence of one or other of the various kinds of traditional attire (p. 1107B).
Elevations did, however, become more and more simple. Perret, in France in 1903,
was the first to give a just external expression to the frame (p. 1073A), though it was
a long time before he was extensively followed. He stressed the frame and reduced
the wall to infilling panels (see also p. 1069F). This kind of construction is still quite
valid, and many are the kinds of materials that have been used for the infilling, some
traditional and some new; though the problem always has been partially solved
since some of the space normally is needed for windows. A next stage of develop-
ment was to remove this sheathing or ‘cladding’ from direct association with the
outer stanchions, placing it instead either just outside them (p. 1101B) or just inside
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN III3

A. Exterior

B. Concourse

The Stazione Termini, Rome (1947-51). See p. IIII

III4. 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

(p. 10838, left); or alternatively, extending the floors as cantilevers and placing the
thin walls between them as continuous horizontal strips (p. 1109A, curved block), or
covering the whole face of the building with a continuous ‘curtain’ (p. 1117)
supported at the floor lines or even hung from the top. In all these latter cases the
screening walls needed no greater thickness or stiffness than was necessary for
weather protection and their own support. Metal became usual for the light wall-
framings, though timber often was equally practicable. The infillings of such
frames could either be glass, transparent or opaque, or other suitable light and
tough material, natural or synthetic.

OPENINGS
Nineteenth Century. Since facades mainly were traditional in complexion, win-
dows and other openings were organized on age-old lines, with their customary
types of enframement. Yet as eclecticism increased and architecture in general
became less academic, non-Mediterranean countries sought to gain more natural
light than strict Classic precedent permitted, and enlarged window areas by
various devices, whilst still retaining a semblance of the style represented. Thus
pseudo-arcades (p. 1087A) and pseudo-colonnades (pp. 1089A, 10928), infilled with
windows, were common features. Business and commercial establishments had a
greater need for light than had apartment houses, and at the end of the century and
the beginning of the next, non-domestic stylar facades already sometimes had more
window than wall, the stylar elements surviving only in a few tortured fragments.
Exhibition buildings in metal and glass had shown the way (p. 1105D). As methods
of glass-making advanced, larger and larger areas of unobstructed opening became
practicable, and window bars were no longer necessary. It was particularly its
advantage in offering large window areas that gave the iron-and-glass facade its
popularity for shopping stores (p. 1105Cc). Iron-and-glass arcades (p. I105A), roofs,
awnings, porches, conservatories and similar structures offered this facility to the
full (p. 1105).
Twentieth Century. Openings maintained their traditional aspect, as modified
in the previous century, wherever load-bearing wall construction continued to be
used or imitated, save that under the general movement towards simplicity they
lost their elaborate enframements almost completely, and became much more regular
in their mutual dispositions (pp. 1073B, E, I099A, I107B). The framed building,
once the frame is expressed, produces its own kind of effect, paralleled to some
extent in old timber buildings, where long ‘ribbon’ ranges of windows had some-
times appeared; but in the main, framed buildings, whether ‘cladded’ in local panels
(pp. 1069F, 1073A), horizontally between floors (p. 1109A), vertically between stan-
chions (p. III0B) or covered comprehensively by ‘curtain’ walls (p. 1117) have little
precedent in history and inevitably visually dissociate themselves from it. The fact
took time to reach public acceptance. Generally speaking, Modern architecture
is a framework lightly infilled or sheathed with a protective covering—a skin having
little depth (p. 1074A, B)—quite the opposite from the traditional massive, load-
bearing walls, through which shadow-creating openings are cut deeply through the
solid. Thus openings in walls are much less strongly differentiated from wall than
formerly (p. 1117). Very large, totally unobstructed windows can be provided when
needed. Traditional building normally presents more wall than window; Modern
architecture readily may have more window than wall.

ROOFS
Nineteenth Century. These normally were pitched, usually steeply, though in an
eclectic age much depended upon the style being more or less faithfully represented.
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN IIIS

The mansard, complete with ornate dormer windows, was a common ‘Second
Empire’ (1848-70) feature (p. 1090B) in Europe, and the roofs then and later often
were broken into pavilions, accentuated centrally and at angles or ends either pyra-
midally (p. Iog1A) or in square or circular domes (p. 10928). In iron construction
the domes might be of iron and glass (p. 1105D), which in any case were materials
extensively used for arcades (p. 1105A) and for coverings over courts, light-wells
and inner apartments where only roof-light was possible. Mansard roofs, with
dormers, were useful over urban frontages above the limits of permissible vertical
height, and were continued into the next century.
Twentieth Century. Pitched roofs, high or low, were a normal counterpart of
northern European traditional-style building, and so were frequently used where
old-style building was perpetuated (p. 1073E). But in the new architecture, particu-
larly the domestic, the pitched roof was considered inadmissible, at least while ideas
were shaping (pp. 1074, 1076). Also, in houses and flats (p. 1078) the roof was looked
upon as a proper part of the usable accommodation, and must therefore be flat.
In the case of large halls, however, it would be difficult to achieve a wide span with-
out recourse to a trussed roof or a vault. Great spans already had been achieved with
metal in the nineteenth century (p. II05F), and developments in the twentieth with
that material were principally refinements upon types already known. Reinforced
concrete introduced fresh opportunities. Mostly its advantages were offset by
weight and expense (p. 1097B), until, from already long-standing isolated prece-
dents, shell-concrete, only two or three inches thick, was rediscovered and system-
atically exploited. A whole range of possibilities for shell-vaults was opened up,
beginning with the dome—which has naturally a high degree of stiffness resulting
from its shape (p. 1108B)—and extending to types capable of covering large rect-
angular compartments, which however, required stiffening as well as buttressing
against the thrusts accumulating towards the base (p. 1060). An early precedent (p.
I106A) had shown that stiffening could be contrived by corrugating the shell of
domes or rectangular vaults in ‘waves’ or folds (pp. 1102A, B, I110C). Vaults, what-
ever their thickness, give rise to stresses and strains appropriate to their shape, and
the difference between shell-vaults and their Roman or Mediaeval antecedents lies
in the vastly reduced weight, their homogeneity and their capacity, up to a limited
point, to contain their own resistance against tensional as well as compressional
stresses. So far, large-span shell-vaults normally have been made to spring at or
near the ground, so that they might be the more readily buttressed or contained
(p. IIO2A).

COLUMNS
Nineteenth Century. The Orders, where appearing, were used for the most part
in the time-honoured ways (pp. 1089A, 1092B). Even when converted into cast iron
(pp. 1087B, 1088A) they approximated to the ancient norms as nearly as possible,
except in being vastly more slender, whether in their shafts, archivolts or entabla-
tures. Gothic shafts similarly were closely imitated in iron (p. I1081D). Cast-iron
columns led to iron building-frames and these to steel and reinforced-concrete
frames, the latter only at the turn of the century. Iron or concrete pillars had the
merit of strength and economy of space, obviating internal walls as a means of
support for upper floors in cases where strict room division was unnecessary or
undesirable.
Twentieth Century. The Orders began to disappear from buildings, and by the
inter-war period became quite rare. In the process they often became much
simplified, or were substituted by abjectly plain pillars or arcades (pp. I100A, B,
1107B). With the spread of framed construction in steel or reinforced concrete,
 II16 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

internal pillar supports came to be relied upon even when room division was neces-
sary, for the reason that building thereby became a straightforward unified process
and partitions could be added at the finishing stage of operations, varied as
necessary from floor to floor. The method was applied to houses (p. 1076B) and
flats (p. 1073A) as well as to public (p. r101B), commercial and industrial building.
Pillars (stanchions) normally carried beams and the beams the floors, but in
‘mushroom’ construction, first used in a Zurich factory in 1908, the concrete
stanchions are shaped like an inverted cone at the top, carrying a beamless floor
forming a uniformly thick concrete slab (p. I109A: main building).

MOULDINGS
Nineteenth Century. These followed historical precedent fairly faithfully, whether
Classical or Mediaeval. In the later decades attempts were made to abandon
historicism and to invent a new style, resulting in occasional unprecedented profiles
or the drastic revision or simplification of old ones (p. 1069c). Such endeavours had
their climax in Art Nouveau, which continued for a few years into the next century,
wherein mouldings were either substituted by sinewy, seaweed-like trailing forms,
turned into knots at extremities and building angles, or were fundamentally
Classical or Mediaeval but so drastically revised as to be scarcely recognisable
(p. 1105C). Also, curvilinear brackets and scrolled ironwork were greatly favoured
(p. 1105C, E). Alternatively, mouldings were dispensed with in favour of soft,
plastic surface modelling (pp. 1070B, C, 10824).
Twentieth Century. The aftermath of Art Nouveau was a restrained historicism,
in which mouldings played a decreasing part (p. I096A, B). Such mouldings as were
retained were sparsely distributed and confined to a few telling elements, or were
merely simple projections (p. 1099A). The modernists, led by Adolf Loos, rejected
mouldings completely after about 1910 (p. 1073C), and in the inter-war period
architects in general mostly abandoned them.

ORNAMENT
Nineteenth Century. Ornament followed historical precedents, though becoming
smaller in scale, more confused and less tasteful than the prototypes (p. 1089B, C).
Unadorned structural ironwork was not considered to be admissible to polite
architecture, and so had to be ornamented (p. 1088A). Art Nouveau ornament took
many exotic forms (pp. 1069D, I070C, 1082A, IIOSE), and polychrome faience was a
feature (pp. IO70A, IIO05C).
Twentieth Century. Apart from the initial continuance of preceeding practices,
ornament virtually disappeared, since it was deliberately excluded from the new
architecture just as firmly as mouldings were refused. In theory, effects were to be
contrived solely by the manipulation of the constructional elements (pp. 1078,
II09A) and by the exploitation of the colour and texture of the materials used. In
practice, ornamental patterns have sometimes been admitted (pp. 1083A, B, I084B),
and polychrome effects often are used nowadays, obtained by panelling with dif-
ferent-coloured synthetic materials (p. 1117) or by the calculated use of attractive
facing materials to concrete structure. Mosaics, heraldry, stained glass (p. 10844),
decorative painting and sculpture are sometimes employed.

REFERENCE BOOKS
BANHAM, R. Theory and Design in the First Machine Age. London, 1960.
BILL, M. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe. Milan, 1955.
BRESSET, M. Gustave Eiffel, 1832-1923. Milan, 1957.
 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN 1117

el
i
i
pl
ie
a
ll

The Jespersen Office block, Copenhagen (1956). See p. 1111

COLLINS, PETER. Concrete, The Vision of a New Architecture. London, 1959.

DORFLES, G. L’ Architettura moderna. Milan, 1954.
FISKER, K., and YERBURY, F.R. Modern Danish Architecture. London, 1927.
GIEDION,S. Space, Time and Architecture. 3rd edition. London, 1954.
—. Walter Gropius. London, 1954.
GROPIUS, W. Internationale Architektur. Munich, 1925.
—. The New Architecture and the Bauhaus. New York, 1936.
HITCHCOCK, H. R. Gaudi. New York, 1957.
—. Architecture, Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries. Harmondsworth, 1958.
HOEBER, F. Peter Behrens. Munich, 1913.
HUXTABLE, A. L. Pier Luigi Nervi. New York, 1960.
JAFFE, H.L.C. De Styl, 1917-1931. London, 1956.
JOEDICKE, J. A History of Modern Architecture. Trans. J. C. Palmes, London, 1959.
KAUFMANN; E. Von Ledoux bis Le Corbusier. Vienna, 1933.
KIDDER SMITH, G.E. Italy Builds. London, 1955.
—. Sweden Builds. London, 1950.
—. Switzerland Builds. London, 1950.
LABO,G. Alvar Aalto. Milan, 1948.
LE CORBUSIER. Towards a New Architecture. Trans. F. Etchells. London, 1947.
MARTINELL, C. Antonio Gaudi. Milan, 1955.
MCGRATH, R. Twentieth Century Houses. London, 1934.
MIERAS,J., and YERBURY, F. Dutch Architecture of the XXth Century. London, 1926.
MUNZ,H. Adolf Loos. Milan, 1956.
OUD, J.J. P. Holldndische Architektur. Munich, 1926.
PAGANI, C. Architettura italiana oggt. Milan, 1955.
1118 19TH-20TH CENTURY EUROPEAN

PAPADAKI,S. (ed.) Le Corbusier: Architect, Painter, Writer. New York, 1948.

PEVSNER, N. Pioneers of the Modern Movement. London, 1936. Revised edition, Pioneers of
Modern Design, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, 1960.
RICHARDS, J. M. An Introduction to Modern Architecture. Harmondsworth, 1940.
ROTH, A. The New Architecture. Zurich, 1940.
SARTORIS, A. Gli elementi dell’ architettura funzionale. 2nd edition. Milan, 1935.
—. Introduzione alla Architettura Moderna. Milan, 1949.
SCHMALENBACH, F. Fugendstil. Wurzburg, 1935.
SWEENEY, J. J., and SERT, J. L. Antoni Gaudi. London, 1960.
WHITTICK, A. European Architecture in the Twentieth Century. 2 vols. London, 1950-3.
YERBURY, F.R. Modern Dutch Buildings. London, 1931.
ZEVI,B. Storia dell’ architettura moderna. 3rd edition. Turin, 1955.
—Gunnar Asplund. Milan, 1948.

The Diamond Workers’ Union Building, Amsterdam (1899-1900).

See p. 1093
 Falling Water, Pennsylvania (1936-7). See p. 1156

XXIX. ARCHITECTURE OF
THE AMERICAS
(c. 500 B.C. to the present day)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. The position of the American continent has been an important
factor in its architectural development. Separated by vast oceans from the cradles of
civilization in the Near and Middle East, the cultures of its peoples advanced com-
paratively slowly until the sixteenth century when the first European settlements
were established in the continent. The discovery of America, or more narrowly the
West Indies, by Christopher Columbus (1446-1506) in 1492 radically altered the
rate and pattern of progress, and from that time the links between the Old and New
Worlds have been strong. Internal geographical conditions have also helped to
determine the history of the continent. For obvious reasons, the first colonial
centres were established on or near the coast; and mountain ranges, the more
important of which all run in a north-south direction, controlled the areas and rate
of settlement. Down the western side of the continent runs a great ridge of moun-
tains, the Rockies of North America and the Andes of South America, to the west
of which, between the mountains and the Pacific, lie narrow coastal plains. To the
east of the mountains lie, in South America, the jungle forests of the Amazon basin
1120 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

; Tey
ATLANTIC
ALASKA“)
7
7
o “etA
Ry =
ra =
te ‘
ES U 9
iy >

:a ie
L <4 / * Ouro Preto
Som
ce
=z La (
ed:
Rio de Janeiro
x , e pe aedE yf?
; ~j Sone)
| Fa
& oe w
e ae fueuae eee
: = Foz epee ie

skye
a x/ fe 43
oe
AMERICA
Land
Ee
over 6,000Fr )
\ Rel Ci

}
i
¢

00
J ogo es
}

\* bens oft Oe
° Miles 1,000 Tae | on ee
— $e ——— Sd 2

VI. re) :
4 Otte ae wy Montreal3
ee
2) re ; ;
= s
°
B23! if \
ee + Ng
&)
Sa ee C.
[ese See aa
=e a mobr
MASS:

5
Ce
Le RT
\ Eee ONN : ade) Since
1) “a ‘ SE ae : New Haven
\NPENNSYLVANIA « ian
1 ) pares /
it. : Pittsburgh NS New York:

Ss i Hf ans
; QQ H f L_ fas se a See a. ( K¢ Pie

‘ = 1 Cincinnati oe ‘ a. 2 Ap se
Baltimore
am
ae Oe poe pS WEST Washington? <4, 2
borg
y a

ee
if 7, -_

i olin v4 ieVIR GINES HeChar ET:

UNITED STATES
NOR

KOE N Ta a
Koy“eee Richmond, —7Tnternational Boundary
Ae dec: ie -

: Witliamsbutys _-@ State Boundaries

Sar j ReG 1 Land over 2,000 feet
re) Mues 250

«Chichen Itz@

f'

{BR. d
0
HONDURAS,

CENTRAL AMERICA a
‘Land over 3,000 Feet
Mules 400

The American Continent

 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1121
and, further south, the plains of Argentina, while in North America there are vast
plains, drained by the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers, cradling the Great Lakes
complex and extending from the Gulf of Mexico to Hudson Bay. In North
America, to the east of the plains is another important range of mountains, the
Appalachians, while the Brazilian Highlands lie in a similar position in South
America. Between the eastern mountains and the Atlantic runs a coastal plain
which in North America was roughly the extent of the British American colonies.
GEOLOGICAL. The search for precious metals has played an important part in
the development of the Americas. Their appetites whetted by tales of mineral
wealth, the Spanish sent out expeditions to Peru and Mexico, and later to what are
now New Mexico, California and Arizona. In the nineteenth century, various ‘gold
rushes’ contributed to the development of remote areas of North America. The pre-
Columbian civilizations of Peru and Mexico made good use of the excellent
building stones available in these regions, and this tradition was maintained and
extended by the Spanish colonists. The North American Indians, being largely
nomadic, did not develop a building tradition comparable with that of Mexico, and
European settlers in North America built mainly in timber—unlimited supplies of
which were readily available from the vast tracts of virgin forest—and later in brick,
but only rarely in stone. It was not until the nineteenth century, with the develop-
ment of railway and canal transport, that the excellent building stones of North
America were fully exploited. Limestones, sandstones and granites are all to be
found, but specific reference should be made to three particular building stones, all
from the eastern part of the U.S.A.: Quincey Granite, used in the Bunker Hill
Monument, Charlestown, Mass. (1825-43) and other buildings; Pennsylvanian
Marble, popular in nineteenth-century Philadelphia; and Brown Stone, widely
used in New York. Coal and iron ore are to be found in Pennsylvania, Ohio and
other areas, and this has accounted for the development of cities like Pittsburgh,
Cincinnati and Baltimore, while in more recent times the presence of oil under
Texas and neighbouring states has contributed much to their wealth and thus
affected their building activity.
CLIMATIC. Throughout the continent, the climate varies enormously, from the
almost arctic conditions of Alaska to the tropics of Brazil. The temperate climate
of the north-eastern part of what is now the U.S.A. and parts of Canada has helped
the industrial and commercial development of these areas, while the west coast of
North America provides a delightful climate, in California similar to that of the
Mediterranean region. In the southern part of North America, the climate is warm
and humid, ideal for the cultivation of crops like cotton and tobacco but somewhat
enervating as far as human activity is concerned. Despite bitter winters and torrid
summers, the central plains of North Americaare extremely fertile and also healthy, but
in the south-west the climate is hot and dry and there are wide areas of desert. In the
Panama region tropical conditions prevail, as they do in the northern and central
parts of South America. In Peru, the altitude of the Andes affords pleasanter conditions,
while further south in the plains of Argentina a more temperate climate is found.
RELIGIOUS. Highly organized religions existed among the pre-Columbian
peoples of Central and South America, centred upon the worship of natural objects
and phenomena—mountains, clouds, rain, earthquakes, the sun, moon, stars, etc.—
and incorporating a form of confession of sins. Among the Aztecs of Mexico, the
Sun God was the most important deity, while the Inca pantheon had as its chief
god, Viracocha, the Creator. Aztec religion incorporated human sacrifice of a
particularly repellent nature, the heart being plucked out of the still-living victim.
Both Peruvian and Mexican religions were controlled by powerful priesthoods
and each was based on a strict moral code.
1122 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

In the sixteenth century, Spanish colonists brought with them the religion of their
mother country as did the Portuguese in the case of Brazil, so that Latin America is
predominantly Catholic. Various Orders of friars—the Franciscans, Dominicans,
Augustinians and Mercedarians—played a considerable part in the cultural as well
as the religious development of South America and Mexico. Later the Jesuits and
Carmelites made a great contribution, particularly the former whose power and
enlightenment were such as to disturb the somewhat reactionary local administra-
tions, with the result that the Order was expelled from Brazil in 1759 and from the
Spanish colonies in 1767. In the early seventeenth century it was estimated that
70,000 churches had been built and 500 monasteries founded in Latin America.
In North America, the religious pattern was again determined by the beliefs of
the settlers, which here varied widely. Thus Virginia, the first British colony, was
Anglican; while (since their settlers had left England for reasons of conscience)
Massachusetts was Puritan, Pennsylvania Quaker and Maryland Catholic. Areas
settled by the French tended to be Catholic. Because of this diversity of belief,
North America developed a tradition of toleration, unknown in Europe until fairly
recent times.
SocIAL. Social organization was highly developed in the pre-Columbian
civilizations of Peru and Mexico. The Aztec Empire of Mexico flourished under a
military theocracy of priest-warriors, while in Peru, under the Incas, government
was carried out by a series of provincial councils, each with an Inca nobleman as
adminstrator and each responsible to the Emperor in Cuzco, the capital of the
Empire. Both the Inca and Aztec civilizations planned and built fine cities and
showed considerable prowess in civil engineering by constructing excellent paved
roads, necessitating in the case of the Incas, tunnelling through the rock of the Andes.
Soon after their establishment, the Spanish colonies in the New World were
divided into two viceroyalties, that of New Spain, set up in 1535, embracing
Mexico and Central America with its capital at Mexico City, and that of Peru
(1544) with its capital at Lima. In 1717 the viceroyalty of New Granada, covering
what are now Colombia, Venezuela and Equador, was established, while in 1776 the
viceroyalty of Rio de la Plata came into being, embracing Argentina, Bolivia, Para-
guay and Uruguay. Portuguese possessions in the continent were limited to Brazil.
Each of the viceroyalties was in the charge of a viceroy who had supreme authority
over all civil and military matters, and governed virtually as an absolute ruler in the
name of the Spanish king. Of almost equal importance was the Church already
referred to.
By the early seventeenth century, a fine road system had been set up in Latin
America, the ‘Camino Real’, in part following roads laid by the pre-Columbian
Indians. In their building and road-making use was made by the ‘conquistadores’
and their successors of Indian labour which was also employed, often under appal-
ling conditions, for work in factories producing wool and cotton goods, and on
plantations. In 1501 the first slaves were introduced from Africa, and by 1560 it was
estimated that there were 100,000 negro slaves in Latin America.
Education was not overlooked, and a royal decree ordered that every village
in the Spanish Empire was to have its own school, while the universities of Mexico
and Lima were established in 1553 and 1576 respectively. Life in both Lima and
Mexico City could be luxurious, and equalled that in the great capitals of Europe
until the decline of Spanish fortunes.
Turning to North America, the pre-colonial societies were infinitely more
primitive than those of the Aztecs and Incas and were organized on a tribal basis.
With the development of the colonies came a social pattern very different from that
in Latin America, due largely to the character of the colonists, who were settlers
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1123
rather than colonizers in the sense of the ‘conquistadores’. In colonial Virginia, for
instance, government was divided between the governor, representing the British
Crown, and the House of Burgesses, representing the people of the colony, who
thus had a measure of independence with the advantage of British protection. Each
colony was a distinct entity and this has, in a sense, been perpetuated in the demo-
cratic system of the U.S.A., which retains a separate legislature for each state in the
union although, in addition, each state is represented in the U.S. Federal or central
Government.
Education received consideration in the colonies at an early date, and in 1636
Harvard, the oldest university in North America, was founded. In 1693 a royal
charter was granted for the foundation of William and Mary College at Williams-
burg, while Brown, Princeton and Yale Universities were all founded in the eigh-
teenth century, prior to the Revolution of 1775.
Many colonial centres, like Boston, Philadelphia and Williamsburg, although
hardly the compeers of Lima and Mexico City, were delighful towns and possessed
all the amenities for gracious living in eighteenth-century terms. A less pleasant
aspect of society was the plantation and slave system of the cotton and tobacco-
growing areas of the South. It should be borne in mind, however, that this was as
much an economic phenomenon as a social one, and that many plantation owners
were benevolent and humane masters. Nevertheless, the principle of slavery was in
direct opposition to the ideals of freedom and equality, strongly cherished by the
new country which came into being after the War of Independence; this was
one reason for the tragic Civil War which broke out in 1861 between the Northern
States (whose economy did not depend upon slavery and who could therefore afford
to oppose it) and the Southern States, and in which the former were victorious.
Today the U.S.A. stands as a great world power, characterized by her com-
mercial prosperity and championship of democratic government. Her vigour may
in part be accounted for by the racial variety of her population. English, Scots,
Irish, Germans, Italians, Poles and many of other nationalities have, as immigrants
to a land of promise and opportunity, contributed much to her spiritual, cultural
and technical development.
Canada, governed by a democratic Parliament modelled on that of Great Britain,
has much in common with her neighbour to the south, and with the backing of her own
vast natural resources is developing economically and culturally at a prodigious rate.
HISTORICAL. The background of the early ‘native’ civilizations of the Americas
is often obscure, but we have seen that in Mexico and Peru they were of a high
order. Indeed the Spanish conquest of these areas took years to bring about, even
with the aid of the horse, gunpowder and steel weapons, none of which was known
to the Indians. With regard to Mexico and Central America, pre-Columbian
civilization may be divided into three main phases: (i) Mayan (c. 500 B.C.-c. A.De
800); (ii) Toltec (from about the time of Christ to c. 1200); (iii) Aztec (c. 1200-
I519). In Peru, the Inca Empire became established in the early fifteenth century,
with its capital at Cuzco, although a highly developed culture with considerable
building skill had existed from perhaps as early as 300 B.c. In North America the
picture is more confused because of the nomadic nature of most of the tribes, but
recently, interesting movements among the Pueblo Indians of the south-west of what
is now the U.S.A. have been traced. Between c. A.D. 600 and c. 1100 these tribes
erected permanent fortified villages on the flat-topped outcrops (‘mesas’) which
characterize this region, but later, for reasons as yet unknown, the villages were
abandoned and new settlements were made in and at the bases of canyon walls in
the same area.
Following the discovery of the New World by Columbus there were numerous
aN H.O.A.
1124 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

exploratory voyages, among them Magellan’s discovery of a south-west passage

from the Atlantic to the Pacific round Cape Horn (1520); Cabral’s voyage on which
he touched Brazil (1500); and Frobisher’s journeys to Labrador (the first in 1576).
In addition there were specific campaigns of colonization :Hernan Cortes in Mexico
(1519) and Francisco Pizarro in Peru (1532). In 1528, Panfilio de Narvaez led a
Spanish expedition to Florida; in 1534 Jacques Cartier explored the S. Lawrence
River and staked a claim for France in what is now Canada; in 1583 Sir Humphrey
Gilbert landed at S. John, Newfoundland (discovered by John Cabot in 1497),
while in 1585, Sir Walter Raleigh landed on the coast of Virginia.
In 1607 Jamestown, the first important British settlement in the New World,
was founded, and thirteen years later the Pilgrim Fathers sailed in the famous
Mayflower from Plymouth, England, to establish Plymouth in what is now
Massachusetts. New Amsterdam, on Manhattan Island, was founded by the Dutch in
1626, to be taken by the English in 1664, when it became New York. The year 1638
saw the founding of a Swedish colony on the Delaware River, and 1668 the estab-
lishment of the Hudson Bay Company, dealing in furs and skins from the Hudson
Bay region of Canada. In 1682 the English Quaker, William Penn, founded
Pennsylvania. Later, the Mississippi was explored by the French, moving south
from their Canadian settlements, and bases were established by them on the Gulf
of Mexico at Biloxi (1699), Mobile (1702) and New Orleans (1718), while S. Louis
was founded by a French merchant in 1764.
By 1755 the spheres of influence of European nations within the New World
were roughly as follows: Portugal, whose main empire lay in the Far East, was
limited to Brazil under the ruling of Pope Alexander VI who, in 1494, had divided
the new discoveries of the world between Spain and Portugal on a longitudinal
basis; Spain possessed Mexico, Central and South America (excluding Brazil)
and what are now Texas, California, Arizona, New Mexico and Florida; the
English colonies comprised virtually the whole of the eastern seaboard of North
America, and the holdings of the Hudson Bay Company in Canada were vast;
French settlements were centred along the S. Lawrence River, in the Great Lakes
region and in the central plains of the U.S.A. down to and including the Missis-
sippi delta.
For obvious reasons there was considerable rivalry between the British and
French over their respective claims in North America, but a more important event
occurred in 1775, with the revolt of the British colonies against the mother country.
A year previously, the first Continental Congress, a gathering of representatives of
all the British colonies (except Georgia), met in Philadelphia to discuss their
relationship with England, particularly with regard to taxation and trade. This
move was precipitated through the decision of the British Government to close the
port of Boston after the famous ‘Boston Tea Party’ (where angry Bostonians had
refused to permit the landing of three shiploads of tea on which the colonists were
to pay what they considered to be an unfair tax). In 1775 the first shot of the
Revolution was fired, and the following year, with the adoption by the thirteen
colonies of the Declaration of Independence—the most important document in
the history of the U.S.A.—the Revolution became the American War of Indepen-
dence. Peace came in 1783 and with it recognition of the independent status of the
nucleus of the modern U.S.A.
From this point the history of the U.S.A. is one of expansion, principally west-
wards—the romantic era of the covered waggon. Certain areas were ceded by
Britain in 1783; in 1803 the central region of the country—the ‘Louisiana Purchase’
—was absorbed and in 1819, Florida. Oregon Territory was ceded by Britain in
1846, extensive areas by Mexico in 1848, while Texas was annexed in 1845. Minor
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1125

adjustments were made to the border between Canada and the U.S.A. in 1818, and
a small area of Mexican territory—the ‘Gadsden Purchase’-—was added to the
ee
ee country in 1853.
Salat

The countries of South America gained their independence in the nineteenth

century when the various viceroyalties of Portugal and Spain were terminated;
Brazil (1806), New Granada and Rio de la Plata (1810), Peru (1817) and New
Spain (1821).
Canada, which had remained loyal to Britain throughout the American War of
Independence, was faced with her own internal problems, springing from the
existence of two distinct cultures within her boundaries—the French and the
English—but these were largely overcome in 1791 by the creation of two separate
provinces, Lower Canada (fundamentally French) and Upper Canada. In 1840
responsible government by an elected assembly was granted to the country, the
British governor assuming a purely legal and symbolic role, while in 1867, with the
passing of the British North-America Act, the country achieved full Dominion
status which it retains within the British Commonwealth today, and its own Parlia-
ment and Ministries were set up at Ottawa on the lines of those at Westminster.
Finally, the original provinces of Ontario and Quebec were joined by New Bruns-
wick, Nova Scotia, Manitoba, British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Alberta to
form modern Canada.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The architecture of the Americas may be conveniently considered as passing
through four main phases: (i) Indigenous (c. 500 B.C.—A.D. sixteenth century); (ii)
Colonial (sixteenth-nineteenth century); (iii) National (nineteenth century—c.
1930); (iv) Modern.
INDIGENOUS PHASE (c. 500 B.C.—A.D. sixteenth century). Although in North
America permanent buildings of this phase, extending from earliest times to the
establishment of European settlements in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries,
were rare owing to the nomadic nature of most of the tribes, a vigorous building
tradition of a high order obtained in Mexico and Peru. In North America per-
manent building seems to have been restricted to the Pueblo Indians of the south-
west part of what is now the U.S.A., but this was of a comparatively primitive order,
using rubble and sun-dried clay. In Mexico religious buildings were the most
important structures and great truncated pyramids were built by the Mayans,
Toltecs and Aztecs (pp. 1128, 1129). The latter were generally built up in ‘adobe’
or sun-dried brick and then faced with stone slabs, sometimes richly carved in
low relief or coated with lime-plaster and painted (p. 1128). Masonry was finely
dressed and laid in courses, but the staggering of vertical joints was ignored and
thus walls tended to be weak in bonding. The round arch and barrel vault were
unknown, but the corbelled arch and vault (limited to spans of 15-20 ft) were used.
Roofs were constructed of logs or corbelled vaults. Formal planning was appreciated,
and Toltec and Aztec cities were laid out on grand lines (p. 1131). Stone columns
were used by the Toltecs (p. 1128). Temples, generally sited on great pyramidal
bases, were windowless, and in all buildings wall-openings were kept to a minimum.
Stone surfaces were carved in intricate designs, often incorporating formalized
representations of serpents, warriors, tigers and eagles (p. 1128). In Peru the most
important building work was in fortified towns (p. 1131), where a high standard was
attained in coursed and polygonal masonry, the stones being rubbed down and
fitted together with great precision. Round burial towers, predating the Inca
Empire, are to be found in Bolivia (p. 1131). As in Mexico, adobe brick was used as
well as the corbelled arch and vault.
1126 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS ,

COLONIAL PHASE (sixteenth-nineteenth century). Extending from the time of

European settlement to that of independent national status, this phase varied in
duration from one area to another; in Latin America, from the early sixteenth
century to the early nineteenth century; in North America from the early seven-
teenth century to the late eighteenth century in the case of the U.S.A., and in
Canada to the mid-nineteenth century. In general the architecture of a particular
area mirrored that of the homeland of the colonizers or settlers of that area, with
modifications occasioned by climate, the types of building material obtainable and
the quality of labour available. Thus in seventeenth-century New England building
followed the pattern of English weather-boarded, heavy timber-frame prototypes
(p. 1131), while in eighteenth-century Virginia we find a ‘Georgian’ architecture,
often almost indistinguishable from that of eighteenth-century England (p. 1132).
Colonial architecture of Latin America followed the pattern of Spanish and
Portuguese work. Early examples show derivation from Spanish Mediaeval proto-
types (p. 1135), and Moorish influences (p. 1139) are apparent. The Plateresque,
Churrigueresque, Baroque and Antiquarian phases of the architecture of the
Spanish homeland are all mirrored in the work of Spanish America (pp. 1135, 1139).
Architecture of Portuguese Brazil in the second half of the eighteenth century had
much in common with the Rococo of Central Europe (p. 1136).
NATIONAL PHASE (nineteenth century—-c. 1930). This phase followed the
shaking-off by an area of its colonial ties with European powers, although it must
be emphasized that European influence in architecture and other matters remained
strong throughout the continent. In South and Central America and Mexico con-
ditions were somewhat unstable following the collapse of the Portuguese and Spanish
Empires and it is only in the present century that these areas have achieved
independent architectural maturity. In the nineteenth century there was a tendency
to rely on foreign architects, particularly French, and notable examples of their
work are the Itamarati Palace, Rio de Janeiro (1851-4) by J. M. J. Rebelo; the
Customs House, Rio de Janeiro (1826) by A. J. V. Grandjean de Montigny
(1776-1850); and work in Santiago by C. F. Brunet-Debaines (1799-1855),
all of which are unequivocally French in character. The nineteenth century
saw the establishment of schools of architecture in Latin America based on the
French Ecole des Beaux-Arts, and these have had an important influence on
architecture.
In Canada there was a similar situation, and architecture was strongly influenced
by trends in England until comparatively recently.
In the U.S.A. on the other hand, a conscious striving for a truly ‘national’
architecture became evident soon after the War of Independence (1776-83), and
the architecture of the National Phase in the U.S.A. can best be followed if it is
considered under three sub-headings:
(a) Post-colonial Period, c. 1790-c. 1815
(6) First Eclectic Period, c. 1815-c. 1860
(c) Second Eclectic Period, c. 1860-c. 1930
(a) Post-colonial Period (c. 1790-c. 1815). Architecture of this period moved away
from the English Georgian idiom which had become established along the eastern
seaboard of the country. Neo-Classic elements were introduced (p. 1147) and, while
there was influence from the English architects the Adam brothers (p. 875) and
John Soane (p. 876), American architects tended to look more to France for
inspiration.
(6) First Eclectic Period (c. 1815-c. 1860). During this period the revived Greek
style was predominant (p. 1143), receiving a more whole-hearted acceptance than in
England (p. 877) and developing specifically American characteristics. The Gothic
“yy

ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1127

(p. 1144) and Egyptian (p. 1148) styles found some popularity but, compared with
the Greek Revival, these were minor streams, and the American Gothic Revival did
not develop the strength of the parallel movement in Britain (pp. 875, 877, 986).
The type of timber-framing known as the ‘balloon-frame’ came into use during
this period (c. 1830) and revolutionized timber construction. Requiring relatively
unskilled labour and obviating the elaborate joints of the traditional heavy timber
structures built in colonial times, the balloon-frame has played an important part in
American architecture and is still widely used in modern domestic work. As its name
suggests, rather than relying on an essentially post-and-lintel construction, the
balloon-frame owes its strength to its walls, roof, etc., as diaphragms. Comparatively
light timber sections are employed which are nailed together, floor and ceiling joists
acting as ties, the whole being stiffened by the external timber sheathing.
As in Britain and Europe (pp. 983, 1061) the period saw considerable develop-
ments in the use of cast-iron as a building material (pp. 1121, 1152).
(c) Second Eclectic Period (c. 1860-c. 1930). American architecture achieved
international significance during this period and followed two main streams.
The first, related to the Gothic Revival and initiated as a Romanesque Revival with
H. H. Richardson (1838-86) as its first important exponent (pp. 1143, 1147), gained
considerable momentum and reached a wonderful vigour and vitality in the work of
Louis Sullivan (1856-1924) (p. 1155). In some respects the movement in its later
stages can be equated with that of the Arts and Crafts in Britain (p. 991) and it
culminated in the work of Frank Lloyd Wright (1867-1959) (pp. 1143, 1144).
The second stream was more academic in character. Influenced by the Ecole des
Beaux-Arts in Paris, its architecture was inspired by the great periods of the past,
the Italian (p. 1143) and French Renaissance (p. 1143), Ancient Greek (p. 1151) and
Roman (p. 1156) and Late Gothic (p. 1147).
Two important and influential exhibitions belong to this period: the Centennial
Exposition (Philadelphia, 1876) and the World’s Columbian Exposition
(Chicago, 1893). The Classical buildings and formal layout of the latter did much to
reinforce the popularity of the academic architectural stream.
The period is noteworthy for its structural experiment and achievement. The
skyscraper, often regarded as America’s greatest single contribution to architectural
development, was a product of this phase and its development was closely related
to that of metal frame-construction, the non-load-bearing ‘curtain’ wall and the lift
or elevator.
The period saw alsothe establishment of many schools of architecture in the U.S.A.,
the first being that at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, founded in 1865.
MODERN ARCHITECTURE (from c. 1930). The architectural contribution of the
Americas since c. 1930 has been of great significance. Not only the U.S.A., but also
Canada, Mexico and the countries of South America have produced notable build-
ings which have had considerable influence throughout the world. In the case of
the U.S.A., with the rise of German Nazism in the 1930’s, some of the great
leaders of European architecture sought asylum there (Walter Gropius (p. 1066),
Erich Mendelsohn (p. 1068) and Ludwig Mies van der Rohe (p. 1066) among
them), and these, both as teachers and practitioners, have had a profound effect on
American architecture. In addition distinguished architects, like Alvar Aalto
(p. 1068) from Finland, have been invited to undertake commissions in the country
(p. 1159), while the growing prosperity of the U.S.A., helped rather than hindered by
the 1939-45 War, has encouraged building activity. Furthermore, and this is true of
the Americas generally, public acceptance of ‘modern’ architecture has been very
much more wholehearted than in the older continent of Europe and healthy experi-
ment, both technical and aesthetic, has been widespread.
1128 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

In Mexico and South America the greatest contribution has been in reinforced-
concrete building, and work in these areas is often characterized by its daring
structural forms (pp. 1160, 1163). The use of colour is also noteworthy, often in a
modern adaptation of the old ‘azulejos’ tradition (p. 1160), and in Mexico whole
facades are sometimes treated as rich mosaic mural decorations (p. 1160).
There are notable examples of reinforced-concrete building in North America
also, but there the steel-frameismore widely used. Important work has been done
in the U.S.A. in the development of prefabrication techniques, particularly in
respect of curtain walling (pp. 1127, 1163) and in site organization related to large
industrial and commercial buildings, while in respect of building services (heating,
lighting, etc.) American architects hold an unrivalled position.

EXAMPLES
INDIGENOUS PHASE
(c. §00 B.C.-A.D, sixteenth century)

MEXICO AND CENTRAL AMERICA

The House of the Dwarf, Uxmal (c. A.D. 700), an example of late Mayan work,
was a large rectangular structure built around a central court on a 20 ft high stone
base. Internally the rooms were spanned with corbelled stone vaults, while ex-
ternally the building, particularly its central entrance, was richly decorated with
low-relief carving. Entrances were square-headed and the walls windowless.
The Pyramid of the Sun, San Juan Teotihuacan (c. A.D. 800) (p. I129D) was
part of a great ceremonial complex of temple buildings planned on axial lines. A
truncated pyramid, it rose from a base more than 700 ft square to a height of 216 ft
in four stages, marked by terraces around the structure, the slope of each stage being
varied to accentuate further the mass of the pyramid. A facing of brightly-coloured,
plastered stone slabs covered the adobe brick core of the structure which was
surmounted by a shrine dedicated to the Sun God.
The Temple Pyramid, Xochicalco (c. A.D. 800) (p. 1129A), was faced with stone
slabs intricately carved with a design of interwining snakes, human figures and
symbolic devices.
The Great Pyramid, Cholula (commenced c. A.D. 125), the greatest of all the
Mexican pyramids, was built over a long period. Today it is overgrown with
vegetation and crowned by a Spanish colonial church.
The Pyramid Temple, Tenayuca (c. A.D. 1270) (p. I1129B) went through a series
of reconstructions, the last in 1507. It rises to a height of 50 ft from a base measuring
140 ft square. Three faces of the pyramid were carved with a design incorporating
serpents, probably related to the Aztec calendar (there were 52 years in the Aztec
cycle and on each of the carved faces of the pyramid there were 52 serpents):
the fourth side is formed as a double stairway which led originally to twin temples
on the truncated summit of the structure.
The Ball Court and Observatory, Chichen Itza (c. A.D. 1200) show evidence of
Toltec craftsmanship and are characterized by the fine quality of their masonry,
laid in courses but in some instances indefinitely bonded. The observatory is
particularly interesting and provides an example of a circular plan form.
The Hall of the Monoliths, Mitla (c. A.D. 1100) (p. 1129E) is one of the most im-
portant surviving buildings in the sacred city, the name of which is derived from the
Aztec for ‘place of the dead’. Approached by a flight of steps, the building stands on
a mound and is entered through three square-headed openings. Externally the
facade is decorated with panels of carved geometric ornament. Internally the hall
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1129

3 So aden
A. The Temple Pyramid, Xochicalco B. The Pyramid Temple, Tenayuca (c. 1270):
(c. 800): Detail. See p. 1128 model of restoration. See p. 1128

See e ‘

c. The Gateway of the Sun, Tiahuanaco D. The Pyrami

(c. 500-1000). See p. 1131 can (c. 800). See p. 1128

MEE Nip
* ia OS

E. The Ruins of Mitla (c. 1100). F. Tenochtitlan in 1519. See p. 1131

See p. 1128
1130 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

A. San Geronimo de Taos, New Mexico (c. 1540). See p. 1131

B. Machu Picchu (c. 1500). See p. 1131

 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1131

measures 125 ft by 23 ft and has six 14-ft high, tapered porphyry columns (each
of 3-ft diameter) on its centre line, thus breaking the span of the roof which was
probably of timber.
At Tenochtitlan (p. 1129F), the Aztec island capital set in Lake Texcoco and now
the site of modern Mexico City, there were many fine buildings. The Palace of
Montezuma, the Aztec Emperor at the time of the Spanish conquest, was a
particularly fine work and incorporated patios, terraces, zoological gardens and
numerous apartments decorated with woven fabrics, leather and carved, sweet-
scented woods.
PERU AND THE ANDES REGION
The Gateway of the Sun, Tiahuanaco (c. A.D. 500-1000) (p. I129C) is a fine
example of pre-Inca work. Two immense slabs of stone carry a great andesite lintel,
10 ft deep and weighing approximately Io tons, richly carved and surmounted by a
carved head of Viracocha.
Burial Towers, Bolivia (A.D. 1000-1440) also pre-date the Inca Empire but
show highly developed masonry techniques. These circular tombs or ‘chullpas’ are
constructed in finely laid polygonal masonry.
Cuzco (after 1200), the Inca capital, has fine walls of coursed, black andesite
masonry, apparently quarried at least nine miles from the city.
The Fort of Sacsahuaman (c. 1475) provides another example of the build-
ing and engineering prowess of the Incas in its superb cyclopean masonry walls
overlooking the neighbouring city of Cuzco.
Machu Picchu (c. 1500) (p. 1130B), a late Inca hillside town, is dramatically sited
above the Urubamba River and has wide stairways, terraces and battered defensive
walls constructed in coursed and polygonal masonry.
NORTH AMERICA
Cliff Dwellings, Frijoles Canyon, New Mexico (c. A.D. 1300). Dwellings here
were either natural or man-made caves, linked by terraces constructed of rubble
and adobe and approached by ladders. Other examples can be seen in Mesa Verde
National Park, Colorado.
San Geronimo de Taos, N.M. (c. 1540) (p. I1130A), despite more recent addi-
tions retains its original character. Rectangular adobe dwellings are piled together to
make a five-storey complex, the flat roofs, constructed of tree-trunks, forming a
series of stepped terraces. Outer rooms, often receiving light only from their
entrances, provide living accomodation, while the inner rooms are used as stores.
Originally, for defensive reasons, dwellings at ground level were without doors and
access was by ladder to roof level.

COLONIAL PHASE
(sixteenth—nineteenth century)

DOMESTIC BUILDINGS

Capen House, Topsfield, Massachusetts (1683) (p. 11334), an excellent example

of seventeenth-century colonial architecture in New England, is of heavy timber-
frame construction, the first floor and gables being carried forward as ‘jetties’ as in
antecedent English examples, while the central, clustered brick chimney is
reminiscent of similar features in England. Externally, the house is clad in weather-
boarding and has a wood shingle roof. Internal walls and partitions are faced with
vertical boarding, beams are left exposed and decoration is sparse, being confined to
such details as the stair balusters. Windows are small, leaded casements. The ground
floor is divided into two rooms by a central brick core, incorporating two fireplaces
 1132 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

back-to-back. An entrance lobbyis at one end of the brick core, from which a staircase
leads to the upper floor. Other houses of a similar character are: Whipple House,
Ipswich, Mass. (1639); Scotch-Boardman House, Saugus, Mass. (1651);
Fairbanks House, Dedham, Mass. (c. 1637); Whitman House, Farmington,
Connecticut (1664); Paul Revere House, Boston, Mass. (c. 1676); John Ward
House, Salem, Mass. (1684); House of the Seven Gables, Salem, Mass.
(c. 1670).
Bacon’s Castle, Surry County, Virginia (c. 1655) (p. 1133E) is cruciform in
plan. Built in brick, with its curved Flemish gables, high clustered chimneys and
Classical details in the brickwork over its entrance, the house has much in common
with Jacobean examples in England.
Abraham Ackerman House, Hackensack, N.J. (1704) shows Dutch influence.
Its roof is of the ‘gambrel’ or mansard type with widely projecting eaves, covered in
wood shingles, as also are the gables and dormer cheeks. The walls of the ground
floor are of roughly-dressed, coursed masonry. Other houses showing Dutch
influence are: Dyckman House, New York, N.Y. (c. 1783); Terheun House,
Hackensack, N.J. (c. 1709); Vreeland House, Englewood, N.J. (1818) and Jan
Ditmars House, Brooklyn, N.Y. (c. 1700).
Parlange, Pointe Coupée Parish, Louisiana (1750) (p. 1133B), a French
plantation house, has an open, colonnaded verandah running round the house on
both floors, a feature providing protection from the hot sun and heavy rains of the
area. The high-pitched, hipped roof is covered in shingles and, because of the
dampness of the site, the ground floor is constructed of brick, although the first
floor is of timber. Other examples showing a similar character are: Connelly’s
Tavern, Nachez, Mississippi (c. 1795); Keller Mansion, St. Charles Parish,
La. (c. 1801).
Westover, Charles City County, Va. (c. 1730-4) (p. 1133C), one of the most
distinguished eighteenth-century Virginian plantation houses, has a close affinity
with English Georgian work. A seven-bay brick structure of two storeys, there are
further rooms in the steeply-pitched hipped roof, which is punctuated with elegant
dormer windows. The central entrance to the main front is accentuated by a
baroque-like broken pediment, finely carved in Portland stone, probably shipped
specially from England for this purpose. The house is flanked symmetrically by
(though originally not physically linked with) two minor structures, one providing
kitchen and servants’ quarters, the other serving as the plantation office. Internally
the house has finely proportioned rooms, with their superbly executed details
ranking with the best contemporary work of the mother country. Some ceilings have
applied designs, cast in composition and almost certainly imported from England
where they were currently fashionable.
Other colonial houses of Georgian character are: Mount Pleasant, Philadelphia
(1761-2), built in stuccoed rubble, its stone details probably derived from a con-
temporary English pattern book like those of Batty Langley (p. 874), has a low-
pitched, lead-covered roof, truncated to form a flat terrace or deck, a feature of
many American houses of this period known as a ‘captain’s walk’; Miles Brewton
House, Charleston, South Carolina (1765-9) has a fine two-storeyed pedimented,
colonnaded porch and similar features are to be found at Shirley, Charles City
County, Va. (c. 1769), Drayton Hall, S.C. (1738-42) (p. 1133D) and in Thomas
Jefferson’s first design for his own house, Monticello, near Charlottesville, Va.
(1770-5).
Brandon, Prince George County, Va. (c. 1765) has a more monumental plan
arrangement showing Palladian influence, and the house is flanked on either side
by minor buildings to which it is joined by low linking elements. A similar plan
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1133

B. Parlange, Pointe Coupée Parish, Louisiana

(1750). See p. 1132

Pee?

ie ¢ i

p. Drayton Hall, South Carolina (1738-42). E. Bacon’s Castle, Surry County, Vir-
See p. 1132 ginia (c, 1655). See p. 1132
1134 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

‘ ¢

A. Ecala Palace, Querétaro (c. 1785). B. S80 Pedro dos Clérigos,

See p. 1135 Recife (1729-). See p. 1136

eS
Likoe
mpadets
tl

og aunty
i

es +

c. Mercedarian Monastery, Quito (c. 1630). D. The Sanctuary, Ocotlan

See p. 1136 (c. 1745). See p. 1136

F, Casa del Alfefiique, Puebla

See p. 1135 (c. 1780). See p.-1135
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1135

arrangement is found’ at Mount Vernon, Fairfax County, Va. (1757-87),

Mount Airy, Richmond County, Va. (1758-62), Tulip Hill, Anne Arundel
County, Maryland (c. 1756) and the Hammond-Harwood House, Annapolis,
Md. (1773-4).
The Ecala Palace, Querétaro, Mexico (c. 1785) (p. 1134A), with its richly
decorated facade, heavy Baroque pediments over the first-floor windows with their
lace-like wrought iron balconies, deep, arcaded loggia on the ground floor and,
under the roof cornice, a wide frieze of blue and white tiles, provides a fine example
of a Spanish colonial palace.
The Casa del Alfefique, Puebla, Mexico (c. 1780) (p. 1134F) is particularly
noteworthy on account of its lavish use of ‘azulejos’ (glazed tiles) as a facing. Its
facade is covered with large, octagonal, unglazed, red tiles and chequered with
smaller, white glazed tiles, decorated with blue flowers.
Other important houses in colonial Latin America are: Torre Tagle Palace,
Lima, Peru (c. 1730) showing pronounced Moro-Spanish characteristics; Quinta
de Presa, Lima, Peru (1766), with its pink colour-washed, adobe walls, evocative
of Austrian Rococo work; and the Saldanha Palace, Salvador, Brazil (c. 1720)
with a richly carved entrance incorporating flanking caryatids.

RELIGIOUS BUILDINGS
The Cathedral, Santo Domingo (now Ciudad Trujillo), Dominican Republic
(1521-41), an important example of the use of late Gothic forms in colonial
architecture, has chevet and lateral chapels, and Gothic ribbed vaulting over its
square nave bays. The west facade is in the Plateresque style.
The Cathedral, Mexico City (1563-1667) (p. 1134E) replaced an earlier primi-
tive, flat-roofed structure (1525-). The building shows a curious mingling of
Baroque and more severely Classical features. With three aisles to both nave and
chancel, and rows of side chapels filling the length of the building on both sides, the
church measures 177 ft in width and is 387 ft long. The nave and shallow transepts
are covered by barrel vaults pierced by lunettes, while each bay of the side aisles is
domed. The clustered piers of the nave are each made up of four engaged Roman-
Doric columns, the fluting of which is continued round the nave arches. Externally,
the west facade is flanked by twin towers rising 203 ft, but these and the remainder
of the elevational detail (carried out in buff-coloured limestone with statues and
other detail in white marble, to the designs of José Damian Ortiz de Castro) date
from 1786 and are Neo-Classic in character. The present dome and lantern and
some of the decorative work on the west front are by Manuel Tolsa, and date from
the early nineteenth century.
The Cathedral, Lima, Peru (1543-51; altered and enlarged c. 1570-; rebuilt
c. 17§0-) provides a fascinating story of the battle against earthquakes. After the
collapse of the original stone vaults in the early seventeenth century, these were
rebuilt in brick. Further earthquakes caused the latter to be replaced by vaults of
wood, reed and plaster in the mid-eighteenth century and this form of construction
has been retained for various later rebuildings. Externally, the church with its twin
west towers and enriched central entrance bay (although heavily restored in 1940)
retains original work by the sculptor Juan Martinez de Arrona (1562-1635) and,
despite its Baroque flavour, has much in common with the work of Juan de Herrera,
architect of the Escorial (p. 851).
Among numerous examples, the following Latin American colonial religious
buildings are particularly noteworthy: The Cathedral, Puebla, Mexico (1562-
1664); The Cathedral, Monterrey, Mexico (1630-1800); Mercedarian Monas-
tery and Cloister, Cuzco, Peru (1650-69); Mercedarian Cloister, Mexico City
1136 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

(1634-); Mercedarian Monastery, Quito, Ecuador (c. 1630-) (p. 1134c) and
College of San Francisco Javier, Sucre, Bolivia (c. 1624-).
Sio Pedro dos Clérigos, Recife, Brazil (1729-) (p. 1134B) by Ferreira Jacome
is an example of Portuguese colonial work. Characterized by the tall, elegant pro-
portions of its west front, the church is generally evocative of mid-European
baroque. The same qualities are seen in the churches of the Rosario (1725-77)
and Santo Antonio (1750-3), both at Recife.
The Sanctuary, Ocotlan, Mexico (c. 1745—) (p. 1134D), marking a famous pil-
grimage site, has a facade of gleaming white stucco shaped into fantastic Chur-
rigueresque forms, flanked by slender twin towers covered with bright red tiles in
a scale-like pattern. The interior is equally rich, much of its carving being by the
eighteenth-century Indian sculptor, Francisco Miguel.
The Church and Convent of San Estevan, Acoma, N.M. (c. 1640) (p. 1137A)
provides an example of a Spanish colonial mission centre, and was built by local
Indian-labour from a mixture of rubble and adobe brick. The flat roof is formed
from dressed tree-trunks carried internally on richly carved timber brackets. Squat
twin bell-towers flank the entrance facade, and the church receives natural light
from only the entrance, two very small windows and a transverse clear-story
between the roof of the nave and the higher ceiling of the sanctuary, the latter
flooding the altar and its richly-painted reredos with bright light.
Other similar examples are: San José, Laguna, N.M. (1699-1706) and the
church at Ranchos de Taos, N.M. (1772).
S. Luke’s Church, Smithfield, Va. (1682-) (p. 1137C) shows the influence of
English Mediaeval parish churches. Built in brick, the church consists of a simple,
rectangular nave with a squat, square tower at the west end. The gables to the nave
have stepped parapets reminiscent of Dutch work, while the side walls are
strengthened by mediaeval-like buttresses. With their crudely-formed brick tracery,
the windows also indicate a Mediaeval prototype.
Bruton Parish Church, Williamsburg, Va. (1711-15) (p. I137E), a simple
brick structure of cruciform plan, has round-headed windows lighting the nave and
transepts and an internal west gallery. The square west tower was added in 1769;
this is surmounted by a timber steeple, a much-simplified version of an English eigh-
teenth-century spire like that by Gibbs at S. Martin’s-in-the-Fields, London
(p. 950).
S. Michael’s Church, Charleston, S.C. (1752-61) (p. 1137B), a beautiful
example of a fully-developed English colonial church in the style of James Gibbs,
has a classical entrance portico, surmounted by an elegant timber steeple built up of
a series of diminishing octagonal drums with pilasters, entablatures and arched
openings to each stage, all reminiscent of S. Martin’s-in-the-Fields, London, (p.950).
The main body of the church is of stuccoed brick; there is a gallery around three
sides of the interior, carried on timber Ionic columns.
Christ Church (Old North), Boston, Mass. (1723), a simple brick building with
an internal gallery and box-pews, has a square western tower surmounted by a
timber steeple, a simplified version, perhaps, of that of Wren’s S. Dunstan-in-the-
East (1693) (p. 914).
King’s Chapel, Boston, Mass. (1749-54) (p. I137D), a stone church, con-
siderably grander than most English colonial examples with an unpedimented Ionic
portico surmounted by a square tower (the latter uncompleted); Christ Church,
Cambridge, Mass. (1759-61) built in timber; and Touro Synagogue, Newport,
Rhode Island (1759-63) were all designed by Peter Harrison (1716-75), an English
sea-captain from York.
The First Baptist Meeting House, Providence, R.I. (1774-5); Christ
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1137

= ie ae

B. S. Michael’s Church, c. S. Luke’s Church, Smithfield, Virginia (168 2-).

Charleston, South Carolina See p. 1136
(1752-61). See p. 1136

. King’s Chapel, Boston, Massa- E. Bruton Parish Church, Williamsburg, Virginia

chusetts (1749-54): interior. (I7II-I5). See p. 1136
See p. 1136
1138 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

beth if Bh Urata es fasiis

A. The Governor’s Palace, Santa Fé, New Mexico (1610-14). See p. 1139

a s eer I
B. Independence Hall, Phila- c. The Cabildo, New Orleans, Louisiana
delphia (1731-91). See p. 1140 (1795-). See p. 1139

D. The White House, Washington, D.C. (1792-1829). See p. 1140

 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1139

Church, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (1727-54) and S. Paul’s Chapel, New

York, N.Y. (1764-6) are other important examples of English colonial churches
and show the influence of the work of Wren and, more particularly, James Gibbs
through his Book of Architecture (1728) and his other publications (p. 873).

EDUCATIONAL, CIVIC AND PUBLIC BUILDINGS

The Governmental Palace, Guadalajara, Mexico (1751-75), by Nicholas
Enriquez del Castillo and José Conique, presents a rich mixture of Churrigueresque,
Baroque and Neo-Mudéjar elements, while the patio of the University, Antigua,
Guatemala (rebuilt in 1763) is an important example of Neo-Mudéjar design in
Latin America.
The Real Cabildo (Town Hall), Antigua, Guatemala (1743-), an example of
the more strictly Classical style favoured for colonial government buildings at this
time, has arcaded loggias to both floors of its nine-bay facade.
The Vizcainas, (formerly Colegio de San Ignacio), Mexico City (1734-53) by
Pedro Bueno, a school for poor girls, is a good example of the current idiom for
public buildings in Spanish America, while the Cabildo (Town Hall), New
Orleans, La. (1795-) (p. 1138c), built to house the Spanish administrative council
during its period of control in this area, shows the academic trend of late eighteenth-
century Spanish design. The open arcaded ground floor, the arcaded first floor with
its pilasters, the central pedimented feature, the weight and richness of the stone
detail and the academic use of classical motifs, relate the building closely to con-
temporary Spanish work. The mansard roof was a later addition (c. 1850).
The Penitentiary, Ouro Preto, Brazil (1784-8) by Francisco Pinto de Abreu,
combined the functions of town hall and prison, and despite its purpose, has a
Rococo elegance in its facade.
The Governor’s Palace, Santa Fé, N.M. (1610-14) (p. 1138A) was the domin-
ating building in the original walled ‘presidio’ or administrative enclosure of this
outpost of the Spanish Empire. The building, a long single-storeyed structure,
constructed by local Indian labour in adobe brick, is approached from the ‘plaza’ of
Santa Fé through an open loggia or ‘portal’ running the length of the palace and
terminated at each end by simple adobe pavilions. The flat roof of the building is
formed of round logs, supported along the portal by crude columns, hewn from
whole tree trunks, with carved bracket-heads.
The Governor’s Palace, San Antonio, Texas (1749), built in stone, with fine
wrought-iron window grilles, possessed a ballroom and grand reception rooms
overlooking its internal patio, and evinces the high standard of life even in remote
parts of the Spanish Empire.
William and Mary College, Williamsburg, Va. (1695-1702) may have been
designed by Sir Christopher Wren in his capacity of Royal Surveyor of England.
If this were so, the drawings provided by Wren must have been largely diagrammatic,
for records state that they were ‘adapted to the nature of the country by the gentle-
men there’. The plan is U-shaped, the three-storeyed central block containing
classrooms, while two projecting wings house, respectively, the college chapel and
refectory. On the west side of the building, an open arcaded loggia extends between
the two projecting wings. The building is Georgian in character, its central block
surmounted by an elegant cupola.
Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., founded as Harvard College in 1636,
is the oldest university in the U.S.A. Nothing remains of the first buildings,
constructed largely of timber, but the following are important: Massachusetts
Hall (1718-20); Holden Chapel (1742-4); Hollis Hall (1762-3); and Harvard
Hall (1764-6), with its pedimented gables, full cornice and comparatively massive
1140 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

cupola, representing an early attempt to introduce a more monumental character

into North American collegiate architecture.
Other important colonial university buildings include: Nassau Hall, Princeton
University, N.J. (1754-6) (much altered); University Hall, Brown University,
Providence, R.I., (1770-1) and Connecticut Hall, Yale University, New Haven,
Conn. (1750-2).
The Capitol, Williamsburg, Va. (1701-5; rebuilding completed 1934) (p.
II4IA) is an accurate reconstruction of the Capitol as it was completed in 1705.
The latter was replaced after a fire in 1747 by another building, in turn burned
down in 1832. The plan is H-shaped, one of the two apsidal-ended wings providing
accommodation for the House of Burgesses, while the other housed the General
Courtroom on the ground floor, with the Governor’s Council Chamber above. The
entrance is through a central linking block which, on the ground floor, takes the
form of an open arcaded loggia and, on the first floor, housed a conference room for
joint meetings between the Governor’s Council and members of the House of Bur-
gesses. Built of brick and basically Georgian in character, the building shows the
effect of climate on architectural style; because of the heat of the Virginian summers
the proportion of solid to void is considerably higher than in English examples. The
open entrance loggia, permitting the free circulation of air, is similarly explained.
The Governor’s Palace, Williamsburg, Va. (1706-20; reconstructed 1932)
is a particularly fine piece of Georgian design, evocative of the work of Wren.
With its magnificent gardens and fine ballroom (a later addition) it provides
evidence of the sophistication of life in early eighteenth-century Virginia.
Independence Hall, Philadelphia, Pa. (1731-91) (p. 1138B) was the scene of
the signing of the Declaration of Independence on July 4th, 1776, and is therefore a
monument of great significance to Americans. Work on the State House, as it was
called, commenced in 1731, and the central block was completed by 1745. The
tower with its fine steeple was built 1750-3 ; becoming unsound, this was demolished
in 1781 and rebuilt on the original lines by William Strickland in 1832. The two-
storeyed flanking buildings, connected with the central block by arcaded links, were
erected in 1736 and 1739 respectively and have recently been restored. In 1789 and
1791 further buildings were added, completing the seven-unit complex and provid-
ing a civic centre perhaps unequalled in eighteenth-century America. The build-
ings, essentially Georgian in character, are in brick with white stone quoins and
other dressings. The central block is surmounted by a balustraded roof-deck, above
which rises the tower and its elaborate timber lantern, a rich piece of design forming
one of the finest Georgian towers in America or Britain.
Carpenters Hall, Philadelphia, Pa. (1770-1), built as the headquarters of
the ‘Carpenters Company’, i.e. the master carpenters, of Philadelphia, is a
simple Georgian building of cruciform plan, its four gables being treated as
pediments. A timber lantern surmounts the building which to Americans is of
particular importance, since it was here that the First Continental Congress
gathered on September 5th, 1774.
Province House, Halifax, Nova Scotia (1811-18) by John Merrick, a simple
sturdy Classical building in stone, is strongly evocative of English Georgian work
and set the pattern for other English administrative buildings in Canada.

NATIONAL PHASE
(nineteenth century-c. 1930)
DOMESTIC BUILDINGS
The White House, Washington, D.C. (1792-1829) (p. 1138D), the official resi-
dence of the Presidents of the U.S.A., was designed by James Hoban (c. 1762-1831),
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS II4I

g. Monticello, nr. Charlottesville, Virginia (1770-1808). See p. 1143

 1142 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS
vee

A. Trinity Church, Boston, Massa- B. Belle Grove, nr. White Castle, Louisiana (1857,
chusetts (1872-7). See p. 1147 See p. 1143

bp. Stoughton House, Cambridge, Massachusetts E. Robie House, Woodlawn Avenue

(1882-3). See p. 1143 Chicago (1908-9). See p. 1144
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1143
an Irish architect, in the English Palladian style. After damage sustained in the
War of 1812, it was restored by B. H. Latrobe and further considerable restoration
has been carried out in the present century.
Monticello, nr. Charlottesville, Va. (1770-5; remodelled 1796-1808) (p.
I141B) was designed by Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), third President of the
U.S.A., for his own use. The first house, an elegant example of colonial Georgian,
was completely remodelled in a free and imaginative Palladian manner (1796-1808).
Tontine Crescent, Boston, Mass. (1793-) by Charles Bullfinch (1763-1844), an
example of terrace or, as they are often termed in America, ‘row’ houses has much
in common with contemporary English work of the same type. Fine examples of
early nineteenth-century brick terrace houses are also to be found in Philadelphia,
again similar to English prototypes. A more monumental terrace is the brown-
stone Colonnade Row, New York (1832) by A. J. Davis (1803-92), where a
screen of Corinthian columns rises through two storeys from above the rusticated
ground floor.
Arlington, Va. (nr. Washington, D.C.), (1802-), at one time the home of
General Robert E. Lee, is an interesting example of a Greek Revival mansion,
particularly in the great hexastyle Doric Portico (added 1826), with its squat,
sturdy order.
Other major Greek Revival houses are: South End House, Sapelo Island,
Georgia (1810-12), a fine and unusual example, especially interesting in that its
walls are made from ‘tabby’ (concrete made from oyster shells); Gaineswood,
Demopolis, Alabama (1842-9), a large house reminiscent of the domestic work
of Decimus Burton in England (p. 877); The Hermitage, Nashville, Tennessee
(1819; rebuilt 1835), a characteristic example of a Tennessee plantation house with
six Corinthian columns rising through two storeys across its main front, thus pro-
viding covered loggias at ground- and first-floor levels; Polk Mansion, Rattle and
Snap, Ten. (c. 1845) with a grand, pedimented tetrastyle Corinthian portico
projecting from its main front and rising through the building’s two storeys;
Ralph Small House, Macon, Ga. (c. 1835), a typical plantation house of the area,
with a simple double-storeyed unpedimented hexastyle Doric portico; and
Belle Grove, near White Castle, La. (1857) (p. 1142B) a particularly grand
example with 75 rooms and a superb portico with the Corinthian capitals of its
columns carved in cypress wood.
Vanderbilt Mansion, 5th Avenue, New York (1879-81) was designed by
R. M. Hunt (1827-95) the first American architect to be trained at the Ecole des
Beaux-Arts in Paris, in the style of an early French Renaissance chateau. An
example of the academic stream of late nineteenth-century American architecture,
it provided a prototype for other buildings, among them Biltmore, Ashville, N.C.
(1890-5) (p. 1142C), also by Hunt.
Villard Houses, New York (1883-5) by McKim, Mead and White (C. F.
McKim (1849-1909), W. R. Mead (1848-1928) and Stamford White (1856-1906),
are in brown stone and were based on ‘palazzi’ of the Italian High Renaissance.
Stoughton House, Cambridge, Mass. (1882-3) (p. 1142D) by H. H. Richardson
(1838-86) is a timber-framed house, its walls clad externally with wood shingles.
Although by no means representative of Richardson at his greatest, the house
provides an important example of the so-called ‘Shingle Style’. An external cladding
of wood shingles over a timber frame became a popular device in domestic building
during the second half of the nineteenth century. Internally, the plan arrangement
shows a loosening and foreshadows the free plan, to be developed later by Frank
Lloyd Wright.
Winslow House, River Forest, Illinois (1893), the first important work of
1144 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

Frank Lloyd Wright (1869-1959), is a simple structure, basically symmetrical, but

its hipped roof, wide projecting eaves and emphatic horizontal lines foreshadow the
architect’s later work and what was to become known as the ‘Prairie House’.
Robie House, Chicago, Ill. (1908-9) (p. I142E), also by Wright, is dominated
externally by its strong horizontal lines which seem to make it almost one with the
land on which it is built. Constructed of fine, small brick with low-pitched hipped
roofs, the house is planned in an open and informal manner, interesting use being
made of changes of level internally.
Other important houses of this period by Wright are: Willitts House, High-
land Park, I1l. (1902); Ross House, Delavan Lake, Wis. (1902) and Coonley
House, Riverside, Ill. (1908).
Gamble House, Pasadena, California (1908-9) by C. S. Greene (1868-1957)
and H. M. Greene (b. 1870) has much in common with the work of Wright in its
sympathetic use of natural materials and owes something also to the vernacular
tradition of the west coast of America.

RELIGIOUS BUILDINGS

The Catholic Cathedral, Baltimore, Md. (1805-21), probably the most important
work of Benjamin H. Latrobe (1764-1820), was the first major Roman Catholic
Cathedral in the U.S. The plan is in the form of a Latin cross; over the crossing
there is a great, coffered Pantheon-like dome (more than 60 ft in diameter) while
the nave is roofed by lesser saucer domes. Internally, the building is characterized
by a wide spaciousness and is reminiscent of the work of Sir John Soane (p. 876)
and of contemporary French examples. Externally, it has a fine pedimented portico
(intended in the original design but added only in 1863), flanked by twin west
towers, while the main dome springs from an octagonal drum.
Notre Dame, Montreal, Quebec (1824-43) by James O’Donnell (1774-1830),
an important early Canadian Gothic Revival building, has twin west towers and a
triple-arched west entrance. Somewhat naive in its detail which is derived mainly
from English sources, it originally had double internal galleries. The interior was
completely remodelled c. 1870.
S. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario (1831) is
a rare example of the Greek Revival in Canada. A simple brick building, its ‘west
end’ takes the form of a Greek Doric hexastyle temple-front and is surmounted by a
timber cupola and spire.
Trinity Church, New York (1839-46) by Richard Upjohn (1802-78), now
dwarfed by the commercial buildings of the modern city, was the third church of
this name on the site. Comparable with the better examples of Gothic Revival Com-
missioners’ Churches in nineteenth-century England (p. 878), it is in the Decorated
style and in its day was the most important Gothic Revival building in the U.S.
Grace Church, New York (1843-6) and S. Patrick’s Cathedral, New York
(1858-79) were both by James Renwick Jr. (1818-95) and are important examples
of American Gothic Revival architecture. The former was based on English
examples, while the latter has continental sources.
The Church of the Assumption, Montreal, Quebec (1863-5) by Victor
Bourgeau (1809-88), with elegant twin west towers is a charming example based on
Baroque prototypes, while the Church of Notre-Dame-de-Grace, Montreal
(-1851) by John Ostell (1813-92) provides another example of the Baroque
Revival which found favour for churches in this area in the mid-nineteenth century.
The Cathedral of S. James, Montreal, Quebec (1875-85), designed by
Joseph Michaud (1822-1902) and Victor Bourgeau, was (at the direction of the
Bishop of Montreal) based on the Cathedral of S. Peter, Rome (p. 714). Despite
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1145

A. The State Capitol, Richmond, Virginia (1789-98). See p. 1147

B. The Episcopal Cathedral of S. John the Divine, New York

(commenced 1892; remodelled 1910). See p. 1147
1146 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

A. The United States Capitol, Washington, D.C. (1792-1867). See p. 1147

gam
ee
ee
ea
LZ
ee
ga

B. The City Hall, Philadelphia (1874-1901). See p. 1151

 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1147
great differences in scale, the west facade, the dome and general plan arrangement
are clearly derived from S. Peter’s. Nevertheless, the church possesses its own
strong and specifically Canadian character.
The Episcopal Cathedral of S. John the Divine, New York (p. 11458), was
originally designed in the Romanesque style (1892) by Heins (1860-1907) and
Lafarge (1862-1938) who completed the choir in 1907. It was remodelled (com-
mencing 1910) by Cram, Goodhue and Ferguson, in a mixture of Late English and
French Gothic, and five aisles, together with a double clear-story, great central
tower, twin west towers and eastern chevet termination were incorporated.
Trinity Church, Boston, Mass. (1872-7) (p. 1142A), by H. H. Richardson, is
one of the key monuments of American architecture. The design, chosen in com-
petition, although basically Romanesque in character is handled in a masterful and
imaginative way and established Richardson’s reputation. A Greek cross in plan,
the building is dominated by a square central tower with round corner turrets, and
is constructed mainly of red granite, the rock-faced texture of which is exploited.
Internal decoration in encaustic colour was carried out by J. Lafarge, while the
west porch was added in 1897 to the designs of Shepley, Rutan and Coolidge.
Unity Temple, Oak Park, Ill. (1905-7) by Frank Lloyd Wright, is charac-
terized by the sturdy simplicity of its external massing, on which the design relies
rather than eclectic detail. In the building, as in all his work, the architect displayed
a knowledge of and sympathy with the natural qualities of materials, which are here
exploited both externally (in the pebble-faced concrete of the walls) and internally
(in the sand-lime plaster work and natural timber details).

EDUCATIONAL, CIVIC AND PUBLIC BUILDINGS

The State Capitol, Richmond, Va. (1789-98) (p. 1145A) by Thomas Jefferson,
was based on a Roman temple prototype, the Maison Carrée, Nimes (p. 188). An
Ionic order was used by Jefferson, while for the fenestration of the ‘cella’ he had
recourse to Palladian formulae. The building may be regarded as the first truly
Neo-Classic monument in the U.S. and, heralding the equivalent of the European
Antiquarian phase (p. 875), had much influence on later American buildings.
Classical temple forms, both Greek and Roman, were adapted for banks, schools
and other buildings, accommodation being sometimes somewhat ruthlessly
crammed into the ‘cella’ in order to retain, at all costs, the external lines of the
antique form. The appendages to the flanks of the Richmond Capitol are additions
dating from the early years of the present century.
The State House, Boston, Mass. (1795-1808), by Charles Bullfinch, shows the
influence of French and English Neo-Classicism in its elevational treatment,
particularly in the projecting central feature, with its simple arcade at entrance level
and colonnaded loggia above, and in the Adam-like detail of the windows at the
extremities of the main facade. The building is surmounted by a dome, a feature to
be incorporated in later American governmental buildings.
The United States Capitol, Washington, D.C. (1792-1867), (p. 1146A) seat of
the United States Government, has become, with its great crowning dome, one of
the world’s best-known buildings. The first building, erected to the designs of
Dr. William Thornton (1761-1828), an amateur architect from England, was
planned on Palladian lines with a central rotunda; this has survived in essentials,
despite numerous modifications and additions. Thornton’s work, in which he was
assisted by a French architect, E. S. Hallet, was continued by B. H. Latrobe, who
had been trained in England as a pupil under Samuel Pepys Cockerell (1754-1827)
(p. 948). After the War of 1812, Latrobe was responsible for rebuilding the struc-
ture (1815-17), badly damaged by the British. Charles Bullfinch continued the work
1148 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

which was completed in 1829. Between 1851 and 1867 extensive additions were
made by Thomas Ustick Walter (1804-88) who was responsible for the flanking
wings and great dome over the central rotunda; the latter, replacing an earlier
Pantheon-like dome, was constructed largely of cast iron and has an internal
diameter of 98 ft and a total height of 222 ft.
The University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va. (1817-26), was designed by
Thomas Jefferson with the assistance of Thornton and Latrobe as an ‘academical
village’. Set in the plain overlooked by Jefferson’s own home, Monticello (p. 1143),
it established a pattern followed by other later American universities in their campus
layouts. The plan consists of a wide, rectangular, tree-lined open space, on each of
the longer sides of which are ranged five double-storeyed pavilions with classical,
columned porticoes. These house teaching staff and lecture rooms and are linked
to one another by low colonnades from which open the students’ rooms. The
central space is terminated at one end by the university library (modelled on the
Roman Pantheon), burned down in the early part of the present century and rebuilt
by Messrs. McKim, Mead and White. Behind the ranges of teaching and living
accommodation and separated from them by gardens, accommodation was provided
for the slaves whom the students brought to the university as personal servants.
Each of the buildings in the scheme was intended to illustrate some famous
classical work, and thus provide architectural exemplars to the students.
Founders’ Hall, Girard College, Philadelphia, Pa. (1833-47) by T. U.
Walter, is in the form of a giant, peripteral octastyle Corinthian temple, and in the
grandeur of its conception is an important monument of the Greek Revival in
America.
The County Record Office, Charleston, S.C. (1822-3), the Patent Office
(1836-40) and the Treasury Building (1836-42), Washington, D.C. by Robert
Mills (1781-1855) were all designed as ‘fire-proof’ buildings, making extensive use
of vaulted construction. Like most work by Mills, they are characterized by their
constructional ingenuity and vigorous and highly personal interpretation of the
Greek style.
City Prison (The Tombs), New York (1838) by John Haviland (1792-1852)
was in the Egyptian style, while the same architect’s Eastern State Penitentiary,
Philadelphia, Pa. (1821-35), planned with radiating cell blocks, was regarded in
its day as a model prison.
Washington Monument, Washington, D.C. (1836-84), a slender 555 ft high
obelisk in white granite, designed by Robert Mills as a monument to the great
general of the War of Independence, was when completed the highest structure
in the world.
The Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. (1847-55), by James
Renwick Jr., is a romantic and picturesque structure in the Norman style.
University College, Toronto, Ontario (1856-8) by W. C. Cumberland (1821-
1881) is an essay in the Romanesque style comparable with the Smithsonian Institu-
tion.
The National Academy of Design, New York (1862-5) (p. 1149¢), by P. B.
Wight (1838-1925), Venetian Gothic in style and making full use of polychrome
masonry patterning, shows the influence of the writings of John Ruskin.
The Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts, Philadelphia, Penn. (1871-
1876) by Frank Furness (1839-1912), a highly individualistic building, makes
imaginative use of forms of diverse stylistic origin and polychromatic masonry. Its
architect is of particular interest for he employed the young Louis Sullivan as an
assistant in his office in Chestnut Street, Philadelphia. The Provident Trust Com-
pany Building, Philadelphia (1879) is another characteristic building by Furness.
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1149

ee »-
4, The Lincoln Memorial, Washington, B. The Chapel, U.S. Military Academy, West
D.C. (1911-22). See p. 1151 Point, New York (1904). See p. 1151

_ The National Academy of Design, New Dp. The Temple of Scottish Rite, Washington,
York (1862-5). See p. 1148 D.C. (1916). See p. 1151

E. The Public Library, Boston, Massachusetts (1887-93). See p. 1151

 1150 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

A. Merchants’ Exchange, Philadelphia (Piel: Barlheee Sai Building, Buffalo

See p. 1152 New York (1904-5). See p. 1155

ian.
ist
Pe
waar
ee
‘tap
ue
8

c. The Second Leiter Building, Chicago (1889-90). Dp. The Schlesinger-Mayer Store
See p. 1155 Chicago (1899-1904). See p. 1155

&

mS
ND

YS

ia

VE |
E. The Auditorium Building, Chicsze erkseays F. Wainwright Building, S.
See p. 1152 Louis, Missouri (1890-1).
See p. 1155
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS L151
Dominion Parliament Buildings, Ottawa, Ontario (1861-7) (p. 1275), by
Thomas Fuller (1822-98), an English architect who moved to Canada in 1 856, and F.
W. Stent, provided a superb example of Victorian Gothic with an ebullient silhouette
of towers, pinnacles and crestings. Most of the original buildings were destroyed by
fire in 1916 and the present structure (largely based on the original but lacking
much of its decorative richness) and the soaring neo-Gothic Peace Tower (1919-)
were designed by J. A. Pearson (1867-1940) and J. O. Marchand (1873-1936).
The City Hall, Philadelphia, Pa. (1874-1901) (p. 11468), by John McArthur
(1823-90), in the French Second Empiré style (p. 1063), provides an example of
fashions prevailing in the late nineteenth century. Its central tower (512 ft) is
crowned by a 37 ft-high bronze statue of William Penn, the founder of the city.
The Public Library, Boston, Mass. (1887-93) (p. 1149E) by McKim, Mead
and White is a beautifully detailed building, representative of the best in the
academic stream of late nineteenth and early twentieth-century architecture in
America. Elevationally it is based on the Library of S. Geneviéve, Paris, (1843-50)
(p. 1085) by Henri Labrouste.
The Public Library, New York, (1897-1910) by J. M. Carrére (1859-1911) and
Thomas Hastings (1860-1929) is also noteworthy as another example of academic
Classical architecture.
The Lincoln Memorial, Washington, D.C. (1911-22) (p. 1149A), by Henry
Bacon (1866-1924), is in the form of an unpedimented Greek Doric peripteral
temple, set on a high podium and surmounted by a simple attic. Executed in white
marble, its detail is superlatively refined and in its scholarship and execution marks
a peak in academic architecture.
The Temple of Scottish Rite, Washington, D.C. (—1916) (p. 1149D), a masonic
temple designed by John Russell Pope (1874-1937), is in the same tradition as the
Lincoln Memorial. Externally, it takes the form of a reconstruction of the Mauso-
leum at Halicarnassus (p. 148).
The Chapel (p. 11498) and Post Headquarters, U.S. Military Academy,
West Point, N.Y. (1904—), romantically sited on a steep escarpment overlooking the
Hudson River, are the work of Cram, Goodhue and Ferguson, and provide examples
of academic architecture in the Gothic style.
The Allegheny County Courthouse and Gaol, Pittsburgh, Pa. (1884-7), by
H. H. Richardson, is a fine and vigorous piece of work which, despite its overtly
Romanesque character, is indicative of the virility of a rising movement. The
building relies largely on the inherent qualities of the materials in which it is
constructed and these are exploited in an imaginative yet highly disciplined manner,
particularly the great, rock-faced slabs of granite forming the jail walls.
The City Hall, Toronto, Ontario (1890) by E. J. Lennox (1856-1933) has a
sturdy, Romanesque character and owes much to the work of H. H. Richardson,
particularly his Allegheny County Court House, Pittsburgh (above).

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS

The Second Bank of the U.S. (Old Customs House), Philadelphia, Pa.
(1817-24) by W. Strickland, carried out in brick and white Pennsylvanian marble,
was the result of an open architectural competition. With octastyle Doric porticoes to
the front and rear, modelled on those of the Athenian Parthenon (p. 119), the building
is rectangular in plan. Internally the central banking hall, with its fine barrel-
vaulted ceiling springing from Ionic colonnades, is particularly fine.
The Providence Arcade, Providence, R.I. (1828), by James Bucklin (1801-90)
and Russell Warren (1783-1860), provides, as in European arcades, a covered
avenue for business premises, and is entered from either end through superbly
1152 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

detailed Ionic columnar screens carried out in granite. Internally the arcade is
lighted by skylights, while the first-floor premises are entered from elegant iron
balconies.
Merchants’ Exchange, Philadelphia, Pa. (1832-4) (p. 1150A), by William
Strickland, is in the Greek Revival style and is noteworthy for the grand, apsidal
treatment of its rear elevation, enriched externally by a screen of Corinthian columns
rising from first-floor level through two storeys, and crowned by a cupola based on
the Choragic Monument of Lysicrates, Athens (p. 139).
The Farmers’ and Mechanics’ Bank, Pottsville, Pa. (1830), by John
Haviland, is important since it was probably the first building in America to make
use of a cast-iron facade. Here iron sheets, moulded to simulate masonry, were
fixed to a brick backing; but later pre-fabricated iron units were to be used for
complete structures.
James Bogardus (1800-74) played an important part in the development of this
type of construction, which he employed in many buildings, among them his own
factory, New York (1848-9); Laing Stores, New York (1849); and Harper Bros.
Printing Works, New York (1854). He also put forward an adventurous scheme
for the New York Exhibition Building (1853) but this was not realized. Other
buildings using the same constructional technique were the Penn Mutual Life
Insurance Building, Philadelphia, Pa. (1850-1) by G. P. Cummings, and some
particularly fine examples in the dock area of S. Louis, Mo. (c. 1850-c. 1880)
(p. 11534).
The A. T. Stewart Store (later Wanamaker’s Store), New York, N.Y. (1862;
burned 1956) by John Kellum (1807-71), was another noteworthy example of
iron construction using pre-fabricated units. Elevationally the building was made
up of repeated bays, each of its five floors being treated as a ‘Renaissance’ arcade or,
in the case of the ground floor, colonnade. Internally the building was framed with
iron stanchions (cast in the form of Classical columns) and girders.
The Montauk Building, Chicago, Ill. (1881-2), by D. H. Burnham (1846-
1912) and J. W. Root (1850-91), the first of a series of extremely important build-
ings in Chicago, made use of spread foundations to carry its ten-storey load-bearing
walls and heralded the advent of the sky-scraper.
The Home Insurance Co. Office Building, Chicago, Ill. (1883-5) by W.
Le B. Jenney (1832-1907) and W. B. Mundie (1893-1939), a ten-storey building,
was the first in Chicago to make use of a metal skeleton carrying the walls as
opposed to load-bearing walls.
The Marshall Field Wholesale Warehouse, Chicago, III. (1885-7) (p. 1170),
by H. H. Richardson, had seven storeys and was of load-bearing wall construc-
tion. A remarkably powerful design, with its great arched openings and the vigorous
texture of its masonry, it had considerable influence on later buildings in Chicago
and elsewhere.
The Tacoma Building, Chicago, Ill. (1887-8) by W. Holabird (1854-1923)
and M. Roche (1855-1927) also had its external walls carried by a metal skeleton.
The Auditorium Building, Chicago, Ill. (1886-9) (p. 1150E) by Dankmar
Adler (1844-1900) and Louis Sullivan (1856-1924) combines an opera house with
hotel and office accommodation and owes much of its external character to Richard-
son’s Marshall Field Warehouse (p. 1170). Ten storeys high, it is of load-bearing
wall construction built on spread foundations. Settlement has occurred to one side
of the structure, in the tower which rises nearly 100 ft higher than the main build-
ing. Internally, the details are of a high order, many showing a Byzantine character
and some probably designed by Frank Lloyd Wright, who entered Sullivan’s
office in 1887 as a draughtsman.
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1153

A. Cast-iron fagade, S. B. The Gage Building, Chicago (right) (1898-9).

Louis, Missouri (c. 1850). See p. 1155
See p. 1152

z
: ~~
on
i
t
|

-
ae eet : ~

c. The Monadnock
Building, Chicago
ARSBAAS.
(1891). See p. 1155 BARBERS:

er
ima
lant
Eli
“att
teatententaalas.

s
ina
mn

D. The Reliance Building, E. Woolworth Building, New York (1911-13).

Chicago (1890-4). See p. 1155
See p. 1155
1154 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

B. Pennsylvania Railroad Station, New York c. Empire State Building, New

(1906-10) :main concourse. See p. 1156 York (1930-2). See p. 1156
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1155

The Monadnock Building, Chicago, Ill. (1891-) (p. 1153C) by Burnham and
Root has sixteen storeys and is of load-bearing wall construction. The building
derives distinction from the simplicity of its elevational treatment and was the last
tall building in Chicago for which load-bearing walls were employed.
The Second Leiter Building, Chicago, III. (1889-90) (p. 1150C) (now occupied
by Messrs. Sears Roebuck) by W. Le B. Jenney, is an eight-storey metal-framed
building with a simple and effective elevational treatment, the stone facade reading
as a sheath over the internal metal structure.
The Reliance Building, Chicago, Ill. (1890; extended 1894) (p. 1153D), by
Burnham and Root, was originally built as a four-storeyed structure but was later
extended to thirteen floors. The terra-cotta facing to the metal frame was reduced
to a minimum and in its simple yet carefully-detailed elevation the building marks
an important advance in sky-scraper design.
The Gage Building, Chicago, Ill. (1898-9) (p. 1153B) by Louis Sullivan and
Holabird and Roche, is a three-bay, eight-storey framed structure, and fore-
shadows the elevational treatment of the Schlesinger-Mayer Store.
The Schlesinger-Mayer Store (now Carson, Pirie, Scott and Co.), Chicago,
Ill. (1899-1904) (p. 1150D) by Louis Sullivan, was perhaps the architect’s crowning
achievement. Originally a nine-storey structure, a twelve-storey section was added
in 1903-4 and further additions were made in 1906 by D. H. Burnham, following
Sullivan’s original design. The building was originally crowned by a rich over-
hanging cornice (recently removed). The white terra-cotta facing to the building’s
steel frame truthfully follows its structure, and horizontal lines are emphasized.
The ground and first floors have cast-iron friezes richly decorated in low relief,
providing first-rate examples of Sullivan’s decorative work, to some extent sug-
gestive of European Art Nouveau.
The Wainwright Building, S. Louis, Mo. (1890-1) (p. I1150F) by Louis Sul-
livan, a ten-storey steel-framed building, provided an excellent answer to the eleva-
tion problem of the sky-scraper. Vertical members of the frame are emphasized
externally as brick piers, and the building is capped by a deep, richly decorated
frieze, pierced by circular windows lighting the top floor, while the recessed panels
between floors are similarly decorated.
The Guaranty (now Prudential) Building, Buffalo, N.Y. (1894-5), also by
Adler and Sullivan is similar in general character to the Wainwright Building but
rises through thirteen floors and is faced externally in terra-cotta.
The Larkin Soap Co. Building, Buffalo, N.Y. (1904-5: destroyed) (p. I150B),
by Frank Lloyd Wright, was designed around a great central circulation court, lit
from the roof and sides by windows sealed from noise and dirt. Offices were
approached from galleries around the court, borne on brick piers. Externally, the
building was characterized by the simplicity and scale of its massing which relied
entirely on the relation of a few clearly articulated forms.
The National Farmers’ Bank, Owatonna, Minnesota (1907-8), a virile and
characteristic building by Louis Sullivan, is particularly noteworthy for its inventive
decorative detail and the bold geometry of its simple but powerful forms.
The Woolworth Building, New York (1911-13) (p. 1153E), by Cass Gilbert
(1859-1934), 792 ft high with fifty-two storeys, was carried out in the Gothic style.
It is an important landmark in the story of high building.
Soon after the completion of the Woolworth Building, the New York City Zoning
Ordinance (1916) became law. This had a profound effect on the form of New York
sky-scrapers which, for reasons of light and ventilation, were now required to have
certain minimum set-backs, related to their height. The effects of the ordinance can
be seen in J. M. Howell’s (b. 1868) Panhellenic House (—1928), with 27 storeys,
20 H.O.A,
1156 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

and more clearly in the Empire State Building (1930-2) (p. 1154C) by Shreve,
Lamb and Harmon, which rises through 85 storeys and is the highest office block
in the world.
Later Chicago buildings to be noted include: Tribune Tower (1923-5) a
newspaper office block by J. M. Howells (b. 1868) and Raymond Hood (1881-
1934). In the Gothic style, the sky-scraper was the result of an architectural
competition in which Eliel Saarinen and Walter Gropius also took part. Palmolive
Building(1929) and 333 North Michigan Avenue (1928) are both by Holabird and
Root and provide interesting examples of Chicago sky-scrapers of the 1920’s.
Rockefeller Centre, New York (1931-9) (p. 11544) by Henry Hofmeister, H.
W. Corbett and Raymond Hood in collaboration with others, is a complex of build-
ings set amid a series of related open spaces. The focus of the centre is the R.C.A.
Building, 850 ft high with 70 storeys, a sheer slab-like structure with its vertical
lines strongly emphasized. Around it are grouped 13 lesser buildings, including the
Time and Life Building (36 storeys); International Building (41 storeys) and a
six-storey garage.
Among numerous examples of railway stations, the following are particularly
important: Grand Central Station, New York (1903-13), by Reed and Stem
(later replaced by Warren and Wetmore), provides a fine example of American
academic architecture, particularly in its great concourse. Based on antique
Roman sources, it shows the influence of the Ecole des Beaux-Arts. Pennsyl-
vania Railroad Station, New York (1906-10) (p. 1154B) by McKim, Mead and
White, is in the same tradition. Overtly based on Roman ‘thermae’ designs, its
concourse, both in scale and detail, recalls the central hall of the Baths of Caracalla,
Rome (p. 204D).
The Hallidie Building, San Francisco, California (1918) by W. J. Polk (1867-
1924) (p. 1171) was remarkably prophetic of techniques to become widely used 4o
years later. The main facade is in the form of a great, glass ‘curtain’, broken only by
the grid of the horizontal and vertical glazing members and enriched at its crown
and base by bands of intricate, fretted metal-work. Behind and free from the glass
‘curtain’, rise the main structural supports of the building.

MODERN ARCHITECTURE
DOMESTIC BUILDINGS
Falling Water, Pa. (1936-7) (p. 1119) by Frank Lloyd Wright is constructed of
stone and reinforced concrete. The free plan makes good use of level changes and
in its woodland site, its structure partly cantilevered over a waterfall, the house
presents a superbly balanced composition of rectilinear masses. Friedman House,
Pleasantville, N.Y. (1948-9), by the same architect, is based in plan on circular
forms and built mainly in rubble walling, with mushroom-like concrete roofs over
the circular elements. Circular plan forms are used also in the same architect’s
Jacobs House, Middleton, Wisconsin (1948) and the David J. Wright House,
nr. Phoenix, Arizona (1952).
Farnsworth House, nr. Plano, Ill. (1950) (p. 1157A), by Ludwig Mies van der
Rohe, is remarkable for the simplicity of its form and the precision of its detail. The
plan of this flat-roofed, single-storey building is rectangular with a central core
(comprising bathrooms, heating plant and a fire-place) around which space flows
freely, the various areas for eating, sleeping, etc. being indicated simply by parti-
tions and fittings which do not connect with the ceiling. Structurally the house is
a cage of white-painted welded steel (with large areas glazed in plate glass) carried
ona concrete slab, lifted above the ground on low supports.
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1157

B. Chemistry Building, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago (1946).

See p. I159
1158 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS
acs

ts
P
se
——
—

ai ER
ES
ON
Ma
)

i
i

tes
° w Blemd
me
eT
Te
ar

aggeetgenee.Lie
PT Thy| feet ta

aa Sean

Nos. 845-60 Lake Shore Drive, Chicago (1949-51). See opposite page
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1159
Nos. 845-860 Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, Ill. (1949-51) (p. 1158), two 26-
storey blocks of flats by Mies van der Rohe, are characteristic examples of his work.
Like great glazed cages of steel, lifted from the ground on ‘pilotis’ at entrance level,
the services, lifts, etc., are contained in a central core, thus permitting completely
glazed elevations. The designs rely on the careful proportioning of the rectangular
grid formed by vertical and horizontal structural steel members and refinement of
detail. Between the main vertical structural members, intermediate uncased steel
I-sections are introduced, running the height of the building and stiffening the
structure.
Promontory Apartments, Chicago, III. (1949), also by Mies van der Rohe,
are 22 storeys high and of reinforced concrete construction, vertical structural
members being emphasized externally. The plan is U-shaped and consists of two
self-sufficient blocks, each with its own lifts and staircase, joined as one. The detail
is severe but carefully considered.
Among numerous examples of first-rate domestic work, the following are
particularly noteworthy: Houses at Wayland, Mass. (1940) and Lincoln, Mass.
(1938) by Walter Gropius (p. 1127) and Marcel Breuer (b. 1902); work by Richard
Neutra (b. 1892); Boissonas House, New Canaan, Conn. (1955-6) and R. S.
Davis House, Wayzata, Minnesota (1954) by Philip Johnson (b. 1906).
Among interesting examples of domestic architecture in South America are:
Parque Guinle Flats, Rio de Janeiro (1948-54) by Lucio Costa (b. 1902), the
designer of Brasilia, the new Brazilian city; and blocks of flats (1954) in the Cerro
Piloto Housing Estate, Caracas, Venezuela, by Guido Bermudez. Built of
reinforced concrete and making good use of colour, in the liveliness of their concep-
tion these represent characteristic examples of modern South American design.

RELIGIOUS AND EDUCATIONAL BUILDINGS

Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, Ill. (1939-) (p. 11578). In 1939, a year
after settling in the U.S., Mies van der Rohe was commissioned to design an
entire campus layout together with its buildings. Work is still progressing, but of
the 24 buildings making up the scheme many have been completed, including
Crown Hall, housing the School of Architecture, (1956); Administration
Building (1944); Chemical Engineering and Metallurgy Building (1949);
Mineral and Metal Research Building (1943); the Alumni Memorial Hall
(1946) and the Chemistry Building (1946) (p. 1157B). Like all Mies van der
Rohe’s work, the beauty of these buildings lies in their proportions, refined and
appropriate detail and first-rate craftsmanship. Exposed structural steel (painted
black), large areas of glass reflecting the trees and landscaping of the campus, and
a buff-coloured brick are the basic materials used in the scheme. Internal planning
is generally open, particularly in the Alumni Memorial Hall and Crown Hall, the
main floor of the latter being completely unimpeded by walls or partitions.
Baker House (Dormitory Block), Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, Mass. (1947-9), by Alvar Aalto (p. 1127), has a serpentine plan and
is carried out in a rich, red brick, the walls punched with simple but finely-detailed
windows on its six residential floors. Overlooking the Charles River, it is a particu-
larly delightful building.
The Graduate Centre, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. (1949-50)
(p. 1161B), by Walter Gropius and his associates, is a fine and characteristic example
of the former’s work. Seven dormitories, housing altogether some 300 students, and
the Commons Building form the scheme which, although basically in two loose
courts, is informal in layout and most attractively landscaped. The higher dormitory
buildings have reinforced concrete frames and the predominant facing material is a
1160 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

yellowish brick. Horizontal lines are emphasized, particularly in the Commons

Building the interior of which is enriched with works by Hans Arp and others.
The Auditorium Building, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, Mass. (1952-5) (p. 1253), by Eero Saarinen (b. 1910) is noteworthy
for its great shell-concrete roof, springing from the ground at three points like a
billowing sail, the three elevations being glazed up to the soffit of the shell.
University City, Mexico (1950-) (p. I161A) is a vast complex of buildings
mainly constructed in reinforced concrete. Particularly notable are the Olympic
Stadium (1951-2) by A. P. Salacios (b. 1909) and others, and the Central Library
(1951-3) by Juan O’Gorman and others. The latter is dominated by a massive tower
housing the library stacks and covered in brilliant mosaic, incorporating decorative
and symbolic devices from the pre-Columbian civilizations of Mexico.
University City, Rio de Janeiro, was initially planned by Le Corbusier in 1936;
work is progressing under Jorge Moreira (b. 1904).
The Church of Sao Francisco, Pampulha, Brazil (1943) (p. 1161C), by Oscar
Niemeyer (b. 1901), an example of (perhaps excessive) virtuosity in reinforced con-
crete, is roofed by a series of concrete vaults. Its flank walls are faced with murals in
‘azulejos’ and to one side there is a concrete bell-tower, tapering towards its base.
The Chapel, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, Ill. (1950), by Mies
van der Rohe, is a simple, box-like structure in black-painted steel and buff
brick, its west end entirely glazed.
Marial Chapel, Lac Bouchette, Quebec (1952) by Henri Tremblay is intended
to form part of a larger church. Billowing shell-concrete vaults are used in interest-
ing juxtaposition to solid rubble walls.
The Chapel, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass.
(1954-5), by Eero Saarinen, is in the form of a cylinder of beautifully-laid, rich
red brick rising on low arches from a shallow pool, through which diffused and
flickering light enters the building. In addition, partially-baffled light enters from
above, producing a most effective atmosphere.

COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND GOVERNMENTAL BUILDINGS

The Johnson Wax Co. Buildings, Racine, Wis. (1936-49) (p. 1162A) by Frank
Lloyd Wright, consist of two main units, the Administration Building (1936-9)
and the Laboratory Tower (1946-9). Carried out principally in red brick, the
buildings are characterized by the plasticity of their forms, generated by the curvi-
linear plan shapes. The interior of the Administration Building presents a forest of
reinforced-concrete mushroom columns, with elegant shafts tapering towards bases
set in steel shoes and surmounted by wide, circular concrete discs. The interstices
between the discs are glazed with glass tubes laid in patterns through which light
filters, providing an unusually dramatic effect. The Laboratory Tower is constructed
on what Wright called the ‘tap-root’ principle, a massive concrete core with deep
foundations providing a structural spine for the building and anchorage for the
floors which are cantilevered from it. The external walls carried by the floors are
merely screens giving protection from the elements: they consist of brick and
glazing (made up from horizontal glass tubes) which wrap around the building in
wide alternating bands.
The General Motors Technical Institute, Warren, Michigan (1946-55)
(p. 1162B), by Eliel Saarinen (p. 1068) and his son, Eero Saarinen, a complex of
twenty-five laboratory and other technical buildings, grouped about a formal lake, is
comparable with the work of Mies van der Rohe in the clear-cut precision of its
forms. Stainless steel, black oxidized aluminium, glass and brightly-coloured glazed
brick are used in the buildings, which admirably express their functions.
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS II61

ey E3 i

A. University City, Mexico : Central Library (1951-3). See opposite page

B. The Graduate Centre, Harvard University, Cambridge,

Massachusetts (1949-50). See p. I159

c. Sao Francisco, Pampulha (1943). See opposite page

1162 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

A. The Johnson Wax Buildings, Racine, Wisconsin (1936-49). See p. 1160

B. General Motors Technical Institute, Warren, Michigan (1946-55).

See p. 1160
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1163

Lever House, New York (1952) (p. 1165c) by Gordon Bunshaft (b. 1909) of the
firm of Skidmore, Owings and Merrill, is a fine example of a modern office block.
Completely sheathed in glass and stainless steel curtain-walling, a sheer slab block
rises from a low structure mounted on pilotis, through which one enters a small
patio, a delightful oasis in busy Park Avenue.
The Seagram Building, New York (1956-8), by Mies van der Rohe and Philip
Johnson, is another notable sky-scraper office block, clad externally in glass and
bronze.
The Alcoa Building, Pittsburgh, Pa. (1952), by W. K. Harrison (1895-) and
Max Abramovitz (1908-), is an instance in which the structural frame of the sky-
scraper is sheathed in pre-fabricated, pressed aluminium panels with relatively
small window areas.
The United Nations Headquarters, New York, (1947-50) (p. I1I165A), was
designed with the advice of an international committee including Le Corbusier,
Oscar Niemeyer and Sir Howard Robertson, with Harrison and Abramovitz of
New York as executive architects. Sited by the East River, the scheme is dominated
by the towering slab block of the Secretariat Building which, with its narrow end
walls rising like sheer white cliffs and its longer sides clad in glass curtain walling,
has had considerable influence on subsequent high buildings throughout the world.
The Ministry of Education and Health, Rio de Janeiro (1937-42) (p. 1165B),
was designed by Lucio Costa (b. 1902) and Oscar Niemeyer (b. 1901) with Le
Corbusier as consultant. A sky-scraper in reinforced concrete borne on pilotis, the
deep reveals of the building’s vertical structural members, aided by horizontal
louvres, control sunlight and provide an example of the influence of climate on
modern architecture.
The Edificio Polar, Caracas, Venezuela (1953-4), by M. Vegas Pacheco (b.
1926) and J. M. Galia, has a fifteen-storey tower rising above a lower structure and
shows strong influence of the work of Mies van der Rohe.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS
Indigenous Phase. Normally rectangular, although there are circular examples in
Bolivia (p. 1131) and at Chichen Itza (p. 1128), plans were largely controlled by
roofing spans (p. 1130A). The central courtyard or ‘patio’ was a common feature in
Mexico and Central America for larger domestic work (p. 1129F).
Colonial Phase. Plans followed prototypes in the homeland of the settlers of a
particular area. In Latin America the patio, often surrounded by arcaded covered
walks, was normal in monastic, collegiate and large domestic buildings (p. 1134C)
and arcaded loggias were sometimes used for entrances, etc. (p. 1134A). Seventeenth-
century houses in New England followed plans found in English vernacular work
of the same period (p. 11334) while later, in the eighteenth century, plans conformed
to Palladian principles (Brandon, p. 1132) or were based on English Georgian
examples (p. 1133C), with modifications, in the way of open loggias and similar
features, occasioned by climate (p. 1141). In the southern part of North America
colonnaded verandahs were popular—sometimes on both storeys of a building (p.
I133D) and sometimes encircling a building on all sides (p. 1133B).
National Phase. For important buildings in Latin America the principles of the
Ecole des Beaux-Arts were usually followed, since most major works were carried
out by either French architects or by architects trained in France (p. 1126). In
North America, there was a general acceptance of Neo-Classic plan forms (p. 1146A)
but Palladian principles were adhered to, in some cases until quite late in the nine-
teenth century. During the last three decades of the nineteenth century, more
1164 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

informal, ‘open’ planning developed, particularly in domestic work (p. 1142D), while
the acceptance of the metal frame for multi-storeyed buildings permitted greater
freedom in the plan arrangements of office and similar buildings (p. I150C).
Modern Architecture. With the development of steel and reinforced-concrete con-
struction and the vast spans which it is now possible to achieve, structure is no longer
as important a controlling factor as in the past. It is possible to roof large buildings
with one unbroken span (p. 1161¢). For multi-cellular buildings, a steel or rein-
forced-concrete frame is general, the plan on each floor being controlled merely by
the constructional grid (p. 1165). Framed buildings can be raised completely from
the ground on ‘pilotis’, thus providing the equivalent of a covered loggia at ground
level (p. 1158), while flat roofs can be utilized as roof gardens or as recreation spaces.
By incorporating all services—lifts, stairs, plumbing, heating equipment, etc.—
within a central core, it is now possible to free external walls from the elevational
restrictions imposed in earlier times. This form of planning has been widely adopted,
not only for multi-storeyed buildings (p. 1158) but also for comparatively small
domestic work (p. 11574).

WALLS
Indigenous Phase. In Peru important buildings and defensive walls were con-
structed of polygonal and coursed masonry of a high standard (p. 1130B). In Mexico
and Central America, in the construction of the great truncated pyramids, lime-
stone slabs, often carved and sometimes plastered, were used as a facing to a rubble
and adobe brick core (p. 1129D). Less important buildings were constructed of
adobe brick and/or timber (p. 11304).
Colonial Phase. In Latin America the existing stone and adobe traditions were
continued and developed by the Spaniards. Coloured, glazed tiles were a popular
facing material (p. 1134F), while colour-wash on stucco was also used, the latter
technique finding particular favour with the Portuguese in Brazil (p. 1134B). Wall-
treatments generally followed fashions in Spain and Portugal.
In North America weather-boarding on heavy timber framing was used in
seventeenth-century colonial work (p. 1133A), but a fine brick-building tradition
developed in Virginia and spread along the eastern seaboard (p. 1133E) although
timber building remained popular (steeple, p. 1137B). In the seventeenth century
there are instances of work related to Jacobean prototypes (p. 1133E) while in the
eighteenth century, in the English colonies, facades were almost always Georgian
in character (p. I133C).
National Phase. Wall treatments were dictated by the style adopted for a particu-
lar building—Greek, Egyptian, Gothic, Italian Renaissance, etc.—but materials
provided an important modifying influence. In their adaptation to timber buildings,
the historical styles acquired a new and often specifically ‘American’ character;
while stylistic elements were retained, details were simplified as the limitations of
materials and craftsmanship demanded. For the cast-iron facades popular in mid-
nineteenth-century America, the Italian Renaissance style was frequently used,
since this could be readily adapted to a repetitive bay-system, essential for the
economic casting of iron units (p. 115§3A).
In the latter part of the nineteenth century, the intrinsic qualities of walling
materials tended to be exploited and, in some cases, buildings rely on this rather
than eclectic detail for their character (p. 1150F). With the development of metal-
frame construction, the wall as such tended to disappear, to be replaced sometimes
by piers expressing the vertical members of the frame (p. 1153B) and sometimes by
an elevational grid following the lines of the structural skeleton (p. 1153D), in both
cases with light, non-load-bearing panels between the structural members.
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1165

\Weetteniemneinermpniprties

A. The United Nations Headquarters, 3 New York (1947-50): the Secretariat Block.
See p. 1163
‘WOU R
BSR
LEEPE
LETHE TEMSPB
-
)

\
Pid Lilethd

TI CSE
EEE
honeLett
es
eet tia lod

SLT
EDT ESEDED
TE
erti

didi adolf IE
Veena
PT,
TBE FH '
4

<—
:

B. The Ministry of Education and Health, c. Lever House, New York (1952).
Rio de Janeiro (1937-42). See p. 1163 See p. 1163
 1166 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

Modern Architecture. Technological developments have made it possible for the

‘wall’ to become merely a skin of glass, sheet-metal or similar material, protecting
the structure and the inside of the building from the elements but playing no part
in the stability of the building (p. 1165c). In some cases floors are cantilevered out
from the line of the structural supports and the wall becomes a screen, carried
separately on each projecting floor (p. 1162A). Although the structural role of the
wall has altered radically, traditional walling methods are still used for decorative
effect and a slab of brickwork or rubble walling is sometimes introduced into a
modern building to provide an accent in its elevational design.
OPENINGS
Indigenous Phase. Openings were kept to a minimum and were invariably
square-headed, spanned either by timber or stone lintels (p. 1129). Sometimes
stone lintels were carved (p. I1129C, E).
Colonial Phase. Generally openings followed the pattern of those in the homeland
of the colonizers, and both arched and square-headed forms were used. In Spanish
colonial work, Gothic, Neo-Mudéjar, Renaissance and Baroque treatments can be
found (p. 1134). As in the Iberian peninsula, decorative iron grilles were some-
times incorporated (p. 1134F). In English colonial work, for churches and similar
buildings, arched windows were general (p. 1137B, D, E) and there is an example of
the use of Gothic forms in a seventeenth-century Virginian church (p. 1137C). In
domestic work, seventeenth-century examples have leaded casement windows, but
in the eighteenth century the typical ‘double-square’ Georgian sliding-sash window
with glazing bars became usual (p. 1133D). In the late eighteenth century there are
examples of the use of the pointed arch for windows, a development of the current
English “Gothick’ fashion (p. 875). For doorways, typical Georgian treatments are
found and a pediment, often supported byflanking pilasters, wasan accepted means of
enrichment to entrances (p. 1133C). A classical portico, often of two storeys (p. _
1133D), was a common feature for larger houses in the south-eastern part of North
America. Sometimes derived from Palladian prototypes, this feature developed
specifically American associations and its use continued well into the nineteenth
century (p. I142B).
National Phase. The design of openings was dictated by the style adopted for a
particular building. In the early part of the nineteenth century, windows often
continued the Georgian tradition, since there were not always convenient prece-
dents in the styles adopted (p. 1150A). In the later decades of the century with the
Romanesque Revival, arched openings, often of great power, were used (p. 1170),
but for framed buildings, square-headed openings provided the most logical
solution (p. I153B, D).
Modern Architecture, With structural developments and advances in glass manu-
facture, it is no longer always possible to assess buildings in terms of ‘solid and
void’, and a complete elevation may now be glazed (p. 1165). Generally openings
are rectangular and rely for their effect almost entirely upon their proportions (p.
11578). With air-conditioning and modern artificial lighting techniques, if required,
a building may be windowless, or conversely its facades may be entirely of glass
with entrance doors in the same material.
ROOFS
Indigenous Phase. Timber logs, sometimes plastered with adobe, were used, as
was the corbelled vault. Spans were limited to about 20 ft and roofs were generally
flat, often being used as terraces (p. 1130A). Pitched roofs covered in thatch were
employed for peasant dwellings in Aztec Mexico.
Colonial Phase. While existing local techniques were adopted and developed, the
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1167
Spanish and Portuguese also introduced their own methods of roofing. The Gothic
vault (p. 1135), the dome (p. 11348), and the pitched roof are all found in colonial
Latin America. In North America the pitched roof was in general use. In seven-
teenth-century English work, roofs were normally gabled and of a steep pitch
(p. 1133A) but during the eighteenth century lower pitches became popular. The
hipped roof seems to have been more common than the gabled roof in the eigh-
teenth century (partly because it was more economical) and sometimes the roof was
truncated to form a balustraded roof-deck (p. 1132). Where gables were built, they
were often treated as classical pediments (p. 1133D). In Dutch colonial work, the
mansard (or gambrel) roof was used (p. 1132). For churches and civic buildings in
the English colonies, steeples and cupolas in the manner of Wren and Gibbs were
common (p. 1137B). Roofs were frequently punctuated by dormer windows (p. 1133C).
National Phase. As with other features, the forms of roofs were largely dictated
by the styles employed for buildings. Tiles, wood shingles, lead and asphalt were all
used as coverings. Although Gothic Revival buildings required a steeply-pitched
roof for reasons of stylistic character, broadly speaking, American architects seem to
have favoured a lower pitch wherever this could be used. At the end of the nine-
teenth century this apparently inherent bias towards the low pitch became mani-
fest with great power and an infusion of oriental character in the work of Frank
Lloyd Wright (p. 1142E). The development of the metal frame encouraged the
acceptance of the flat roof (p. I1153B, D), although, throughout the century, minor
structures (generally in timber) employed, for reasons of economy, a flat or mono-
pitch roof, an upstanding timber facade providing a parapet on the main elevations.
Modern Architecture. Roofs can take a wide variety of forms. The low-pitched
roof, in the manner of Frank Lloyd Wright, is still popular in the U.S.A. for
domestic work. Although for large steel- or reinforced-concrete-framed buildings
the flat roof is generally adopted, for buildings like churches and auditoria more
plastic forms find favour (p. I161C).

COLUMNS
Indigenous Phase. Stone and timber columns were used in order to reduce roofing
spans, but architecture of this phase is essentially of a mass-wall type rather than
columnar (p. 1129).
Colonial Phase. In the Latin-American colonies columns were based on European
prototypes generally (p. 1134), although there are examples which show a curious
intermingling of native and Spanish features (p. 1138A). In North America,
columns were based on prototypes in England, Palladian exemplars or copied from
eighteenth-century English architectural pattern-books (p. 1133C, D).
National Phase. The design of columns was, of course, directly related to the style
of a building, and the architect was assisted by an increasing number of publications
giving details not only of the Classical Orders, but of Gothic, Egyptian and
Muslim architecture. The use of cast-iron tended to affect the proportions of
columns, and although iron columns were frequently enriched with Greek, Roman
and Renaissance capitals and bases, they seldom had any relation to the proportions
of their prototypes (p. 1153A). In the work of the Academic stream towards the close
of the National Phase, considerable care was taken with the design of columns
which followed as closely as possible their historical sources (p. 1149A, D). In the
work of Richardson and his followers, although broadly speaking Romanesque in
character, considerable inventiveness was often displayed in the design of capitals,
etc. (p. 11424).
Modern Architecture. Today columns are usually expressed frankly as structural
supports and little or no attempt is made at enrichment or at incorporating the
1168 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

traditional divisions of base, shaft and capital. In the work of some architects, steel
I-sections are left exposed as an integral feature of a design (p. 1157B), but normally
fire regulations require steel structural members to be protected by a concrete or
similar covering. Concrete columns are sometimes tapered towards their bases, as in
the Administration Building of the Johnson Wax Co., Racine, Wis. (p. 1160).

MOULDINGS
Indigenous Phase. Mouldings were extremely severe, normally of a rectangular
section and used in the manner of string courses (p. I129A, C, E). In Mexico there
are examples of the use of moulding similar to the Egyptian ‘gorge’ (pp. 55J, I129A).
Colonial Phase. In Latin America mouldings followed the pattern of contem-
porary Spanish and Portuguese work at home, modified by the materials and labour
available in the colonies (p. 1134). In North America, in the English colonies, pro-
totypes were provided by seventeenth and eighteenth-century English examples,
often through the medium of pattern-books. While seventeenth-century examples
are often crude, a remarkably high degree of refinement was achieved in eighteenth-
century work (particularly in timber), sometimes of a higher standard than its
equivalent in England (pp. 1137B, D, 1138B).
National Phase. Mouldings followed those belonging to the particular style
adopted for a building (pp. 11424, B, C, 1146). A simplification of mouldings is often
apparent, for example in Greek Revival timber buildings and cast-iron work,
necessitated by questions of economy and the materials employed (p. 1153A). To-
wards the end of the nineteenth century considerable originality is found in the
work of designers like Richardson, Sullivan and Wright where, although still often
inspired by historical precedent, simplicity and clarity become the keynotes (p.
I1I50F). In the work of more academic architects, like Hunt, Bacon and McKim,
Mead and White, mouldings often achieved the perfection of the Classical and
Renaissance examples from which they were copied (p. I149A, D, E).
Modern Architecture. Mouldings as such are rarely used today but their equiva-
lents are to be found, for example, in the section of a handrail or the detailing of the
nosings to a staircase and it is through the careful and sensitive design of elements
such as these that the modern architect enriches and humanizes his buildings
(pp. 1157, II61B, 1162B).

ORNAMENT
Indigenous Phase. Often, bold, abstract geometric shapes were carved in the
stone facing slabs to the pyramids of Central America and Mexico (p. 1129), and
sometimes conventionalized forms—warriors, wild animals, serpents and gods—
were incorporated (p. I1129A, C). The carved stone slabs could be covered with
plaster and coloured.
Colonial Phase. Spanish and Portuguese forms were used in Latin America
(p. 1134) sometimes combined with existing Indian decorative devices. In North
America, ornament was sparse in early colonial work, but, in the eighteenth cen-
tury, it reached standards comparable with those in the mother country which
provided prototypes. In the mid-eighteenth century, ornate designs, cast in ‘com-
position’ and imported from England, were used in some buildings, where they
were applied to walls and ceilings (cf. Westover, p. 1132). Timber details—
panelling, fireplace surrounds, doors and doorways—were often particularly fine.
Towards the end of the eighteenth century there is evidence of influence from the
work of the Adam brothers in internal ornamental work.
National Phase. Ornament was dictated by the precedents of the style adopted for
a building but since appropriate prototypes did not always exist—e.g. for fireplaces,
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS 1169

ceilings and wall treatments—there were inventive adaptations of Greek, Egyptian

and Gothic motifs in many instances. In the later nineteenth century, in addition to
the whole gamut of the decorative vocabularies of the historical styles, the influence
of European Art Nouveau is evident (p. I150D).
Modern Architecture. For the enrichment of their buildings modern architects
have tended to rely on the inherent qualities of materials (p. 11618). In LatinAmerica,
‘azulejos’ and ‘brise soleil’ have been exploitedto produce exciting effects of colour and
texture (pp. II161C, 1165B), while in North America interesting use has been
made of brightly-coloured glazed bricks (p. 1162B), moulded sheet metal (cf. the
Alcoa Building, p. 1163) and even glass tubing (p. 1162A). Recently, North American
architects have been seeking additional enrichment to their buildings by pierced
screens, in metal or concrete, used as non-structural claddings, features closely
related to the ‘brise soleil’ of the tropical areas of South America.

REFERENCE BOOKS
GENERAL WORKS
GIEDION, S. Space, Time and Architecture. 3rd Edition, Cambridge (Mass.), 1954.
GOODWIN; P.L. Brazil Builds. New York, 1953.
GOWANS, A. Looking at Architecture in Canada. Toronto, 1958.
HAMLIN, T.F. The American Spirit in Architecture. New Haven, 1926.
JACKSON, H. New York Architecture, 1650-1952. New York, 1952.
KIMBALL, F. American Architecture. Indianapolis, 1928.
LARKIN, O. W. Art and Life in America. New York, 1949.
ROOS,F.J. Writings on Early American Architecture. Columbus, 1943.
SANFORD,T.E. The Story of Architecture in Mexico. New York, 1947.
TALLMADGE, T. The Story of Architecture in America. 1928.
INDIGENOUS PHASE
BINGHAM, H. Machu Picchu, a Citadel of the Incas. New Haven, 1930.
KINGSBOROUGH, Lord. Antiquities of Mexico. 9 vols., 1930-48.
KUBLER, G. Cuzco; Reconstruction of the Town and Restoration of the Monuments. Unesco
(Paris), 1952.
MASON, J.A. The Ancient Civilizations of Peru. Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, 1957.
MEANS, P.A. Ancient Civilizations of the Andes. 1931.
PETERSON, F. Ancient Mexico. 1959.
PRESCOTT, W.H. History of the Conquest of Peru. 1847.
—. History of the Conquest of Mexico. 1850.
TOTTEN, G. 0. Maya Architecture. Washington, 1926.
VAILLANT, G.C. The Aztecs of Mexico. 1944. Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, 1955.
COLONIAL PHASE
BAZIN, G. L’ Architecture réligieuse baroque au Brésil. 2 vols., Paris, 1956-8.
BRIDENBAUGH, C. Peter Harrison, First American Architect. Chapel Hill, 1949.
BRIGGS, M.S. Homes of the Pilgrim Fathers in America, 1620-1685. London, 1932.
FORMAN, H.C. Architecture of the Old South; The Medieval Style, 1585-1850. Cambridge
(Mass.), 1948.
JOHNSTON, F. B. and WATERMAN, T. T. The Early Architecture of North Carolina.
Chapel Hill, 1941.
KELEMEN, P. Baroque and Rococo in Latin America. New York, 1951.
KELLY, J. F. The Early Domestic Architecture of Connecticut. New Haven, 1924.
KIMBALL, F. Domestic Architecture of the American Colonies and of the Early Republic.
New York, 1922.
KUBLER, G. Mexican Architecture in the Sixteenth Century. 2 vols., New Haven, 1948.
LIVERMORE, H. V. (Ed.) Portugal and Brazil: An Introduction. Oxford, 1953.
MORRISON, H. Early American Architecture. New York, 1952.
NAVARRO, J. G. Religious Architecture in Quito. New York, 1945.
1170 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

The Marshall Field Wholesale Warehouse, Chicago

(1885-7). See p. 1152

NEWCOMB, R. Spanish-Colonial Architecture in the United States. New York, 1937.

—. Architecture in Old Kentucky. Urbana (IIl.), 1953.
SANTOS, P. F. O Barroco eo Fesuitico na Arquitetura do Brasil. Rio de Janeiro, 1951.
WATERMAN, T.T. Domestic Colonial Architecture in Tidewater Virginia. New York, 1932.
—. The Mansions of Virginia. Chapel Hill, 1946.
—. The Dwellings of Colonial America. Chapel Hill, 1950.
WETHEY,H.E. Colonial Architecture and Sculpture in Peru. Cambridge (Mass.), 1949.
WHIFFEN, M. The Public Buildings of Colonial Williamsburg. Williamsburg, 1958.
NATIONAL PHASE
BOSSOM, A.C. Building to the Skies. London, 1934.
CONDIT,C. The Rise of the Skyscraper. Chicago, 1952.
FRARY, 1. T. Early Homes of Ohio. Richmond, 1936.
HAMLIN, T. F. Greek Revival Architecture in America. New York, 1944.
HITCHCOCK, H.R. The Architecture of H. H. Richardson and his Times. New York, 1936.
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS II7I

NEWCOMB,R. Architecture of the Old North-West Territory. Chicago, 1950.

RANDALL, F. History of the Development of Building Construction in Chicago. Urbana (IIl.)
1949.
SCULLY, V.J. The Shingle Style. New Haven, 1955.
SULLIVAN,L.H. The Autobiography of an Idea. New York, 1949.
TALLMADGE,T. Architecture in Old Chicago. Chicago, 1941.
WHITE, T. (Ed.) Philadelphia in the Nineteenth Century. Philadelphia, 1953.
Monographs on individual architects:
GALLAGHER, H.M.P. Robert Mills. New York, 1935.

The Hallidie Building, San Francisco (1918). See p. 1156

1172 ARCHITECTURE OF THE AMERICAS

GILCHRIST, A.A. William Strickland: Architect and Engineer. Philadelphia, 1950.

HAMLIN, T. F. Benjamin Henry Latrobe. New York, 1955.
HITCHCOCK, H.R. In the Nature of Materials. New York, 1942. (on Frank Lloyd Wright)
KIMBALL, F. Thomas fefferson, Architect. Boston, 1916.
MAGGINIS, GC. The Work of Cram and Ferguson, Architects. New York, 1929.
Monograph of the Work of McKim, Mead and White. 4 vols., New York, 1915-25.
MORRISON; H. Louis Sullivan. New York, 1952.
NEWTON, R.H. Town and Davis: Architects. New York, 1942.
NORTH, A. T. Raymond M. Hood. New York, 1931.
PLACE, C. Charles Bullfinch: Architect and Citizen. Boston, 1925.
REILLY, Cc. H. McKim, Mead and White. London, 1924.
UPJOHN; E. Richard Upjohn: Architect and Churchman. New York, 1939.
WRIGHT, F.L. An Autobiography. New York, 1945.

MODERN ARCHITECTURE
HITCHCOCK, H. R., and DREXLER, A. Built in the U.S.A.: Post-war Architecture. New
York, 1952.
HITCHCOCK, H.R. Latin American Architecture since 1945. New York, 1955.
MINDLIN,H.E. Modern Architecture in Brazil. Rio de Janeiro, 1956.
MUMFORD,L. Roots of Contemporary American Architecture. New York, 1952.
MYERS, I.E. Mexico’s Modern Architecture. New York, 1952.
MCCALLUM,I. Architecture U.S.A. London, 1959.
Monographs on individual architects;
CHRIST-JANER, A. Eliel Saarinen. Chicago, 1948.
GIEDION, S. Walter Gropius. London, 1954.
JOHNSON, P. Mies van der Rohe. 2nd Edition, New York, 1953.
PAPADAKI, S. The Work of Oscar Niemeyer. New York, 1950.
—. Oscar Niemeyer: Work in Progress. New York, 1956.
ZEVI,B. Richard Neutra. Milan, 1954.
The following periodicals contain important articles, particularly on individual architects
and buildings:
Fournal of the Society of Architectural Historians; Architectural Review; Architectural Record;
Forum; Pencil Points.
 PART IT

Architecture in the East

INTRODUCTION

FROM the very ancient architectures of Egypt and Mesopotamia we have been able
to trace, through the rise and fall of successive styles, a continuous development
trending towards the West, fanning from the Mediterranean and then expanding
in the train of colonization from Europe to the outer Western World. It remains to
give some account of the succession in the East. There, modern archaeology has
located two further ancient nodes or cradles of civilization, the one in the basin of
the River Indus in North West India, now in Pakistan, and the other on the middle
reaches of the Hwang Ho (Yellow River) and Yangtze-Kiang, China. Applying
once again the tests of the resort to town-building and the use of writing, both are
less old than the cultures of either Egypt or Mesopotamia. They were each sub-
stantially independent of other chief centres, though that of the Indus had con-
tacts with and a somewhat similar ancestry to the Sumerian, being related by events
on the fringes of the Persian plateau which lies between. The Indus region,
a zone along the river greater in extent than the British Isles, was settled after
3000 B.C., and in the enormously long period c. 2500-1500 B.c., displayed an
advanced civilization quite comparable with that of contemporary Mesopotamia.
It collapsed with the Aryan invasion of c. 1500-1000 B.c., but left its important
mark on the Hindu civilization which succeeded. How architecture developed
thereafter in the Indian peninsula a following account will show; in its ultimate
scope it embraced the lands to the east from Burma down to the Malayan archi-
pelago, and missionaries and merchants carried its influences to China and even
Japan. The foundational Chinese culture, in its turn, bloomed in the Shang period
(c. 1766-1122 B.c.) after long stages of growth dating back to the third millennium.
It spread eastward to the river plains; and so to South China. Relatively, civiliza-
tion in Japan was much belated, and can scarcely be put before the middle of the
first millennium B.c. Substantially, its architecture derived from China, but was
nevertheless extremely consistent and conservative in character. From time to
time, as history marched, influences of varying importance reached these several
countries from the West, as equally they traversed in the reverse direction; but the
development which had the most profound consequences of all was that of the
Muslim dominion, which from beginnings in Arabia in the seventh century A.D.,
bracketed East and West and established a religious faith which has continued to
span them from that time. Yet since its consequence has been the greater to the
Eastern World, Muslim architecture is included with the present group of styles.
In the case of the three old civilizations, Indian, Chinese and Japanese, the archi-
tectural treatment in the following pages begins at the much later stages when the
surviving evidence becomes adequate to show continuity. The Muslim, based on
previously-developed architectures, springs almost fully fledged.
 N y sAm
aiaappd ;

Preeeey
57 a
Mohenjo-Daro pat Rees ~, f
! a8 4 HANS ot
ie 4 N Gwalior. » 20°
anp

.Anuradhapura
= Land over 1,500 feet Polunnawara
fo) Mules 500 CEYLON
eee
EW.

The Indian peninsula

XXX. ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA

AND PAKISTAN
(HINDU, BUDDHIST AND JAIN)*
(Circa 300 B.C. to present day)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. India and Pakistan, together with the outlying countries of
Afghanistan, Burma, and Indo-China, form the southern fringe of Asia. The main
triangular peninsula, comprising the first two countries, is about fifteen times the
* Although the main developments in Hindu, Buddhist and Jain architecture took place
within the Indo-Pakistan sub-continent, there were important Buddhist centres in
Afghanistan, and there were equally important later developments in Burma and Indo-
China. For Muslim architecture in the sub-continent, see Chapter XX XIII, p. 1222.
 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN 1175

size of Great Britain. On the north, a barrier is formed by high mountain ranges
stretching from the Hindu Kush in the west, through the Pamirs, Karakorams,
and the Himalayas to the mountains of Sikang in China, in the east. On the east,
south, and west, the area is bounded by the sea. In the earliest times, influences
entered the area mainly from Central Asia through the passes of the north-west
and north-east: there was also a strong tide of influence from Persia and the Middle
East, which came through what is now Baluchistan. Good harbours along the coast
are few; intercourse by sea was, therefore, less important in early days, although
by the first century A.D., there was a thriving maritime trade with the Roman
Empire. The great rivers in the north, the Indus and Ganges and their tributaries,
provided trade ways, and many of the area’s most important cities were founded
along them. Delhi, the ‘Rome’ of India, on the River Jumuna, has been the capital
of India, at various times, over a period of a thousand years: around it still are the
remains of at least seven separate ‘cities’ scattered over nearly fifty square miles.
Its importance was due to its commanding position at the junction of the four
trade routes from the Lower Ganges, the Hindu Kush, the Indus Valley, and the
Gulf of Cambay. The chief commercial city of Pakistan is Karachi, a port founded
in the eighteenth century and the sea gateway to the Indus Valley. Excavations at
Mohenjodaro and Harappa, and in Rajasthan, indicate close links between the so-
called ‘Indus Valley culture’ and ancient Mesopotamia. It is only in the south and
east of the peninsula that the stream of influences seems to have been unimportant,
in spite of Roman trading stations on the coast of the Bay of Bengal.
GEOLOGICAL. The lack of building store along the Indus and Ganges Valleys,
and the easily available timber which was floated down the rivers from the moun-
tains have influenced architecture in the area from the earliest times. In the north,
architectural forms, at least until the eighteenth century A.D., tended to be simply
the translation into stone of carpentry techniques. There is good white marble in
Rajasthan, widely used inMogul buildings, and fine red and cream sandstone from
the neighbourhood of Agra; generally speaking, however, these are used mainly as
facing materials for rubble walling behind. In the centre and south, the ‘trap’ and
granite of the Deccan and the volcanic potstone of Hallabid made their own con-
tributions to the development of regional characteristics. In the Western Ghats,
the horizontal rock strata which rise in perpendicular cliffs, made possible the
rock-cut sanctuaries of Karli (p. 1181A), Ajanta (p. 11818), and Elephanta (p. 1185B).
At Mamallapuram and Ellora (p. 1185A) rock-cut temples, known as ‘Raths’, were
hewn out of amygdaloidal trap formations. As far as timber is concerned, hard teak
is found in Burma and in the eastern and western coastal mountains. An excellent
sottwood, deodar, is found abundantly in the northern mountain ranges; shisham,
a hardwood somewhat inferior to teak, grows everywhere in the river valleys of the
north. In the riverine plains of Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, and the Punjab, the alluvial
soil makes good bricks which were, and are, used extensively in these areas. Terra-
cotta has been used from the earliest times; the ease with which the plastic clay can
be pressed into moulds or carved, before firing, may be responsible (together
with the traditions of wood-carving), for the exuberance of decoration in sub-
sequent periods. Lime for building was obtained by burning limestone, shells, and
kankar, a nodular form of impure lime found in the river valleys.
CLIMATIC. Although slightly more than half the area lies within the Tropic of
Cancer, the climate varies widely. In the east, there is a small variation of tempera-
ture between summer and winter, a very heavy rainfall in the monsoon season
(May to August), and a moderate rainfall throughout the year. This produces a
climate generally warm and humid, but not excessively hot. In the bulk of the
peninsula, the temperature is fairly equable throughout the year, but the distinc-
1176 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN

tion between dry and wet seasons is more clearly marked. In the plains of the
north, temperatures rise high in the summer months (May to July) and drop
markedly about the winter solstice. The rainy season comes later than in the east,
and is shorter. The general character of the climate is dry, with a cooler winter. In
the north-west, the hot season and the cold season are nearly equal in length, the
former being severe (temperatures rising to 120° F), and the latter also sharp with
night-frosts and sleet: the summer rainy season is short and late, and the winter
rains are more marked than in the Gangetic Plain. This great variation of climate
has less general effect on architecture than might be expected, as protection against
heat, even in the north-west, seems to have received more attention than winter
comfort. Pierced, or latticed, windows to exclude sunlight and heat are general:
and canals, reservoirs and tanks, for ceremonial use, for irrigation, and for comfort,
are features of all important religious and secular buildings. The high angle of the
sun over much of the area, and the frequency of sunny days, may well have helped
to produce the characteristic external carved decoration which takes much of its
effect from the contrasts of light and shade. The flat roof, for summer sleeping, is
almost universal except in the east, where the need to deal with heavy and continuous
rain produced steeply-pitched roofs. Major climatic changes have taken place at least
in some parts of the area in historic times: excavations at Mohenjodaro, for example,
clearly indicate that the Lower Indus Valley, now largely semi-desert, once supported
the rich animal and vegetable life normally associated with tropical jungles. This may
explain, in part, the replacement of wood by stone as a basic building material.
RELIGIOUS. In these lands, religion impinges more strongly and continually on
everyday life than is normal in the West. The basic doctrines of Hinduism have
been modified by the impact of Buddhism and Jainism, which are both, funda-
mentally, non-conformist sects of Hinduism. The former sect has moved much
further from the parent doctrine than the latter, and has now largely disappeared
from the country of its origins, although there are Buddhist communities in East
Pakistan. Jainism still attracts many devotees in India.
Hindu. The Hindu religion seems to have evolved from a combination of the
faiths of the indigenous Dravidians and the Aryan invaders: the Dravidian cult of
‘bhakti’ (devotion to an incarnation, and so to images) modifying the Aryan prefer-
ence for abstract principles. These Aryan principles are incorporated in the ‘Rig-
Veda’, a series of hymns composed some time between 1500-800 B.c. About the
beginning of the Christian era, the Vedic gods were superseded by the trinity
(‘Trimurti’) of modern Hinduism: Vishnu, the preserver; Siva, the destroyer; and
Brahma (the prime being of the trinity), soul and creator of the universe. Vishnu
and Siva appear in various forms (‘avatars’) and for this reason the triune aspect
of Hinduism has often been misrepresented as multiple idol worship. Hindu wor-
ship is essentially an individual act, and except on certain specified occasions com-
munal worship is foreign to it. This has produced the basic difference between the
Hindu temple, and the Muslim mosque (p. 1226).
From the earliest days of Hinduism, an orthodox Hindu’s daily life has been
governed by religious practice in its minutest details. Any major occasion demands
the services of one of the Brahman priesthood, who alone have the authority to
officiate. Before the advent of Buddhism, the Brahman caste had thus so concen-
trated power in their own hands that this early period of Hinduism is known as the
Brahmanical period, and the Brahman abuse of their powers produced the chal-
lenges of both the Buddhists and the Jains.
Buddhist. Siddartha, or Gautama Buddha, was born about 563 B.c. on the
borders of Nepal. He belonged to the princely Kshatriya caste, who had obvious
reasons to dispute Brahman domination. Buddha’s basic doctrine was that salva-
 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN 1177

tion, being attainable by the individual’s actions, was within the reach of all regard-
less of caste, and did not depend on Brahmanical intercession. It followed that the
Buddhist religious buildings became concentrated in monasteries (where the con-
templative life could be lived in communion with fellow spirits), and in shrines
where relics of those who had achieved salvation (‘nirvana’) were deposited. These
shrines took the form of ‘stupas’, or domical mounds which, grouped with their
rails, gateways, processional paths, and crowning ‘umbrellas’, came to be regarded
as symbols of the universe. The monasteries became places of international pil-
grimage and dissemination of learning. With the passage of time, the original asceti-
cism of Buddha’s doctrines became modified, and pictorial sculpture revived the
idolatry which had originally been forbidden. Buddhism declined in India after the
seventh century A.D., but has revived strongly in Burma, and the Far East.
Fain. Jainism was traditionally founded by Mahavira (roughly a contemporary
with Buddha) who was himself a Brahman. The goal is salvation through succes-
sive re-births, the ideal being rigid asceticism and the avoidance of injury to every
living creature, which might be some soul in the process of purification. Jain
temples differ little in essentials from the normal Hindu temple, but are distin-
guished by the extraordinary richness and complexity of their sculptural ornament.
Mahavira and twenty-four other saints who had achieved salvation before him are
worshipped, sometimes in the form of the animals which are attributed to each of
them.
The Muslim religion and the forms in architecture to which it gave rise are con-
sidered in Chapter XX XIII, Muslim Architecture (e.g. India and Pakistan, p. 1238).
SOCIAL. Some religious implications of the organization of society into castes
have already been indicated, and these divisions still remain clearly marked in spite
of recent efforts to break them down. Apart from forming social divisions into
classes, the caste system had a racial significance in that Brahmans and Kshat-
riyas claimed descent from the Sanskrit-speaking Aryan invaders, the Vaisyas were
held to be of mixed blood and could therefore lay no claim to racial aristocracy,
and the Sudras were the defeated aboriginals. Apart from these, there was a large
Muslim population claiming descent from Arab and Persian invaders, but in fact
drawn mainly from converts to Islam: these were mostly concentrated in what is
now Pakistan. The sub-continent cannot be considered as an entity either socially
or artistically, for there is as great a divergence of language, social custom, climate,
and ethnographic type as may be found within Europe from Scandinavia to the
Mediterranean: thus a simple picture of architectural development is impossible.
Ordinary domestic buildings of any great age do not exist; wealth, until very
recently, was concentrated in the hands of feudal landlords who built palaces for
themselves or temples for their gods. In an order where life on earth is looked upon
mainly as a preparation for something more enduring after death, it is not surpris-
ing that temples are more important monuments than palaces.
HISTORICAL. The earliest defined civilization in the sub-continent is that of
the so-called ‘Indus Valley culture’ (2500-1500 B.c.), which was related to the
Sumerian cultures of the Middle East. The most famous excavated sites of this
period are those at Mohenjodaro (in Sind) and Harappa (about a hundred miles
south of Lahore); but recent excavations in the Rajasthan area of India indicate
that this civilization was more widely spread than its present name indicates. All
remains discovered so far are archaeological rather than architectural, and there-
fore are not included in the present account.
Successive incursions, military and economic, into the area from 2000 B.c. until
the nineteenth century A.D., brought art and architecture into contact with many
influences; Persian, Graeco-Roman, Sassanian, Portuguese, French, and English.
1178 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN

The strength of these varied considerably: the first three exercised a deep influence,
the fourth and fifth more purely local ones, and the last, again a strong one. Be-
tween the periods of internal weakness marking these incursions, indigenous
empires and kingdoms rose and declined. From the point of view of the Hindu,
Buddhist and Jain cultures, the most important of these were:
(a) The Mauryan Buddhist Empire in the north, founded c. 300 B.c. on the
remains of Alexander the Great’s short-lived ‘empire’. Cultural influences from
Sassanian Persia (e.g. the Persepolitan type of memorial pillar or ‘lath’ erected by
Asoka) are indicated by the descriptions by a Chinese pilgrim in A.D. 400 of the
wooden palace of Asoka at Pataliputra, then still surviving.
(b) The Bactrian Buddhist kingdoms of Gandhara and Sialkot in the north-west,
breaking away from the Mauryan Empire in about 200 B.c. Close cultural affinities
with the Graeco-Roman world existed, probably through trade with Africa and
Asia Minor.
(c) The more orthodox Hindu Andhra and Sunga kingdoms in Central and
South India, from about 185 B.c. These areas were less under external influences,
and their art was more indigenous in character. Presumably this also applied to
their buildings, though none survive.
(d) The Kushan Empire, founded by a tribe of Central Asian nomads in the
north-west, and in existence for the first three centuries of the Christian era. The
greatest ruler was Kanishka (c. A.D. 78), whose capital was at Peshawar. This
period shows a great cultural influx from Alexandria, Syria, and China. There are
‘architectural’ remains of this period in the excavated city of Sirkap (Taxila), and
rock-cut shrines with important architectural detail at Bamiyan in Afghanistan.
(e) The Gupta Empire, embracing the northern areas from the Jumuna River
in the west to Assam in the east, and south to the Narbadda River. During this
period (fourth to sixth century A.D.), there was maritime expansion to the Far East,
carrying with it artistic influences which flowered later in Cambodia and similar
places. To this phase belong the earliest substantial architectural remains that
survive.
(f) In the south, four orthodox Hindu states were successively dominant: the
Cholas, from the late tenth to the thirteenth century A.D., whose power reached
into Burma and Ceylon; the Hoysalas in Mysore, more or less contemporary with
the Cholas; the kingdom of Vijayanagar, south of the Kistna River, founded in the
first half of the fourteenth century and destroyed in 1565; and the Nayak
dynasty of Madura, of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.
After the middle of the eighteenth century, the disintegration of the Mogul
Empire in the north, and the Hindu states in the south, combined with the arrival
of European fashions through France and England, virtually put an end to any
further development of Hindu architecture. Some self-conscious attempts at a
‘revival’ since 1947, when India and Pakistan became sovereign states, have
produced nothing of importance.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
(1) Buddhist (300 B.C.-A.D. 320). The major examples are in the north-west (i.e. the
old Bactrian kingdoms) and in the mountains of the Western Ghats above Bombay.
The main characteristic of Buddhist shrines (as opposed to those of the Hindus
and Jains) is that they are all designed for congregational use. Monasteries, meeting
halls (‘chaityas’), and stupa shrines are all planned to accommodate large groups of
worshippers. In the rock-cut chaityas of the Western Ghats, the main forms and the
details of the wooden prototype buildings, now vanished, have been preserved.
 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN 1179

Decorative detail is used more in the Western classical tradition—to emphasize

structure—than in Hindu and Jain buildings, where it conceals structure like a
jungle growth. This is even more noticeable in the north-west, where near-replicas
of Hellenistic buildings occur (e.g. the Zoroastrian temple at Jhaulian, Taxila),
and where both Corinthian and Ionic Orders occur in a distorted, but plainly
recognizable, form. Virtually no secular buildings remain, but the excavated parts
of the city of Sirkap (Taxila) (fl. 200 B.c.—A.D. 200), show a city neatly laid out on a
rectangular grid and dominated by an ‘acropolis’ containing a monastery and stupa.
The acropolis appears again in other civil settlements, such as Mingaora (Swat
state).
(2) Fain (A.D. 1000-1300). Jain temples are found over most of the area, but
mainly in the northern central part of the peninsula. There were revivals of archi-
tectural activity in the fifteenth century A.D., but the work from this period has
little life and shows no real development. The main difference between the Jain
and the Hindu temple is the lighter and more elegant character of the former. The
Jains, also, paid particular attention to the siting and environment of their monu-
ments. Although both Hindu and Jain temples are basically enclosed shrines intro-
duced by a more open porch, specifically Jain are ceilings in the form of flat domes,
and stonework so elaborately carved that it often loses all its own character and
can rather be compared to petrified foliage.
(3) Hindu. Hindu temples may be roughly grouped into three types, although
these are not clear cut and a hard division cannot be assumed.
(a) Northern Indian: A.D. 600 to the present.
(6) Central Indian: A.D. 1000 to 1300.*
(c) South Indian (Dravidian): A.D. 625 to 1750.
In all types, the fundamental plan consists of a small unlit shrine called the ‘garbha-
griha’, crowned with the spire-shaped ‘sikhara’, and introduced by one or more
porch-like halls (‘mandapas’) used for religious dancing and music. This form
seems to have evolved about the fourth century A.D. The sanctuary as a whole is
the ‘vimana’. Except in the south, the vimana is seldom designed to take a con-
gregation of worshippers; its entire self becomes an object of worship. This explains
the importance attached to the sculptural decoration of the exterior, and also the
sanctity traditionally ascribed by Hindus to the art and to the practitioners of
temple building. The vertical sikhara makes a very marked contrast with the low,
flat roof-lines of the average Indian village, and proclaims the holy place as unmis-
takably as does the church-tower in the English countryside. In (a), the Northern
Indian temple, the sikhara is very dominant: it is conical in form, with convex
curved sides; and there is normally a finial (‘kalasa’) of vase or ‘melon’ form. The
‘mandap’ or porch-hall is usually more or less enclosed with walls or screens. The
general plan form of the vimana is a combination of simple rectangles. Temples of
(b), the Central Indian type, combine features of the Northern (e.g. the sikhara)
with those of the Dravidian (e.g. the stellate plan form). Generally speaking,
temples of this type are more florid and exuberant in form and decoration than
those of the north. In (c), Dravidian temples, the form of the spire becomes a
flatter pyramid with straight or (later) concave sides: the term ‘sikhara’ in this type
is given only to the top storey of the spire, which becomes much elaborated and
follows either the Buddhist stupa or chaitya form (pp. I181A, 1193B). These crown-
ing spires are often grouped in miniature repetitions round the lower stages of the
building. Peculiar to the later Dravidian temples are the many-columned halls,
tanks, and courtyards surrounding the inner sanctuary. Between these courtyards
* This type is sometimes called ‘Chalukyan’, but misleadingly, as the Chalukya dynasty
had ceased to rule by A.D. 750.
1180 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN

are gigantic gateway towers (‘gopurams’) which replace the sikhara as the dominat-
ing features of the temple group (p. 1190A). The intention of this arrangement is to
heighten the emotional impact of the approach to the shrine, and to display the
wealth and power of the temple and its servants. The sculptural and decorative
details are of little importance compared with those of earlier temples: compare
the dry, lifeless carving in the Temple at Tarputry (seventeenth century A.D.) (p.
1IQOB) with that at Bellur (twelfth century A.D.) (p. 1189B).

EXAMPLES
1. BUDDHIST ARCHITECTURE
(300 B.C.—A.D. 320)
(1) Stambhas or Laths. These are monumental pillars, standing free without any
structural function. Inscriptions were carved on the shaft. The capital, which was
usually Persepolitan in form (cf. p. 78), was crowned with animal supporters
bearing the Buddhist ‘chakra’ or ‘wheel of the law’. The emblem of the Republic
of India is the capital of the ‘stambha’ at Sarnath. There are others at Allahabad,
and at Lauriya Nandangarh in Nepal (p. 1186A).
(2) Stupas. The most important group of these domical mounds is at Sanchi in
the former state of Bhopal. The Great Stupa here dates, in its present form, from
the end of the first century B.C., and preserves its stone enclosing railings (pp.
I182A, I194E) and the four ceremonial gateways (‘toranas’) (p. I194A) at the cardinal
points of the compass. These ancillary features must have been common to all
important stupas. The toranas resemble the Chinese ‘pai-lou’ (p. 1205) and the
Japanese ‘torii’ (p. 1218). At the base of the stupa is a processional path above a
platform 14 ft high. The stupa is of solid brickwork, 106 ft in diameter and 42 ft
high. Originally, it was faced with stone, and the crowning feature was a three-
tiered stone ‘umbrella’, similar to that still in place (though damaged) on the stupa
within the hall at Karli (p. 1181A). Other important stupas are at Barhut (second
century A.D.), and Amaravati (A.D. 200).*
There are many lesser stupas throughout north-west Pakistan; at Mankiala near
Rawalpindi, at Taxila, and in the Khyber Pass. The great stupa built by Kanishka
at Shah-ji-ki-Dheri, on the outskirts of Peshawar, has disappeared, but it was
carefully described by Chinese pilgrims of the sixth century as rising to a height
of 700 ft (including the wooden superstructure). Excavations on its site in 1908
revealed an important bronze relic casket (now in Peshawar Museum), decorated
with debased Hellenistic motives, and signed by the Greek-named maker, Agesilas.
(3) Chaityas or Assembly Halls. No free-standing chaityas of any importance
remain, but rock-cut examples at Bhaja (250 B.c.), Nasik (129 B.c.), Karli, Ellora,
and Ajanta, show clearly the form of the original structure (p. 1181). The latest of
these dates from A.D. 250. The plan consists of an apsidal-ended hall with closely-
spaced pillars at each side, forming aisles. A stupa shrine is placed in the apse,
furthest from the entrance. The roofs are semicircular in section, and ribs repre-
senting the original timber members of the prototypes are cut from the rock. The
facade normally contains, above a low entrance portico, a horseshoe-shaped win-
dow filled with rock-cut or wooden tracery (p. I1181B).
The Chaitya, Karli (78 B.c.) (p. 1181A), is 126 ft long, and the height and width
are 45 ft. The Persepolitan-type columns are octagonal, and the capitals are formed
by pairs of elephants. The roof ribs, in this case, are actually of wood, inserted
after the roof was cut. A fine lath, crowned with four lions, stands at the entrance
of this chaitya.
* Many sculptured panels from Amaravati are in the British Museum, and a full-size
reproduction of the Sanchi railings is in the Indian Museum, South Kensington.
B. The Chaitya, Ajanta: facade (c. A.D. 250). See opposite page
1182 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN

B. Monastery at Takht-i-Bhai (A.D. 3rd cent.). See p. 1183

 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN 1183

(4) Viharas or Monasteries. Most of the existing viharas are in the north-west of
Pakistan and in Afghanistan. There are several fine remains round Taxila (second
century B.C. to second century A.D.) and near Mingaora in the Swat valley. That
at Takht-i-Bhai (p. 11828) is typical of these. A number of simple cells are ranged
round a quadrangle; the main stupa is placed adjoining this quadrangle in a second
courtyard which is crowded with smaller votive stupas. There are several larger
chambers for assembly or dining. All roofs have disappeared—they were of wood
and thatch, or tile—as has most of the painted stucco with which the masonry was
originally faced. Apart from that on the stupas and their bases, there seems to have
been little carved ornament on buildings. The Corinthian column appears fre-
quently in miniature in the carved aedicules on stupa bases, and also as full-sized
fragments detached from their original contexts. The Buddhist monastery at
Nalanda (Bengal) which flourished in the seventh century A.D., represents the last
phase. It was of great size, and could more properly be described as a university.
A stupa excavated there retains little of the Graeco-Roman characteristics of the
earlier types: the simple rectangular base has developed into a four-storeyed rect-
angular tower, topped by a drum supporting a flat saucer-dome—all that remains
of the hemispherical stupa-mound.
There are rock-cut viharas adjoining some of the chaitya caves, notably at Bhaja
(second century B.C.): they consist of a simple group of cells without any adorn-
ment.

There are major Buddhist remains in Ceylon, particularly at Anuradhapura

and Polunnawara, which were the capital cities from the first to the eighth and
the eighth to the thirteenth century respectively. In Java, there is a great stupa
at Barobudar, which represents the culmination of the conception of the stupa as
representing the cosmos. The Singhalese stupas are remarkable for their size, one
being 370 ft in diameter. The ornament has a lively elegance which is lacking in the
Buddhist buildings of the north-west.

2. JAIN ARCHITECTURE
(A.D. I000—-1300)
The most important group of Jain temples is at Mount Abu (p. 1184A), below the
peak of this name at the south-western end of the Aravalli range in Rajasthan.
Typical of this group is the Dilwarra Temple (1032) (p. 11848), built of white
marble. There is a large portico-hall, the columns of which are crowned with
bracket capitals, carrying the raking struts which are peculiarities of Jain building.
The interior of the corbelled dome roof is so highly carved that the marble assumes
the character of lacework. In common with the majority of Jain temples, the
artistic quality of the carved ornament falls short of the technical achievement.
The Temple, Ranpur (1439), on the side of the Aravalli Mountains in
Rajasthan, gives the completest picture of a Jain monument. It stands on a high
substructure some 200 ft square, surrounded by eighty-six cells, each of which is
covered by a sikhara-shaped roof. There are five shrines, one at each angle of that
in the centre, with four open light courts between. Twenty domes, 21 ft in dia-
meter, supported on over four hundred columns, are placed symmetrically in
groups of five round the angle shrines. The central dome of each group is three
storeys high and 36 ft in diameter. The domes are all formed in the usual way, of
horizontally-corbelled courses of masonry elaborately carved. The multiple repeti-
tion of parts, and the virtuosity of the craftsmanship, are typical of Jain temples in
general.
1184 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN

B. Dilwarra Temple, Mount Abu: interior (1032). See p. 1183

 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN 1185

B. Rock-cut temple, Elephanta: interior (9th cent.). See p. 1191

1186 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN

A (left). The Lath (Lion column), Lauriya Nandangarh (243 B.c.). See p. 1180
B (right). The Parasuramesvara Temple, Bhuvaneshwar (750). See p. 1187

c. Hindu Temple, Amber (1000-1200). See p. 1188

 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN 1187

At Udayagiri in Orissa, are several rock-cut Jain viharas dating from the second
and first century B.C. These are irregular in plan, but are interesting in that they
reproduce in their sculptured facades, structural details of vanished buildings of
that period.

3. HINDU ARCHITECTURE
(a) Northern Indian (A.D.600 to the present).
Temples in Orissa (800-1200) on the east coast, form a series which presents
the finest examples of this type. The typical plan is square; the lofty sikhara cover-
ing the ‘garbha-griha’ or shrine has convex curved sides, the mandap or porch-hall
is without columns, and has a lower, stepped roof. Each facade has rectangular
projections in the centre, which become triangular in plan in later examples. The
elaborate gateways and enclosures of Dravidian temples are entirely missing. Of
these Orissa temples, the best known are at Bhuvaneshwar (p. 11868). The strong
contrast between the emphatic vertical lines of the sikhara and the horizontality of
the mandap is softened by the horizontal lines of sculpture, each separated by an
incised band, running round the former: these, from a distance, produce an effect
reminiscent of rustication. The melon-shaped finial is particularly dominant, and
increases in importance as the type develops.
The Black Pagoda, Kanarak (thirteenth century) (p. 1194C, D) is the ruin
of a huge, uncompleted temple to the sun. The cell was never raised above its
basement courses. The mandap is so large as to be a virtual assembly hall, and it
has been suggested that the problem of supporting the weight of the sikhara, which
would have been 200 ft high if it were in normal relation with the mandap, was the
main reason for the building’s incompletion. The sculptured decoration is arranged
to form horizontal bands running round the mass of the building (as in the Bhuvan-
eshwar temples), but all on a proportionately larger scale.
The Kandarya Mahadev Temple, Khajuraho, (c. 1000) (p. I1190D), is
typical of a large group of temples in Central India. There is a series of mandaps
leading to the garbha-griha, but the whole is grouped on one, firmly defined, base.
This, together with the strong horizontals of both sculptured and architectural
details, and the carefully considered relationship of the ascending sikhara roof,
produce a satisfying unity in the whole mass. The verticals are dominant, but the
skilful counterpoint of horizontals prevents monotony. The sides of the main
sikhara are enriched by miniature reflections of the whole spire: a common feature
in Dravidian temples. There are nearly a thousand figures on the temple, half life-
size, and all of a uniformly high artistic standard.
The Sas Bahu Temple, Gwalior, (1093) (p. 1189A), belongs to the same
group as the temples at Khajuraho. Like the Black Pagoda, it comprises only the
mandap, the garbha-griha having vanished. Although more complex in detail than
the Orissa temples, the same feeling of horizontality (to contrast with the vertical
sikhara) is present, and the same low-pitched pyramidal roof. The canopied
balconies found at Khajuraho (p. 1190D) are here developed into features of major
importance.
Other temples of this type are the Jagannath Temple, Puri (1174), and
those at Pattadakal (700) near the west coast; Chandravati (ninth century)
in Rajasthan; Baroli, (ninth century) (p. 1190C); and Udaipur, Rajasthan (eleventh
century).
The Golden Temple of the Sikhs, Amritsar, (1766) is very strongly influ-
enced by Mogul buildings: it consists of a hall to hold congregations at the reading
of the sacred books, standing in an artificial lake surrounded by older ancillary
buildings.
2P H.O.A.
1188 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN

The Birla Temple, New Delhi (1938-) is an attempt to translate traditional

forms into contemporary idioms in reinforced concrete.
There are many palaces, architecturally the most important being in Rajasthan,
dating from the fifteenth century onwards. These were largely influenced by
the Mogul palaces at Agra, Delhi, and Lahore. The city of Jaipur was laid out in
the eighteenth century when the ruler moved his seat from the ancient fortress of
Amber, and is a charming composition of rose-pink stucco-faced buildings laid out
in an orderly fashion around the ruler’s palace. There are two towers at Chitor,
also in Rajasthan, commemorating victorious battles there. These, in their stellate
plans, perhaps owe something to the much older towers at Ghazni in Afghanistan,
but the top storey is a purely Hindu composition of projecting balconies and flat
pyramidal roofs, reminiscent (in miniature) of the Sas Bahu Temple at Gwalior.

(b) Central Indian (A.D. 1000-1300).

The Temple, Amber (1000-1200) (p. 1186c) illustrates the difficulty of mak-
ing stylistic divisions of Hindu architecture; for although the building belongs in
type to those of Central India, it is situated in Rajasthan and surrounded by later
secular buildings of the type mentioned in the previous section (a). The mandap
(perhaps added in the sixteenth century) might, in fact, be mistaken for a Mogul
pavilion. The sikhara, however, has the elaborate stellate plan, small finial, and
elaboration of architectural (as distinct from sculptural) decoration typical of
examples such as Hallabid in Mysore.
The Hoysaleswara Temple, Hallabid (1141-1182) (p. 1193A) consists of
unfinished twin temples standing side by side on a terrace 5 ft high, with detached,
pillared porches. The walls are covered with friezes of extremely elaborate carving,
700 ft long, of elephants, lions, horsemen, geese, and scenes of the conquest of
Ceylon. The window openings are filled with elaborately pierced marble slabs.
The Great Temple, Bellur (1117) (pp. 1189B, 1194J), has the typical star-
shaped garbha-griha and an elaborately pillared mandap, all covered with highly
ornate carvings.
The Temple, Somnathpur (1268), like that at Hallabid, has more than one
shrine: in this case there are three, radiating from a central hall. The sikharas have
not the emphatic vertical lines of the Northern temples, and the horizontal bands
of carving are more marked. On the other hand, the domical top storey, found in
Dravidian types, is absent.
The carved detail of all these temples, particularly of those at Hallabid and
Somnathpur has more affinity to the richness of Singhalese work than to the more
restrained ‘classicism’ of Northern sculpture.

(c) South Indian (Dravidian) (A.D. 625-1750).

At Mamallapuram, near Madras, a series of huge granite rocks was carved into
small temples or ‘Raths’ between 625-674. They are reproductions in solid
rock of vanished prototypes; although so early, they contain all the fundamentals of
the fully developed Dravidian type, including the domed (stupa-shaped) crowning
storey to the sikhara. There is also a chaitya-type roof, and a pyramidal thatch-like
roof on a square base; all these are cut in the rocks.
The rock-cut Temple, Ellora (750-950) (p. 1185A) stands free within a
huge artificial basin in the mountain side, 290 ft long and 150 ft wide. The whole
temple stands on a podium 25 ft high to raise it above the basin floor. All the
familiar elements are present: the garbha-griha, the mandap, and a detached shrine
in front of the latter for the Siva bull-image. The mandap is larger than those in
ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN 1189

B. Great Temple, Bellur, from E. (1117). See p. 1188

1190 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN

A. The Gopuram, Madura (1623). B. Old Temple, Tarputry portion o f

See p. II91 entrance (17th cent.),
See p . 1180

Cc Column and temples, Baroli D Kandarya Mahadev Temple,

(9th cent.). See p 1187 Khajuraho (c. 1000). See p. 1187
 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN 1191

Northern temples, and indicates what was to follow later at Madura. The pillars
are typically Dravidian, seen in their latest form in the rock-cut temples on
Elephanta island in Bombay harbour (ninth century) (p. 11858). The heavy,
curved cornice is also typical of this class, and re-appears for a thousand years.
The Temple, Conjeeveram, Vellore, is early eighth century. The garbha-
-griha is enclosed with a courtyard wall containing gateways crowned with hull-
shaped structures; these are a clear forecast of the great eighteenth-century gopu-
rams at Madura and elsewhere. The form of the sikharas is based on that of the
largest Rath at Mamallapuram.
The Great Temple, Tanjore, (1000) (p. 11938), is 180 ft long, and the sikhara of
thirteen storeys is 190 ft high. The form of the crowning member of the tower, a
single stone weighing 80 tons, is based on the Buddhist stupa. The basic forms are
used repeatedly in the decoration of the tower: this, and the very beautiful propor-
tions, produce a feeling of great repose.
The later temples, such as those at Madura (1623) (p. I1190A), Srirangam
(seventeenth century) (p. I194F), and Tinnevelly, in spite of their apparent
complexity, preserve the simple fundamentals of the traditional plan. But the
garbha-griha and its sikhara are dwarfed by the successive giant gopurams (there
are fifteen of these gateway towers at Srirangam), and the small mandap has
developed into a series of huge halls, reminiscent of Egyptian hypostyle halls,
containing forests of columns; at Madura, there are over 2,000 of them.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

PLANS
Buddhist. Rock-cut ‘chaityas’, based on vanished prototypes, consist of apsidal-
ended assembly halls. Free-standing columns down each side and round the apse
form an aisle or ambulatory. The entrance, and lighting, is from the end opposite
to the apse, which is occupied by a domical mound or ‘stupa’. ‘Viharas’ (mona-
steries) consist of a quadrangle surrounded by a verandah on to which simple
square cells open. Adjacent to this ‘cloister’ was the courtyard containing the main
stupa, which was usually crowded with smaller votive stupas. Communal rooms,
like dining halls and kitchens, adjoined the cloister as the site allowed. Major stupas
were surrounded by a raised processional path, enclosed by a stone railing (pp.
1182A, L194), containing four gates (p. 1194A) at the cardinal points. These, with
the stupa itself, symbolized the cosmos (p. 11824).
Fain. The central shrine, covered by a dome or spire, is introduced by a pillared
portico, usually in the form of an octagon set within a square (p. 1194B). There are
thus twelve pillars supporting the roof, which is formed of successively diminishing
squares, laid diagonally to each other. Although Jain temples are seldom simple
units (cf. Ranpur, p. 1183), the most elaborate examples are but a multiplication of
the basic form.
Hindu. The small, dark, shrine, and the more open porch which introduces it,
are the basic elements, to which may be added an enclosure with gateways. The
shrine is crowned with a spire, and the portico with a lower roof. These elements
are seen at their simplest at Kanarak (p. 1194D) or Baroli (p. 1190C). In their most
elaborate form, they are found at Srirangam and Madura (p. 1190A). Tanks for
ritual ablution are the only fresh features in the latter. Variations of the simple
plan are such as those at Brindaban (p. 1194G) where accommodation was necessary
for crowds of pilgrims, and at Bellur (p. 1194J) where the mandap has become a
theatre for ritual dances.
1192 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN

WALLS
Buddhist walls in the north-west of Pakistan are built of stone blocks, dressed to a
fair face on the outside surfaces, but not squared along the sides. The interstices
are filled with much smaller fragments of stone, firmly wedging the large blocks.
All appear to have been laid dry, and were probably originally thickly rendered with
lime stucco.
Hindu and Jain walls are of simpler ashlar masonry, often laid without mortar.
There is a general tendency to cover walls externally with a texture of sculptured
ornament. Walls are often thicker than structurally necessary; either because of an
intention to build for eternity, or from a lack of instinct for the techniques of
masonry buildings.

OPENINGS
Buddhist. The gateways of the Sanchi stupa (pp. 1182A, 1194A), are peculiar to this
style. The horseshoe arch became adopted in later Hindu buildings, but it prob-
ably derived from the shape of the gable wall of the chaitya hall (p. 1181B). It was
never built as a true arch, and would appear to derive from wooden prototypes.
When used as the light source for the chaitya, the opening was screened by a
wooden trellis to filter the sunlight (this has disappeared from the facade at Ajanta).
In the north-west, and in Kashmir, openings were either square-headed or filled
with trefoil or ogival arch forms. These latter, however, were formed by corbelling
and not with voussoirs.
Jain. Openings are normally square-headed. In pillared porches, stone archi-
traves rest on bracket capitals; the square openings were often modified by the
insertion of sloping struts, producing a triangular head to the openings (pp. 1181B,
1194B). These struts evidently derive from a timber form, and appear in a few
Muslim buildings of the Emperor Akbar’s reign (cf. p. 1242) as a deliberate
eccentricity. An extension of the bracket capital is often applied to wall openings,
lintels being supported by brackets built out into horizontal courses. This feature
also appears in buildings of Akbar’s period.
Hindu. Square-headed openings are usual, but they are often modified (as in
Jain openings) by the introduction of corbelled brackets at the corners to reduce
the span of the lintel. Buildings of the Central Indian type have pierced window
slabs, as at Bellur (p. 1189B) and Hallabid (p. 1193A). These pierced slabs are dis-
tinctive of this type, though somewhat reminiscent of Muslim treatment.

ROOFS
Buddhist. Although no structural roof of the period survives, the rock-cut chaityas
and raths at Mamallapuram, as well as paintings at Ajanta and the descriptions of
Chinese pilgrims, clearly show that roof structures were of wood, covered normally
with thatch. In Kashmir, there are a few surviving examples of steeply-pitched
pyramidal roofs of stone, on square buildings, but it seems likely that these were
masonry reproductions of wooden originals: a very similar type of wooden struc-
ture may still be found in temples in the remoter parts of the Kangra Valley in the
Himalayas.
Fain. The shrine was covered by flat domes (p. 1184a) or by what was virtually a
Hindu sikhara. In either case, the construction was of successively diminishing
courses of stone. In the case of the flat dome, these courses were either laid dia-
gonally each to the next (p. 1194B), or, in the larger examples, in circular courses
laid horizontally and gradually diminishing in diameter (cf. the Treasury of Atreus,
 |
ceceieeeeeeeeal
Leahee re ASSES HGOPA SEB

B. The Great Temple, Tanjore (1000). See p. 1191

Se
|
|
\
\
\
\
\
| ee
ol =

i5
ON |
’o
Mt
a
‘a im el
|
|
| F ELEVATION & SECTION .
|
|
AGODA: KANARAK : ORISS
|

i ra ,
NORTH GATEWAY OF
SANCHI STUPA euppuist) ,

Seeroe
eo INDIAN)

Bee hina r
Hp, Ka

Ne cs6 a
La eo)
A
Ae Teo

-><---106'0:
9".
0"
--7
COMPOUND PILLAR ae
SERINGHAM ,(DRAVIDIAN)

we
eee

SS
Ty N/ \ i Rano
bartes
eaeS Ree
ae
SINE
STONE ORNAMENT (HINDU)
&
een
GUO
(auRMese) STONE ORNAMENT (Hindu)
 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN 1195

Mycenae, p. 101). The concentric rings are elaborately carved, and the single cap
stone at the apex of the dome is often developed as a pendant.
Hindu. Roofs are either steeply-tapering sikharas formed of horizontal courses
of stone (p. I190D), or flatter pyramidal coverings to the mandap. In the latter case,
the span is often reduced either by the introduction of wide-spreading brackets
above the column capital, or by successive corbels as in Jain buildings. The vault
never seems to have been used at any period, however large the building, except in
an isolated and late case at Agra, which was under the direct influence of the many
Mogul buildings near-by.
COLUMNS
Buddhist. Buddhist columns are of two types, those based on Persepolitan models
(such as the laths), and those derived from Graeco-Roman origins. The former
have circular or octagonal shafts (p. 1186A) with bell-shaped capitals: these carry
animal supporters, either for the roof or (as in the case of laths) for the symbol of
the law. The bases shaped like inverted vases seem to be an indigenous develop-
ment; it has been suggested that they derive from stone or earthenware sockets to
protect the wooden columns from the attacks of water and insects. The Graeco-
Roman type may be rectangular in plan (as a pilaster), fluted, and crowned with
Corinthian or Composite type capitals (cf. pp. 191, 224G). More rarely, this type may
be circular, unfluted, and with an Ionic cap (cf. p. 160C, D), as at Jhaulian, Taxila.
Jain. Columns are much used, and very elaborately decorated. As at Mount
Abu, there may be prominent corbels below the capital to support the struts, and
the capital itself may carry corbels to support the roof beams, thus producing an
effect of superimposed capitals. In neither Jain nor Hindu columns is there any
standardization of ‘Orders’ as in Greek or Roman work.
Hindu. The column at Baroli (p. 1190c) shows many characteristics of the Hindu
column; the deeply cut bell-form capital (cf. Elephanta, p. 11858), the garland
decoration below the capital, the chain-and-bell ornament modulating the transi-
tion from the circular to polygonal shaft section, the four apsuras (female divinities)
below, and finally the heavy base with its deep-cut mouldings. As already pointed
out, the typical Hindu column does not exist, but this is a good example of an
often-found type. In Dravidian temples, the heavy cushion capital often appears,
(p. 1185a). In later periods decoration becomes so lavish that the column loses its
identity as a supporting member (p. 1194F, K), and assumes the character of free-
standing sculpture (cf. Greek caryatids, p. 136).
MOULDINGS
In all three styles, mouldings have a bulbous character, often heavily undercut.
The height and brightness of the sun produce strong shadow lines, and any
subtlety of moulding would be lost. In Buddhist Graeco-Bactrian mouldings, in
particular, the lack of refinement is noticeable when compared with their Greek or
Roman originals. A moulding made by overlapping rectangular slabs is often used.
In other cases, a semicircular openwork moulding, like basketwork, and also the
torus, are found. The double convex shape, into which the cross-pieces of Buddhist
railings are cut, forms horizontal bands of light and shade, taking the place of
mouldings (p. II94E).

ORNAMENT
In marked contrast to Hindu and Jain ornament, Buddhist ornament is restrained
both in character and extent, although in later periods and outlying places (such as
Ceylon, Indo-China and Java) it became almost Hindu in its exuberance. In the
Bactrian work of the north-west, familiar Hellenistic motives (such as garlands
1196 ARCHITECTURE IN INDIA AND PAKISTAN

carried by cupids, gryphons, and acanthus ornaments) are combined with more
exotic ones, like the double-headed eagle, elephants, and flying divinities. In the
Central Indian monuments (e.g. Sanchi, and Ajanta) the indigenous love of orna-
ment asserts itself more strongly; the female figure in its most voluptuous form is
often used, with an apparent disregard for Buddhist rules of asceticism. A female
holding the bough of a tree in an upraised hand, which becomes a familiar figure
in later periods, first appears in Buddhist work: the origins of the motive are
mysterious, and have been attributed severally to Alexandrian Egypt, and to
Scythian Central Asia. Painted wall decoration was widely used, and ranged from
purely architectural forms to the very elaborate and beautiful ‘genre’ paintings on
the cave walls at Ajanta, which provide invaluable social and architectural records
of the period. Jain and Hindu ornament, in contrast on the one hand to the severely
classical restraint of the Buddhist north-west, and on the other to the highly-
stylized decoration of the Muslims (p. 1249), is immensely exuberant, and based on
an appreciation of human and animal forms in their most sensual manifestations.
At its best, this sculpture is highly emotive and very beautiful; but it too easily
descends, first into sheer virtuosity, and thence into mechanical repetition. Much
of the highly elaborate Jain sculpture is an example of this. In the earlier, and
finest, examples (e.g. Hallabid) the sculptured ornament although keeping its
vitality and interest, is perfectly related to the buildings it adorns. But this is rare,
and more often the building is little more than a support for a completely dominant
cloak of decoration.
REFERENCE BOOKS
ACHARYA,P.K. A Dictionary of Indian Architecture. London, 1927.
BROWN;P. Indian Architecture, Buddhist and Hindu. Bombay, 1942.
Cambridge History of India. 6 vols., 1922.
CODRINGTON,K.DE B. Ancient India. London, 1926.
COHN, W. Indische Plastik. Berlin, 1923.
COOMARASWAMY,A.K. History of Indian and Indonesian Art. New York, 1927.
CUNNINGHAM, SIR A. Archaeological Survey of India, 23 vols. (2 vols. Cunningham only,
1762-5). Simla and Calcutta, 1871-87.
DE FOREST,L. Indian Domestic Architecture. Boston, 1885.
DEY, MUKUL. My Pilgrimages to Ajanta and Bagh. London, 1925.
FERGUSSON, J. Picturesque Illustrations of the Ancient Architecture of Hindostan. London,
1848.
—. Illustrations of the Rock-cut Temples of India. London, 1845.
—. Architecture of Ahmedabad. London, 1866.
—. History of Indian and Eastern Architecture. 2 vols., revised by Jas. Burgess and R.
Phene Spiers. London, 1910.
GANGOLY,O.C. Indian Architecture. 2nd ed. Calcutta, 1946.
HAVELL,E.B. The Ancient and Mediaeval Architecture of India. London, 1915.
KRAMRISCH,S. The Hindu Temple. Bombay, 1948.
LA ROCHE. Indische Baukunst. 6 vols. Berlin, 1921-2.
LE BON, G. Les Monuments de I’ Inde. Paris, 1893.
LE MAY,R. Buddhist Art in Siam. London, 1938.
Marg, Bombay. Articles by various writers from 1947 onwards.
MARSHALL, SIR J. Taxila. 3 vols. Cambridge, 1951.
MORELAND, W. H., and CHATTERJEE, SIR A. C. A Short History of the Indian People.
London, 1936.
RICHARDSON,A.E.,and CORFIATO,H. The Art of Architecture.
Revised ed., London, 1946.
SE »B. The Art and Architecture of India: Buddhist, Hindu, Jain. Pelican History of
rt, 1953.
SMITH, V. A. A History of Fine Art in India and Ceylon. 2nd ed. revised by K. de B.
Codrington. Oxford, 1930.
WHEELER, SIR M. Rome Beyond the Imperial Frontiers. London, 1954.
 Land over 3,000 feet
Mues 500
EW.

XXXI. CHINESE ARCHITECTURE

(Third century B.c. to present day)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. The Republic of China, comprising twenty-two provinces and
the three autonomous regions of Tibet, Inner Mongolia, and Sinkiang-Uigur,
covers an area larger than the whole of Europe and equal to nearly one-thirteenth
of the total land area of the world. The great bulk of transport in South China is
still carried on inland waterways as it has been for centuries, including the great
rivers Yangtze and Si Kiang, and their tributaries supplemented by canals; the
Grand Canal from Tientsin to Hangchow, about 600 miles long, at one time a
dominant waterway, has deteriorated in recent years. Wheeled transport super-
sedes water transport north of the Tsinling Mountains, and has done so ever since
the development of the ‘Silk Road’ from Changan 1,500 miles to Balkh in
Afghanistan at the time of Pan Ch’ao (A.D. 32-102). A programme of railway con-
struction was commenced in the twentieth century and continued in the 1930’s
with the construction of great trunk lines in the north, while in July 1956 the great
Paochi-Chengtu railway, 420 miles long, was completed. The country is mountain-
ous, with extensive fertile valleys in the middle and south-east, and great plains in
 1198 CHINESE ARCHITECTURE

the north. There are many excellent harbours, which have promoted the develop-
ment of Western influence in China, particularly during the past two hundred
years.
GEOLOGICAL. Coal is widely distributed, but the country is deficient in iron
and petroleum; in the south tin, copper, zinc, antimony, tungsten, manganese, and
mercury are abundant. The soil in the north is chiefly loess and alluvium with a
marked absence of trees; further south on the west of the Yangtze gorges there are
many pine trees, chestnuts and maples. Red sandstone is characteristic of Szech-
wan, where the dominant trees are nanmu, paulownia, catalpa, and broussonetia,
the paper mulberry tree. South of the Tsinling the bamboo tree is cultivated exten-
sively. Sedimentary rocks exist in South West China on the high plateau, and
jungle vegetation is prolific in the valleys. The mulberry tree, which has no direct
influence on architecture as a structural timber, created the ancient and prosperous
silk industry which initiated Chinese contacts with the Western World at the time
the Roman Empire was at its height. Timber is the principal material in Chinese
architecture; bamboo, pine, and the Persea nanmu, the tallest and straightest of all
the trees in China; it was floated down the Yangtze River in trunks to serve as
columns in palaces and temples in Peking. Bricks from the clay of the river plains
were also used, as well as limestone and sandstone; but brick and stone were never
considered as important as timber. A standard work on architecture, Ying Tsao Fa
Shih (The Method of Architecture) published by Imperial orderin the year A.D. I103
refers only to stonework as a material fit for use in thresholds, stairs, balusters,
engineering works, etc., and disregards brick altogether. Roofs were covered with
clay tiles, coloured and glazed with symbolic colours, black, red, azure, white and
yellow.
CLIMATE. The mountain ranges leave the north unprotected from the cold
strong winter winds from Mongolia, which, sweeping down from Asia produce
severe winters with an average January temperature in Peking of 23-5° F. Further
south it is warmer, and the winter temperature is equivalent to an English summer.
Because the country extends from latitude 45° to latitude 20° north of the equator,
it experiences a range of climate varying from extreme cold to almost tropical. The
north-east and south-westerly monsoons sweep across the country in summer and
winter, yielding the heaviest rainfall in the summer, averaging from 40 to 60 ins per
year. These climatic conditions are partly responsible for the characteristic Chinese
roof with its accentuated curved eaves. Heating of buildings was often provided by
charcoal burners without flues or fire-places; beds were heated with burning char-
coal.
RELIGIOUS. The main religious and ethical influences in China have been Con-
fucianism (Confucius, 551-479 B.C.), Taoism, and Buddhism. Confucianism was
a code of social conduct and a philosophy of life; it was not a religion as we under-
stand it; it laid stress on the family and ancestor worship; it was a doctrine of the
‘Middle Way’. Taoism attempted to transcend Confucianism and was founded at
about the same time, probably by Lao Tzii in the fourth to the third century B.c.
It encompassed mysticism and superstition and was readily combined with Bud-
dhism when that religion spread to China from India in the second century a.p.
by way of the three trade routes from India. By the first century A.D., Buddhist
monks and laymen were living in China, and a Buddhist temple was built at Anhui
in A.D. 190. It developed rapidly after the downfall of the Han (A.D. 221) and
exerted a great influence on architectural expression. The combination of Con-
fucianism, Taoism, and Buddhism has produced conceptions of the universe and
beliefs about the future closely allied with superstition, astrology and necromancy
which have controlled the planning of society and of cities as well as of the design
 CHINESE ARCHITECTURE 1199

of buildings. A pseudo-science, ‘féng shui’, evolved, which was based on a belief

that forces exist in every locality which act on all types of buildings, towns and
cities, for good or ill, and sites were chosen or adapted accordingly. With the
impact of the West, starting with the Jesuit mission in 1582, Christian influ-
ence gradually developed and is a potent factor in China today. Confucianism has
gradually disintegrated and ancestor worship has declined.
SOCIAL. As Chinese archaeology is still in its infancy there is very little positive
evidence about prehistoric China, but it is certain that there existed a culture be-
tween the Stone and the Bronze Age. Researches into records of solar eclipses and
other astronomical phenomena recorded by the Chinese, indicate dates ranging
from 3253 B.C. to 2127 B.C. as the earliest authentic historical records, but their
complicated system of chronology combined with confused and scanty records
makes it difficult to establish accurate dates until about 720 B.c. Before that time
dynastic history is legendary and includes the Emperor Fu-hsi (2852 B.c.) who, it
is claimed, evolved social order out of chaos. Fu-hsi was followed by Shén Nung,
who introduced agricultural implements and discovered medicine. He was suc-
ceeded by Huang Ti, the Yellow Emperor, who consolidated the Empire, enlarged
its boundaries, and introduced extensive reform and social improvements. Of a
succession of emperors that followed, the most outstanding was the great Yao
who, with his successor Shun, stands at the dawn of Chinese history as a model of
all wisdom and sovereign virtue. The dynasties Hsia (2205-1766 B.c.), Shang or
Yin (1766-1122 B.c.) followed, until the Chou (1122 B.c.) and first Emperor Wu
Wang, started an era of great expansion of culture and territory; but expansion
brought disintegration; the power of central government declined and feudalism
flourished, resulting in the break-down of the Empire into a number of warring
states similar in many respects to Europe in the Middle Ages. This deterioration
resulted in the emergence of thinkers and the expansion of thought and schools of
philosophy. Confucius sought to bring a new order by his code of ethics and educa-
tion, with emphasis on the sanctity of the family and filial piety. Contemporary with
Confucius was Lao Tzt, reputed founder of Taoism, who offered a doctrine of
universal love as his solution to social disorder. There were other philosophers of
vigorous thought, but the Chou dynasty, which meantime had survived in an
effete form and with much-shrunken dominions, continued to decline until it dis-
appeared and was replaced by the Ch’in (255-206 B.c.), the fourth emperor of
which, Shih Huang Ti, styled himself the First Emperor, and founded a new and
homogeneous empire on the ruins of the old feudal system. He divided the Empire
into thirty-six provinces, and built a vast palace by forced labour at Hsien Yang;
he also constructed by forced and convict labour fortifications including part of
the Great Wall. He suppressed opposition and criticism by destroying records of
all opposing ideas and doctrines, and imposed his will by harsh discipline. He built
roads, extended canals, and laid the foundations of a great Empire, which found
full expression in the succeeding dynasty, the Han (206 B.C.-A.D. 220) which so
developed the economic and cultural state of the Empire that at the time of the
Emperor Kuang Wu Ti, it vied with the Roman Empire of Hadrian as the most
powerful state on the face of the earth. During this time trade routes were developed
and commerce in silk, cloth, furs, rhubarb, and cinnamon was carried on exten-
sively with the Roman Empire, Persia, India and other Asiatic countries. There
was an exchange of ideas, an influx of foreign culture, and the introduction of
Buddhism. Confucianism and Taoism were revived, and the capital was moved
first to Changan and thence to Loyang. But the dynasty weakened and the Han
was followed by three and a half centuries of disunion, until the Empire was
reunited in the T’ang (A.D. 618-907) when, under the leadership of the second
1200 CHINESE ARCHITECTURE

Emperor T’ai Tsung, it became more powerful than before. Foreign traders came
by land and sea, and Chinese goods were on sale in Baghdad; Nestorian Christians,
Jews, Muslims, and Persians were seen in the streets of Canton. But the Chinese
were forbidden by Imperial rescript from going abroad, and their architecture
consequently suffered little influence from the expansion of trade. Buddhism
reached its peak and stimulated the arts and influenced architectural form; paint-
ing probably reached the highest point in Chinese history with an emphasis on
calligraphy and the use of the brush. Printing was introduced; books printed in
868 have been found in the grottoes of Tun-huang, and the first book on
architecture was issued in 1103. The Sung dynasty followed the T’ang, with capitals
at K’aiféng and Hangchow; from 960-1279 the cultural developments of the
T’ang were maintained, but the dynasty succumbed to the military superiority of
Kublai the Mongol, who founded the Ytian (Mongol) dynasty which flourished
until A.D. 1368. The Grand Canal was completed, and Chinese influence spread
further west as a result of the exploration of Marco Polo. With the collapse of the
Mongol Empire in 1368 there was an anti-foreign wave, and with the pre-
eminently Chinese dynasty of the Ming (1368-1644) foreign trade and influ-
ence deteriorated. The first Ming Emperor established his capital at Nanking
(southern capital), and his successor Yung Lo founded the northern capital Peking,
and laid out the city as one of the outstanding architectural conceptions of the
world. The ban on foreigners was lifted, and penetration by Jesuit missionaries
initiated a subsequent invasion of Western culture and ideas which eventually
transformed the social structure of the Empire. Manchus overthrew the Ming,
and established the Ch’ing dynasty in 1644, and this gave way to the Republic
in 1912. The outstanding feature of the Ch’ing is the increasing Western influ-
ence and the gradual but insistent infiltration of Western traders. To the Chinese
the Westerners were barbarians, and their ideas and influence were strongly
resisted; but since the formation of the Republic and the establishment of a dif-
ferent system of education largely influenced by America, the old culture and
philosophies have given way to Western methods and industrialization has become
firmly established. The construction of roads, railways, schools, factories, housing,
and welfare buildings now occupies the major part of the Chinese building prog-
ramme, constructed by Western methods and design. This transformation has
been accelerated by the People’s Republic of China, so that whereas in Sinkiang
in 1949 there were 14 factories with less than 4,000 workers, there were 400
factories and more than 58,000 workers in 1957, and this is typical of the whole of
China.
HISTORICAL. The early history of China is indistinguishable from the legends
of the Emperors, who were identified with various progressive steps in civilization.
The Chou dynasty is said to have waged war in the tenth century B.c. against the
barbarians from the north. During the Ch’in dynasty (255-206 B.c.) Shih Huang
Ti, the ‘First Emperor’ (246-210 B.C.) built part of the Great Wall against bar-
barian invasions. The earlier (Western) Han dynasty (206 B.c.-A.D. 25) sent
Chinese ambassadors to Western Asia, discovered India and made Eastern Turke-
stan a Chinese colony. In the time of the Later (Eastern) Han dynasty (A.D. 25-
220), Emperor Ming Ti extended the Empire and Buddhism was introduced from
India. During the reign of Ssti Ma-Yen of the Tsin dynasty (A.D. 265-420) the
Emperor Diocletian sent ambassadors to China (A.D. 284). T’ai-Tsung (A.D. 627—
649) of the T’ang dynasty (A.D. 618-907) purchased the alliance of the Turks, just
as the Emperor Justinian had done in A.D. 558, and regained Eastern Persia up to
the Caspian Sea. Ambassadors from Persia and Constantinople went on a mis-
sion to the Emperor in 645. During the Sung dynasty (960-1280) China was
 CHINESE ARCHITECTURE 1201

engaged in war with the conquering Mongols, which left her under the Mongol
heel for 88 years. Under the Emperor Shih Tsu (Kublai) (1280-94) of the
Mongol or Ytian dynasty (1280-1368), China reached her greatest extent and
with the exception of Hindustan, Arabia, and Western Asia, all the Mongol princes
as far as the Dnieper were her tributaries. Hung-Wu, the first Emperor of the Ming
‘dynasty (1368-1644), conquered the Mongols and established his capital at
Nanking, but his successor removed it to Peking, the present capital, in 1403. The
Ch’ing (Manchu) dynasty, which lasted from 1644 until the establishment of
the Republic (1912), introduced the shaved head and pigtail as emblems of
Tartar sovereignty. K’ang Hsi (1661-1721) added Tibet to the Empire and
published the Dictionary of the Chinese language. Ch’ien Lung (1735-95)
invaded Burma, Cochin-China, and Nepal, and crushed the Muslim rebellion. He
received Lord Macartney as first ambassador of George III. In 1840 war was
declared by England against China, and this marks the beginning of active Euro-
pean intervention. In 1873 foreign ministers obtained the right of audience
with the Emperor, and in 1912 the Chinese Republic adopted the calendar of
Western Europe. A period of internal strife and disunity followed and the inter-
ference of foreign powers accelerated China’s disintegration. China joined the
Allies in the First World War, but took little part in the conflict. In 1937 a
life and death struggle opened with Japan, and in 1941 China declared war with
Japan and became a member of the allied nations in the Second World War. In
1949 the Nationalist government collapsed, the Communists seized control, and
the People’s Republic of China was proclaimed. The Nationalists, evacuating to
Formosa under Chiang Kai-shek, still sought to recover the support and sympathy
of the Chinese on the mainland, but with little or no success.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The architecture of China is a faithful index of her civilization, for both were prac-
tically stationary for many centuries. Of the fine arts as understood in the West,
only painting was recognized by the Chinese; sculpture, architecture, and the
crafts were regarded as artisan work. The art was poetic rather than material; the
Chinese revelled in the beauty of nature and had little feeling for architectural
design, which they held subservient to human needs. Chinese architecture, though
subject to Buddhist and Muslim influence, held its own as an indigenous style
from the early centuries until the present day; there has been no distinction be-
tween sacred and secular architecture, and temples, tombs, public buildings, and
private houses, whether great or small, all follow the same plan.
The roof was the chief feature, supported on timber uprights and independent
of the walls, which were often as useless for support as were the large traceried
windows of the European Gothic style. The great Temple of Heaven at Peking
was dignified by a triple roof of blue tiles, and this use of bright colours, applied
in the form of glazed tiles and porcelain, is a characteristic of Chinese buildings;
the colours were symbolic of Chinese rites. ‘Pai-lous’ or gateways, of stone and
wood, derived from Indian ‘toranas’, are features of Chinese architecture and, like
many others, were only erected by government permission. Towers in stone, square
like those in the Great Wall, are of early date, and show influence of Mesopotamia
in the use of arch and vault. The pagoda, the most typical Chinese building, is
usually octagonal in plan, with thirteen storeys and repeated roofs, highly coloured,
and with upturned eaves. The Chinese built chiefly in timber; brick and timber
were sometimes combined, and stone was reserved for special structures and parts
of buildings. The Chinese had little religious zeal, and therefore few great temples;
1202 CHINESE ARCHITECTURE

no territorial aristocracy and therefore no noble country houses; little pride of liv-
ing and therefore no town mansions, while their domestic architecture was tram-
melled by sumptuary laws to mark the social status of the owner.

EXAMPLES

TEMPLES
The Temple of Heaven, (Ch’i Nien Tien), Peking (A.D. 1420), circular and
triple-roofed, with roofs covered with deep cobalt-blue glazed tiles, dominates the
Ch’i Ku T’an or altar of prayer for grain, open to the sky with three tiers of marble
steps and balustrades. The temple, facing south, is 99 ft high with the upper roof
supported by four gigantic columns, and the lower roofs by twelve columns, all
straight trunks of nanmu trees. Originally founded by Ch’ien Lung (A.D. 1420) it
was rebuilt correctly in every detail in recent years. To the south is the Great
Altar of Heaven, the most sacred of all Chinese religious structures, consisting of
marble terraces and nine circles of nine marble stones symbolizing Chinese
numerical philosophy. There are other single-roofed temples, of which one is “Hall
of Central Peace’, and another the Temple of Agriculture (p. 1204p). In all
these circular buildings there is the characteristic bracket frieze under the widely
projecting eaves.
The Temple of Honan, Canton, (p. 1204N) is a typical Buddhist temple, en-
closed by a wall with gateway, porch, ante-chapel, successive halls, and sanctuary
with the idol, and seats for the monks, with a ‘dagoba’, offices and kitchens beyond.
The Temple of the Sleeping Buddha, near Peking, built of brick in two
storeys, is unusual in having circular-headed windows in a clear-storey as well as
in the ground storey. The columns are faced with glazed bricks, and between them
are niches with the statue of Buddha; the roof has an elaborate cresting with finials
and flamboyant dragons (p. 1203A).
Most Chinese temples, however, are of the simple T’ing type as exemplified in
the Sacrificial Hall of Yung Lo (fifteenth century A.D.) near Peking consisting of
a concave roof on uprights, covered with brilliant coloured tiles, yellow at the
temple of the earth, red at the temple of the sun, bluish-white at the temple of the
moon. There are monastery temples containing the image of the Buddhist triad—
just as in England there were monastic churches—surrounded by a wall and ap-
proached through the typical ‘pai-lou’ or gateway. The whole monastic group
consists of temple, ‘dagoba’ or relic shrine, bell-tower, pagoda, library, and dwell-
ings for the monks. There are also ancestral temples such as the Confucian Temple
in the Kuo Tzu Chien, Peking, and mosques which resemble the Buddhist temples.

PAGODAS
The pagodas (t’ai), derived from Indian prototypes, are distributed in considerable
numbers over the country and form the most important structures in the temple
enclosures (pp. I1203B, 1204E). They vary from three to fifteen storeys in height, the
number being uneven in every case and very often thirteen, sometimes with stair-
cases to each floor, and were probably originally constructed in timber; those that
remain are mostly of brick, the timber structures having perished. Pagodas had
formerly a religious significance, but those erected latterly are secular in character
and are sometimes monuments to victory; they are often associated with féng-shui
to insure good fortune. They are frequently polygonal in plan and the roof slopes
to each storey, and are elaborately ornamented.
The Pagoda, Sung Yiieh Sst, Honan (c. A.D. 523), is the oldest pagoda still
 CHINESE ARCHITECTURE 1203

RRR WG "Fell n~_eo

STUNT Arte

Se =
See. tae
as

3. Typical Chinese pagoda. See p. 1202 c. A typical pai-lou. See p. 1205

 1204 CHINESE ARCHITECTURE

| fe MERCHANTS
gf

eee

SECT
La :
ov
|
|
REA
yea |
|
a REFERENCE TABLE
» TH: Ve 1 PASSAGE _ Il OFFICES
2 RECEPTION RMS. 12 SHOP
3 BEDROOMS [3 LARGE RMS.
f 4 STUDY PARTIONED IN
k S OPEN COURTS 0 GUEST RMS.
6 DINING HALL J4IDOL ALTAR |
Jz KITCHEN ISFAMILY | Ba
4 8 SERVANTSRM. APARTMENTS
i 9 BATH ROOM I6 SHOPMENS
JOLAVATORIES LODGINGS

aaa
eee 2
|e
) is Gall! i
SASS

in?
nina i | i | ! ly
\I

ee
\ an

alieee = cuesth
ek
M GARDEN TEMPLE N PAVILION:GREAT TEMPLE: CANTON GATE TEMPLE or CONFUCIL
 CHINESE ARCHITECTURE 1205

standing in China; constructed of brick and mud on an octagonal base, it rises to

a height of about 90 ft in fifteen blind storeys.
The Porcelain Pagoda, Yiian Ming Yiian, near Peking, is a fine example of
glazed faience after the style of the famous porcelain pagoda at Nanking (p. 1204E)
which was destroyed by the Taiping rebels in A.D. 1854. The whole of the brick
walls and projecting roof eaves are clothed in coloured porcelain tiles, glazed in five
colours, deep purplish-blue, rich green, yellow, sang de boeuf red, and turquoise-
blue, which were intended to suggest the five jewels of Buddhist paradise. Con-
spicuous amongst many other pagodas are the Pa Li Chuan Pagoda, near Peking
(thirteenth century A.D.) of thirteen storeys; the Nan t’a at Fang Shan, Chih-li
(eleventh century A.D.) of eleven storeys; the Pei t’a at Fang Shan, Chih-li (eighth
century A.D.); the pagoda at Ling Kuang Sst, near Peking (seventh century A.D.)
of thirteen storeys, built of brick upon stone foundations; and others at Hangchow,
and Foochow, where the White Pagoda of seven storeys dominates the town. There
are the Great Pagoda, the Twin Pen Pagodas—reputed to be 1,000 years old—and
the Ink Pagoda, 120 ft high, all at Soochow, and others at Shanghai, Ningpo,
Nanking and Peking. There is a somewhat lifeless example in Kew Gardens
designed by Sir William Chambers, and there are models in the Indian Museum,
South Kensington.

PAI-LOUS
The pai-lous of China (p. 1203c) bear a family resemblance to the toranas of India
(cf. the Sanchi stupa, p. 1180) and the torii of Japan, and were erected by special
authority as memorials to deceased persons of distinction. They were constructed
of wood or stone and have one or three openings, formed by posts supporting
horizontal rails bearing an inscription and often crowned with bold projecting roofs
of symbolical coloured tiles. The pai-lou which spans the avenue leading to the
Temple of the Sleeping Buddha, near Peking, is a magnificent example with
three arches in sculptured marble, separated by vermilion stucco walls with
panelled faience enamelled in yellow, green and blue, in the centre of which is the
inscribed marble tablet. The all-timber pai-lou at the lake of the Summer Palace,
Peking, is a characteristic example of another form of pai-lou which marks the
entrance to a sacred or beautiful place; the marble pai-lou at the Altar of Heaven,
Peking, shows the type of structure which is one of the most salient features of
Chinese architectural design, upon which was lavished all possible richness of
decoration.

TOMBS
Tombs, though associated with ancestor-worship and therefore sacred, are not of
great architectural value because the pai-lous were the real memorial monuments.
Tombs are sometimes cone-shaped mounds surrounded by stones, sometimes cut
in the rock or designed in the hillside, with a horseshoe back in stone sloping to the
front and covered with symbolic carvings, while mythical animals guard the
entrance.
The Tombs of the Ming Dynasty (A.D. 1368-1644) north of Peking, are entered
through triumphal gateways or pai-lous of white marble and along an avenue a
mile in length, flanked by thirty-two large monolithic figures (12 ft high) of camels,
horses, priests, elephants, lions and griffins. Each of the thirteen tombs consists of
an earthen mound, half a mile in circumference, supported by a retaining wall
20 ft high, and they seem to be founded on such monuments as the Sanchi stupa
in India (p. 1180).
The Tomb of Yung-lo, Peking (A.D. 1425), consists of a tumulus, surrounded
1206 CHINESE ARCHITECTURE

by a crested wall with a three-storeyed tower, two entrance gateways, and an

ancestral hall of the T’ing type in the entrance court.

PALACES
Imperial palaces and official residences were erected as isolated, one-storeyed
pavilions resembling temples in general design, and crowned with the typical roof,
but these detached buildings are not imposing as are the large homogeneous
palaces of Europe.
The Imperial Palace, Peking, situated in the centre of the ‘Forbidden City’,
has three vast halls, all similar in design, of magnificent proportions and resplendent
in oriental decoration. The “Tai Ho Tien’ Hall of Highest Peace (A.D. 1602) is the
most important, with terraces and open verandahs, and is formed of nave and
aisles, parallel to the facade, separated by great columns, with the Imperial dais at
the centre. A Pavilion (p. 1204F) of the Summer Palace, Peking, destroyed A.D. 1860,
gives an idea of some of the smaller buildings. Within the enclosing wall there were
residences for emperor and officers of state, and the groups of buildings were set
amidst pleasure gardens, lakes and grottoes on a magnificent scale.

HOUSES
Houses, generally of one storey like the temples, are constructed with timber sup-
ports, filled in with brickwork (p. 1201). The building regulations not only govern
the dimensions, but also the number of columns, and thus had a marked effect on
the plan and arrangement of Chinese houses; for, while the Emperor had his hall
of nine bays, a prince was restricted to seven, a mandarin to five and an ordinary
citizen to three bays. Roofs are of a steep pitch with boldly projecting eaves and
highly ornamented ridges of coloured and glazed tiles, with the angles turned up
and finished with grotesque animals or fantastic ornament. The roof-framing in
bamboo and other wood is frequently painted red, green or blue. The houses owe
much of their character to their environment of gardens planned to suggest a
natural landscape, elaborated with fountains, artificial rocks, woodland scenery,
lakes, flower-beds, hanging plants, bridges, watercourses, stepping-stones, and
garden temples (p. 1204M). Town houses of importance are also made up of a col-
lection of isolated pavilions, surrounded by gardens. There are three principal
divisions, viz.: (a) vestibule or porter’s lodge on the street; (6) audience chamber
and family rooms; (c) kitchen and servants’ rooms (p. I204A, B, C).

BRIDGES
Bridges form conspicuous features in a country of rivers and waterways, and con-
stitute the main architectural characteristic of the Chinese landscape; it has been
estimated that there are about twelve bridges per square mile in many parts of the
country, and about two and a half million altogether. They are of various types of
construction and design, pontoon bridges, wooden truss bridges, stone bridges,
arched bridges of brick and stone, cantilever bridges and suspension bridges.
Pontoon bridges have been in use since the beginning of recorded history, a well-
known example being that at Ningpo. Nearly as old as the pontoon bridge is the
wooden truss bridge, and in the densely-forested mountainous districts of the
country there are countless examples of this form of construction. In the area
around the Yangtze delta, where natural stone is plentiful, bridges built of granite
are numerous; the Chinese bridge-builders used this material to its maximum
ability, allowing no margin for safety. Stone truss bridges in spans less than 14-16
ft, and 6-10 ft high above the water were the cheapest form of construction for
 CHINESE ARCHITECTURE 1207

narrow canals. They were also used for wider spans, such as the ‘Bridge of 10,000
Ages’, Foochow, built A.D. 1323, 1,270 ft long and 14 ft 6 ins wide, with thirty-five
intermediate piers and thirty-six spans; the ‘Bridge of 10,000 Times Peace’, at
Tsienchowfu, built during the Sung Dynasty, is 3,780 ft long and 16 ft wide, with
forty-seven spans. Normally, however, bridges of great length were arched; the
arch is never skew, and the abutments are nearly always vertical; the arch stones
are cut to fit each other exactly but are not radiating voussoirs. Mortar was seldom
used either in the arch, abutments or foundations. Arches were usually circular,
but pointed arches were sometimes used, as in a bridge at Yachowfu, Szechwan.
The ‘Jewel Belt’ bridge, near Soochow, has fifty-three arches, all semicircular; the
‘camel-back’ bridge at the Summer Palace, Peking, has a pointed arch. In those
parts of the country where tree trunks were easily obtainable, cantilever construc-
tion was popular; this incorporated stone abutments supporting piled up canti-
levered wooden trunks which carried the horizontal roadway. In Western China,
the use of bamboo rope encouraged the construction of suspension bridges with
granite abutments and wooden intermediate supports with bamboo ropes; at Kwan
Hsien there is a bridge of this kind 700 ft long, with its longest span 200 ft by 9 ft
wide, which is carried by ten bamboo cables each 63 ins in diameter. The bamboo
ropes have a breaking load of 26,000 lbs. per sq. in. The Yangtze River Bridge
(A.D. 1957), is one of the world’s largest bridges, of 5,480 ft total length with a
clearance above the water level of 59 ft, constructed of concrete piers with a double-
decker steel-and-concrete decking. It was commenced in A.D. 1955 and completed
twenty-six months later.

THE GREAT WALL OF CHINA

The ‘Great Wall’ (214 B.c.) (p. 1197), the most famous of ancient Chinese building
undertakings, is 1,400 miles long, 20 to 30 ft high, 25 ft thick at the base, sloping to
15 ft at the top. There are square towers at intervals in this immense mileage of
masonry which, like Hadrian’s Wall in Britain, follows the contours of the country,
climbs mountain tops, descends deep gorges, strides across lofty table-lands, and
spans wide rivers, like a huge serpent wrought in brick and stone. Recent investiga-
tions of the brick arches in the Wall have led to the conclusion that the Wall was
originally an earth embankment faced with stone at a later date and that the brick
arches in the passages and the watch towers originate from A.D. 1368, when the
whole Wall was thoroughly repaired.

MODERN BUILDINGS
Since 1949, a vast number of new buildings have been erected in China; in Peking
alone the total floor area of new buildings amounts to over 150 million sq. ft,
including commercial buildings, industrial buildings, schools and colleges, hos-
pitals, hotels, cinemas and theatres and housing. These buildings show a complete
departure from Chinese tradition and exhibit (with a few exceptions) an unimagina-
tive adaptation of Western Renaissance revival in concrete and stone. The Peking
Institute of Iron and Steel Technology, in symmetrical blocks of three and four
storeys, flat-roofed, with uniformly distributed windows in unrelieved facades, is
typical. The Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Assembly Hall has
an entrance with three huge arched openings, with attached columns on the sup-
porting piers terminating in crude capitals. Blocks of four-storeyed flats are similar
to those to be found anywhere in the West, and it is only in a few buildings such as
the Asian Students’ Sanitorium that any semblance of Chinese individuality can be
found.
 1208 CHINESE ARCHITECTURE

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. Buddhist temples resemble those of India, consisting of successive open
courts and porticoes with kitchens, refectories, and sleeping cells for the priests.
The normal type consists of three lofty pavilions of one storey, with parallel open
timber roofs, approached by broad flights of steps, gateways, and bridges. Houses,
like temples, face south; the front door opens into a courtyard with rooms on either
side and a hall at the end, followed by another and often by a third or women’s
court with garden beyond; while all windows, as in French fortified chateaux, face
inwards.
WALLS. Stone is employed in important edifices, but ordinary building materials
are brick and timber. Most Chinese buildings of wood are raised on a stone or brick
platform as a protection against damp. Bricks sometimes have a glazed coloured
surface.and walls are also faced with glazed tiles or majolica. Walls are often con-
structed hollow, as described by Sir William Chambers, thus saving material and
effecting a more equable temperature in the house. The ‘t’ais’ or ‘pagodas’ are
mostly of brick covered with highly-coloured glazed tiles or marble, and vary from
three to fifteen storeys, each reduced in height and provided with projecting roof
(pp. 1203B, I204E). The veranda or portico of wooden columns is a special feature of
dwelling-houses (p. 1204N).
OPENINGS. Doorways are square-headed, but varied in outline by fretted pen-
dants from the horizontal timbers. “Pai-lous’ are distinctive Chinese gateways (p.
1203C), sometimes as entrances to temples and tombs, sometimes as monuments to
the deceased, and sometimes they stand across a street. Their construction is
timber in origin, and they consist of two or more upright posts with horizontal
frieze, making one, two, or three openings, sometimes surmounted by a series of
brackets like those under the temple eaves. Windows are of similar form, suiting
the rectangular framing of timber posts or lashing together of bamboos (p. I2I0).
They are frequently filled in with the lining of the oyster shell, which is as trans-
parent as talc and admits an effective subdued light. Rice paper was also used
instead of glass in windows.
Rooks. The roof is the principal feature of the building, and contrasts strongly
with the Greek, Roman, and Renaissance styles, in which there is often an evident
endeavour to hide the roof, whereas the Chinese roof-ridges are laden with elaborate
ornamental cresting and the up-tilted angles are finished off with fantastic dragons
and grotesque ornament. It is considered a sign of dignity to place roofs one over
the other, and this system also serves to protect the interior from extremes of heat
and cold. The framing of the characteristic T’ing roof with ‘I’rimoya’ gables is of
open timber construction and is supported on wooden posts independent of the
enclosing walls (pp. 1203, 1204). Roofs, which are concave in section, are generally
covered with enamelled tiles of S shape (pantiles) set in mortar, which is also used
to form cover-joints as a protection from the driving winds (p. 1210). The roof-
framing consists of a system of trusses in rigid rectangles (not triangles as in
Europe) formed of bamboos held together by wooden tenons, and thus the weight
of the roof acts vertically and no oblique thrust comes on the walls (p. 1204H, K).
The lightness and strength of bamboo were important factors in influencing a
system of construction quite different from the framed European roof-truss. The
connection between the roof and the pillars which sustain it is often strengthened
by brackets, and the soffits are often divided into square or octagonal coffers by
means of raised ribs with brass socketings at their intersection.
COLUMNS. Chinese building procedure as applied to columns is peculiar, and
is the reverse of that in other countries; for instead of first raising the columns and
 CHINESE ARCHITECTURE 1209
framing the superstructure upon them, the Chinese first made the framework of
the roof and that determined the position of the columns, which were often of
nanmu wood, while the rigidity of the framework and roof-beams was relied on to
keep the columns in position on the stone foundations; in short, instead of putting
the roof on the columns, they put the columns under the roof (p. 1204G, M, N). It
was therefore essential that the roof-beams should be tenoned direct at the various
heights into the shaft, without the intervention of a second member or capital,
which was therefore omitted, but the roof-beams were supported by brackets, often
multiplied in number and ornate in character. Chinese columns, whether for
temples, pai-lous, palaces, or houses, are unique, for in all other styles the capital
is one of the most important of architectural features. Columns, whether free-
standing, as in palace halls, or carried up as an integral part of the wall, were with-
out capitals, and were bound direct to the roof-beams of the rectangular-framed
roof which press vertically down on them, and thus columns and roofs are the chief
features of the T’ing type of building, in which the walls are of no constructive
value.
MOULDINGS. In China, where roof and columns are the chief architectural
features, and where building is generally in brick or timber and much of the orna-
ment is in glazed tiles, mouldings play a small part in decoration. In fact, here as
in other styles where wall tiling came in, mouldings went out. They are seen in the
cyma and ovolo of the bronze bases of timber pillars, but as there are no capitals
they do not appear again in the columns; simple mouldings, however, occur in the
compound brackets supporting the roof timbers, which are chiefly treated with
grotesque carving. They arealso used in the panelled railing round temple enclosures,
but in the temples and pagodas the chief relief is found in the boldly projecting
uplifted eaves of the superimposed roofs (pp. 1203, 1204).
ORNAMENT (p. 1204). Chinese ornament expresses national characteristics. All
Eastern nations appear to have a natural instinct for colour, and the Chinese are no
exception. Colour schemes form an integral part of Chinese architecture; roofs are
covered with brightly glazed tiles in symbolic colours, while the outstanding ridges
and hips are emphasized with highly coloured dragons, fishes, and grotesque figures
in glazed terra-cotta. Coloured ornament is applied to buildings in the form of
enamelled glazed tiles, painted woodwork, landscape and figure subjects. The
Chinese excel in the minor arts, in silk- and cotton-weaving, in carvings of wood
and ivory, and in porcelain ware. The Chinese national sense for art found its out-
let not in architecture, but in painting, of which from early times there were several
great schools. The Chinese were past masters in the use of the brush, with which
they produced a wonderful fineness of line, as is seen in their calligraphy, for which
they used a soft brush instead of a hard stylo. Thus it was that their decoration in
architecture took the form of colour applied to surfaces on which were painted
landscapes, birds, and flowers. The Buddhist religion encouraged their love of
mystery and symbolism, and the great yellow dragon and the tiger were freely
introduced into decorative colour schemes.

REFERENCE BOOKS
ALLOM,T.,and WRIGHT, G.N. The Chinese Empire. Ilustrated. 2 vols., 1858-9.
BOERSCHMANN;E. Die Baukunst und religidse Kultur der Chinesen. Berlin, 1911.
—. Chinesische Architektur. 2 vols., Berlin, 1926.
BUSHELL, STEPHEN W. Chinese Art. London, 1924.
CHAMBERS, SIR W. Designs of Chinese Buildings. London, 1757.
CHI, TSUI. A Short History of Chinese Civilisation. London, 1942.
DOUGLAS,R.K. Society in China. London, 1894.
1210 CHINESE ARCHITECTURE

EDKINS, J. Chinese Architecture. Shanghai, 1890.

FUGL-MEYER;, H. Chinese Bridges. Shanghai, 1937.
GEIL, W.E. Eighteen Capitals of China. London, 1gIt.
GRATTAN, F.M. Notes upon the Architecture of China. London, 1894.
HILDEBRAND, H. Der Tempel Ta-chiieh-sy bei Peking. Berlin, 1897.
JONES, O. Examples of Chinese Ornament. London, 1867.
LATOURETTE,K.S. The Chinese Civilisation. New York, 1941.
MUNSTERBERG, O. Chinesische Kunst-geschichte. 2 vols., Esslingen, 1910-12.
PALEOLOGUE,M.L’4rt chinots. Paris, 1887.
SIREN, O. The Imperial Palaces of Peking. 3 vols., Paris, 1926.
—. The Walls and Gates of Peking. London, 1924.
TOKIWA, D., and SEKINO,T. Buddhist Monuments in China. Tokyo, 1930.

Temple at Canton. See p. 1208 (under ROOFS)

 Japan

XXXIT. JAPANESE ARCHITECTURE

(Sixth century A.D. to present day)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. Japan, with its principal island, Honshiu, and attendant islands
to north and south, lies off the eastern coast of Asia, from which it is separated by
the Sea of Japan. The eastern shores of Japan are bounded by the Pacific Ocean.
Geographically Japan has many points of resemblance to Great Britain; both lie
opposite populous continents with indented coast-lines providing excellent har-
bours; both are at the head of important trade routes and across international lines
of communication. Japan and Great Britain also lie in the path of warm ocean
currents, which tend to produce equable temperatures.
GEOLOGICAL. The prevalence of earthquakes in Japan has had a profound
effect upon building development. Practically the whole of Japan is rugged hill
country, and some four-fifths of the entire area is occupied by forests and wild
vegetation. The land however, is one of very great natural beauty. There is prob-
ably a greater diversity of trees than in any other country. Bamboo is plentiful,
and extensively used in building. Stone is mainly of volcanic origin and un-
stratified. Granites and porphyries are well represented, but there is a dearth of
lime and sandstone. Stone is used for foundation work, or in polygonal form for
the lower portions of walling, upon which would be erected an upper timber
structure.
1212 JAPANESE ARCHITECTURE

CLIMATIC. Japan is influenced by a cold airstream from Asia in winter, and by

the incursion of warm moist air from the Pacific in the summer. The mountainous
nature of the country, in conjunction with the prevailing airstreams, conduces to
exceptionally heavy rainfall, particularly in the summer. Houses, wherever possible,
face south and deeply projecting eaves are provided to give protection against the
sun, while high courtyard walls screen the northern aspect from the cold winds of
winter. In summer, portable partitions forming house fronts are removed, leaving
the dwellings quite open to the breezes.
RELIGIOUS. Shinté was the Chinese name for the indigenous polydemonism
which existed in Japan before the introduction of Buddhism. While Shintéism
was without any well-defined moral code, it did lay great stress upon ancestor and
nature worship. Image worship or elaborate temple buildings were uncalled for.
The native Shinté faith was profoundly affected by Buddhism, introduced from
the Chinese mainland about A.D. 550. Buddhism encouraged the erection of
temples, and its mystic symbolism inspired the artistic Japanese temperament to
the production of countless images of every possible size and fantastic form. The
priesthood contributed greatly to the development of the country, even in road
construction and bridge building, which by aiding communication between isolated
localities greatly helped the unification of the country and strengthened the influ-
ence of the priesthood. Buddhism gradually became the paramount religious
influence, but Shint6ism was never extinguished, and in course of time was grafted
upon the Buddhist faith. In relatively modern times Shintdéism regained pre-
dominance, and by its tenets largely contributed to the fervent Japanese nationalism
displayed in recent history.
SOCIAL. Japan can be credited with a degree of civilization even before the true
historic period, which commenced about A.D. 400, when Chinese culture was intro-
duced through Korea. Early written records, the Kojiki, a ‘Record of Ancient
Matters’ (A.D. 712), and the Nihongi, the ‘Japanese Chronicle’ (A.D. 720), com-
mence chronology with the Emperor Jimmu, who is reputed to have united Japan
in 660 B.c. By A.D. 500 the Japanese had become a distinctive race of people, but
at a primitive state of development, with the population divided into isolated com-
munities ruled by chieftains. These conditions led to intrigue among the rulers,
superstition became rampant and abuses flourished. During the Suiko period (A.D.
552-645), Buddhism became firmly established and the nation tended to become a
bureaucratic state with Chinese laws and ceremonial. The Mikado, as the most
powerful chieftain, acquired certain prerogatives with which he eventually acquired
full domination over the nation. It is reputed that by about 600, more than four
hundred Buddhist temples had been erected. Nara became the capital in 710,
and the city was laid out with nine gates, a palace and seven great temples. When
Kidto became the capital in 794, the arts of domestic architecture and land-
scape gardening made great strides. Through many vicissitudes and in the face of
open aggression, Buddhism gained in strength and fortified monasteries multi-
plied. Feudalism, at its height in the thirteenth century, recognized three groups—
the Emperor and nobles, the Shoguns with the military caste, and the people.
Under the Tokugawa dynasty (1603-1868), the divine descent of the Emperor
was emphasized and actively promulgated. After continual strife, which at times
resulted in a full civil war, the last of the Shoguns resigned in 1867. A con-
stitution was formed in 1890 which eventually recognized the rights of the
people. The representative government which emerged laid the foundations of
the subsequent progressive position of Japan.
HISTORICAL. The early history of Japan is obscure, while later records for the
main part are both vague and unreliable. The Japanese, however, date back an
 JAPANESE ARCHITECTURE 1213

unbroken line of Mikados to the Emperor Jimmu, reputed to have ascended the
throne in 660 B.c. There is clear evidence of Chinese influence as early as the
seventh century of our era. The Japanese have at all times tended towards a self-
imposed isolationism, with exclusion of all foreign intercourse. Overseas trade was
a government monopoly; thus there was no incentive for individual enterprise in
foreign commerce. Some intercourse was established with Korea and China as
early as the eighth century a.D., but it was not until 1543 that the Portuguese
discovered and began trading with Japan. This was the first direct contact that the
Japanese had with peoples of the Western World. Christianity was introduced in
1549 by S. Francis Xavier, but this missionary effort led to many conflicts.
Envoys from Japan visited Europe in 1582. Korea was invaded by the Japanese
in 1592. Despite these tentative contacts with the outer world, Japan reverted
to isolationism and in 1614 all foreign priests were expelled. The Spaniards
were driven out in 1624, and the Portuguese in 1638. Christianity was
finally interdicted on the departure of the Portuguese, and then for a period of
almost 200 years, Japan was closed to the outside world. Commercial treaties with
America and European countries were, however, entered into in 1854, when
Japan felt the effects of American enterprise and English institutions. Following
these contacts came wars with China and Russia, while in 1914 Japan joined
the alliance against Germany; but in 1941 she sided with the Axis powers.

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The architecture of Japan was largely derived from China, but at all times main-
tained its own special characteristics of lightness and delicacy. Refinement in
Japanese architecture, combined with minuteness in carving and decoration, are
particularly noticeable in timber construction, where cumulative skill and artistry
of generations of craftsmen render work in timber akin to fine joinery. Notable are
the dominant roofs, which form a striking contrast with practice in the Middle East
and India, where flat terrace roofs predominate. The roofs of Japan, with exquisite
curvature and exotic decoration, are supported upon a succession of simple or
compound brackets which are striking features (p. 1216K). The conventional
arrangement of these brackets produces what are known as ‘orders’. Japanese
temples, which were inspired by Chinese influence, do not rely upon monotonous
repetition of similar features as in China but owe much of their distinctive char-
acter to a well-balanced symmetry of component parts. Interiors are largely depen-
dent upon the justly world-famous decorative art of Japan. Decoration, with lavish
use of gold lacquer and brilliant colouring, can cover both walls and ceilings, and
is particularly suited to the subdued lighting of temple buildings. Minor details—
gateways, torii, belfries, summer-houses and garden treatment—are all imbued
with a characteristic national feeling and contribute to the formation of delightful
settings for many buildings.

EXAMPLES
TEMPLES
Buddhist Temples at H6riuji, Nara, and Nikko, like other examples, under-
went little change from Chinese prototypes. The mountainous character of the
country made it possible to utilize natural terraces for temple sites, instead of hav-
ing to rely upon artificial, built-up platforms which are the rule in China. In Japan,
avenues of trees, and rows of standard lanterns in both stone and bronze, produce
picturesque and imposing effects in conjunction with buildings when viewed
1214 JAPANESE ARCHITECTURE

against the sombre background of wooded landscape. Generally, temples comprise

isolated structures within concentric enclosures, the outer enclosure formed by a
low wall, the second as a promenade for priests, and the third enclosing the main
temple building surrounded by a lofty, roofed screen wall. Temples are invariably
raised upon a stone foundation to a height of approximately 5 ft, and the sanctuary
is reached by steps leading to a veranda covered by the projecting roof of the
temple in the centre, a typical example being the Temple of Miyo-Jin-Kanda,
Tokyo (p. 1216A). In 1949, fire destroyed the main portion of the Temple at
Horiuji, but this has now been faithfully restored to its original form; an example
of Japanese reverence for tradition. Mortuary temples of the Shoguns at Tokyo
are regarded as ranking among the more famous buildings of Japan.
The Buddhist Temple of Hommonji, near Tokyo, has a two-storey gateway
and a reliquary, a library, reception hall and rooms for priests, besides a pagoda.
Tiles were used for roofing of Buddhist temples, instead of the thatch customary
on Shint6 shrines.
The Shint6 shrine of Kamiji-Yama, in Isé (p. 1220), comprises a series of
single-storeyed buildings typical of other Shinté structures. While these shrines
are commonly considered as being of little architectural importance, they are signi-
ficant as contributing to the picturesque element in the Japanese scene. The
shrines in Isé offer another example of the national homage to tradition, for despite
the fact that they are entirely rebuilt during the course of every twenty years, the
shrines today remain exact replicas of original structures.
The Kurodani Temple, KiGto (p. 12154), is noted for its beautiful garden, and
is surrounded by a cemetery with typical monuments.

PAGODAS
Pagodas followed in the wake of Buddhistic influence from China, but those now
standing mainly date from the seventeenth century, and are adjuncts of important
temples. They are square in plan, mostly five-storeyed and about 150 ft in height.
In construction, they are virtually suspended around a central timber post, thus
providing a measure of stability against earthquake shock. The ground storey con-
tains images and shrines, while the upper storeys serve as ‘belvederes’. There are
wide projecting roofs to each storey, and the subtle curvature distinguishes them
from comparable Chinese examples.
The Pagoda, Ho6riuji, is the earliest example remaining, and is reputed to have
been built by Koreans in 607. This pagoda is supported by a great central
post, 100 ft high and 3 ft square at the base, the whole being surmounted by a
curious finial, decorated with metal rings and bells.
The Pagoda, Hokiji (646), is a particularly beautiful example, and while
probably constructed by a Japanese master, it clearly follows the Korean tradition.
The three-storeyed Pagoda, Yakushiji, was built only a little later; 680.
This is notable not only because it comprises three storeys, but also because it is
one of the earliest works by native builders. It is more graceful than the Korean-
inspired examples, and introduces the truly national style.
The Pagoda, Bessho, is a four-storeyed octagonal structure, while the Tenno-ji
Pagoda, Osaka (p. 1216G) and the Pagoda, Yasaka (1618) (p. I215B), are fine
examples of five-storeyed pagodas.

TOMBS
Reverence for the dead has at all times led to the erection of large and small monu-
ments. Apart from the tombs of the Shoguns, Tokyo, which are world-famous, the
Tomb of Ieyasu, Nikk6, is typical of the larger mausoleum. Flights of steps
 JAPANESE ARCHITECTURE 1215

A. Kurodani Temple, Kidto. See opposite page

HM
ok:

B. Pagoda, Yasaka (1618). See opposite page

 1216 JAPANESE ARCHITECTURE

NIATALIATTTATTPA
gyngggu9 ya
HR
avi He

TEMPLE OF MIYO-JIN- KANDA.

DA: TOF
tere MIDDLE 4

tht SS Pasay on ao OA

Bare
Besrors
i == Se
ayELEVATION
aS FUELS +
; [Ela | KIT
DRESSING |WOMEN'S |_|)’
REFERENCE TABLE 4 RM. |BATHRM. {5 RM
at oth! do,
Fecal rs, Bor!
1 ENTRANCE 6 CLOSETS
2 ANTE ROOM 7 BACK ENTRANCE
3 LIVING ROOMS 8 PRIVY ETC. MENS $}1,—4 5
4 KITCHEN 9 VERANDAH DRESSING! patiaw tet
5 SCULLERY 10 ENCLOSED SPACE RM. | u

fi 1! GARDE

ail
aN
SS eS

oP} | {(0AU REI

\ TENNO-Jl PAGODA
OSAKA :JAPAN
Pehl

(ai,
[——“}

BB

JAPANESE aay
©
COMPOUND BRACKETS JAPANES m FONT
Oo SHED GABLE ENDS
 JAPANESE ARCHITECTURE 1217

make an imposing entry to the mortuary chapel and tomb chambers. Besides these
structures there are priests’ chambers, store houses, and a pagoda. The whole is
contained within a triple enclosure, with three ‘pai-lou’-style entrances. This tomb,
however, belongs to a late period (seventeenth century), and is an example of
decadence in design, through over-elaboration with ornamentation tending to lose
all restraint and constructive meaning (p. 1221).

PALACES
The Imperial palaces were of a simple type, consisting of a principal hall, joined by
corridors to three separate pavilions for the family of the Emperor. From the six-
teenth century, palaces were protected by walls of masonry, often formed with a
batter, concave on the external face, and with tilted quoin stones, to resist earth-
quake shocks. A moat invariably encircled the walls.
The Imperial Palace, Nara, (eighth century) is the focal point of the city,
being situated at the end of a central avenue possessing four parallel streets on
either side, crossed by others at right angles—evidence of considered town planning
and indicating Chinese inspiration.
When the capital was removed to Kidéto in 794, this city too was carefully
planned, but on an even more sumptuous scale, being formed with a series of
rectangular blocks for buildings similar to many modern American cities.
The Mikado’s Palace, Ki6to, is a typical example, comprising one-storey build-
ings covered with temple-style roofing, which instead of having one uniform slope
has gables in what is known as the ‘I’rimoya’ style. The pavilions overlook splendid
gardens, and are connected by covered corridors. Pavilions are divided internally
into rooms by sliding screens 7 ft high, and as in smaller houses, the rooms are
reached by an exterior veranda. Room sizes are governed by the number of floor
mats, which for Imperial palaces measure 7 ft by 3 ft 6 ins. The residential block is
about 100 ft by 60 ft and can be divided into fourteen separate rooms, including a
throne room with the Imperial dais, and the Mikado’s sleeping apartment.
The Palaces of the Shoguns reflect the feudal conditions which prevailed in a
later period (1603-1868), and were protected by moats and fortified enclosures
like so many of the mediaeval castles of England. They offer a grim reminder of the
civil strife which ravaged the country at the time of their erection.
The Kinkaku-ji and Ginkaku-ji, Ki6dto (c. 1600), are examples of particu-
larly charming garden pavilions. Originally covered with gold and silver leaf, they
represent the Japanese delight in brilliant ornamentation, which ran to excess in a
later period.

HOUSES
Timber construction, and consequent fire risks, led to development of the detached
pavilion treatment for larger houses. A typical middle-class dwelling, except where
a central court is introduced, is planned as a simple rectangle (p. 1216C, D), usually
one-storey high, with entrance, ante-room, living rooms, kitchen (with scullery),
store rooms, and garden. A separate small fire-resisting structure, with clay wall-
ing, known as a ‘go-down’, is built for the storage of valuables. The size and shape
of rooms are dependent upon the number of floor mats, each 6 ft by 3 ft, required
to cover the floor areas. Walling is formed by light timber vertical posts and hori-
zontal members covered with weather boarding. Interior partitions are formed with
light movable timber frames, with infilling of stout translucent paper, 6 ft in height,
the friezes above being plastered or wood-lined. Screens can be slid aside, allowing
maximum flexibility of interior arrangement, while exterior veranda partitions
can be likewise rearranged or removed. No distinction is made between living and
1218 JAPANESE ARCHITECTURE

sleeping apartments. Two main reception rooms form a suite, the second a step
higher than the first and having two alcoves or ‘tokonamas’, a special feature of
Japanese houses, used to display a flower arrangement or a selected art treasure.
Thatched roofs are employed in rural areas, steeply pitched to ward off heavy rains.
Tiled roofing is more common in built-up areas, to give protection from fire.
Chimneys are unnecessary, as charcoal braziers are the usual source of domestic
heating. In some larger houses, European influence has led to the erection of a
separate wing with rooms in the ‘Western’ style.

INNS AND BATH-HOUSES

The typical Japanese inn closely resembles the large private house, but it is invari-
ably planned round a central courtyard. In larger examples, upper floors are pro-
vided with connecting galleries on the principle developed in London during
mediaeval and later times. The Shukin-ro, Nagoya, is an excellent example of
Japanese practice.
Appreciation of the importance of personal hygiene is strongly marked in the
Japanese character. A typical public bath-house is illustrated (p. 1216E, F).

TEA-HOUSES
Tea-houses (p. 1216B) were developed in the Kamakura period (1185-1335) as
a result of the aesthetic doctrine of Zen Buddhism, which permeated Japanese
thought and resulted in the ‘tea-ceremony’, garden cultivation and flower arrange-
ment. They represent a most exclusive Japanese social institution and were the
resort of the sophisticated and fashionable world. In no sense can they be identified
with a normal public restaurant. Tea-houses are maintained solely for the cult of
the tea-drinking ceremony, associated with contemplation and appreciation of the
Arts. Typically indigenous in style, tea-houses are normally on a small and dainty
scale, the size regulated by mats, often down to a single-mat room, only 6 ft by 3 ft.
Always there is the inevitable recess or tokonama. Architecturally, the greatest care
is lavished on these small structures, while no detail of lighting, ventilation or
decoration is neglected. The entry for guests is usually approached by stepping
stones through a pleasure garden with tastefully-arranged flower beds. Decorative
stone lanterns, skill in landscaping with trees and watercourses, contrive to form a
delightful setting to the small central fane dedicated to the tea-drinking ceremony.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. Shint6 temples can be distinguished from Buddhist by the characteristic
‘torii? or gateways formed by upright posts supporting two or more horizontal
beams, under which, it was considered, worshippers must pass for prayers to be
effectual. Japanese houses are entered through a vestibule and have a veranda,
living, dining and guest rooms with the necessary recess for display of flowers and
art treasures. There are rooms for host and hostess, but no bedrooms in the usual
sense. Any room can be made a sleeping chamber by spreading a mattress on the
floor. Light movable screens form interior partitions, and when removed, permit
the entire house to be open to the garden. Maximum flexibility in planning is
characteristic of Japanese dwellings. Rooms are regulated in size by floor mats or
‘tatami’ used as floor coverings, and measuring one ‘ken’, about 6 ft, by a ‘half-
ken’. Imperial or royal mats, only, are a little larger. Japanese houses owe much of
their bright and cheerful character to simplicity of design, consummate skill in
both selection and working of materials, as well as to well-chosen garden settings.
Night illumination by decorative Japanese lanterns produces effects of exquisite
beauty.
 JAPANESE ARCHITECTURE 1219
WALLS. Most houses are constructed of wood-framing with wood or stout paper
infilling, which in an earthquake shock is much safer than stone or brick construc-
tion. Temple walling is a strictly trabeated arrangement of timber posts and rails
dividing surfaces into regular oblong spaces, filled in with plaster, boarding or
carved and painted panels (p. 1216a). Light is introduced principally through door-
ways. A system of cornice-bracketing in both simple and complex forms is one of
the most characteristic features of Japanese buildings (p. 1216K). Standardized
arrangements of this bracketing constitute various ‘orders’. Immediately above the
pillars or columns is a highly-decorated frieze, and above this, the bracketing con-
sists of a series of projecting wooden corbels supporting horizontal members and
rafters with decorated faces, thus allowing the roof to overhang the wall, often by
as much as 8 ft. The disposition of columns, posts, brackets, and rafters forming
the cornice is in accordance with well-recognized modules of measurement. Inter-
columniation is governed by the ‘ken’, and a rough assessment of spacing would be
one ‘ken’ for small and two ‘ken’ for large structures. Buildings are stilted upon
stone piles to a height which would ensure timber being above ground water during
the rainy season. The undersides of beams are frequently cambered to avoid any
impression of sagging, while piers and columns are given a refined entasis and fre-
quently an inward inclination to mitigate the effects of earthquake shocks.
OPENINGS. Owing to the great projection of roofs over exterior walls, there is
little direct natural light and the greater part of the light which reaches interiors is
reflected from the ground. Window-openings are filled with timber trellis and pro-
vided with wooden shutters externally, and paper—usually rice-paper—in light
sashes, internally. In all cases, exterior walling is extremely thin; columns receive
the main load from the roof and wall panels are entirely non-structural. While
Shint6 temples are approached through torii, Buddhist foundations are entered
through an elaborate two-storeyed gateway, surmounted by a muniment room and
covered by an ornate roof.
RooFs. While Japanese roofs bear a general resemblance to Chinese, they are
as a rule simpler in treatment and possess more subtlety and refinement in outline,
having some intangible quality which stamps them as indubitably Japanese (p.
21216A). The upper part of the roof is terminated by a gable placed vertically
above the end walls, known as an ‘I’rimoya’ gable, while the lower part of the main
roof is carried round the ends of the building in a hipped form (p. 1216A, H). Roof
coverings can be thatch, shingles or tiles. Thatched roofs often have a prominent
ridge of tiles with an exaggerated cresting, or the ridge may be of stout bamboos,
tied with blackened rope and terminated with finials. Tiled roofs have flattish and
roll tiles alternately, while cover tiles, often of decorative form, are used to mask
joints at the eaves. Ridges and hips are made up of layers of tiles set in mortar,
finished with large moulded tile cappings and crestings. A lower roof, known as
‘hisashi’, is sometimes projected below the eaves of the main roof. Hollowed bam-
boos are used to form roof gutters and down pipes. Gable ends often have cusped
barge-boards with pendants (p. 1216H, J, M). Curved brackets (“Kumo-Hijiki’)
adorn the underside of the overhanging eaves. The subtle curvature of barge-
boards and brackets has been compared to the shapes of certain cloud formations,
and the resemblance is such as to indicate an inherent appreciation of natural
beauty in the minds of the craftsmen.
COLUMNS. Columns, which followed the Chinese form, are conspicuous in
Japanese temples and in facades to palaces and gateways. Temples usually have a
columned loggia, either round three sides or forming a facade to the main building.
Frequently there is a portico over the approach steps which rests upon timber
columns, held together at the top by horizontal tie beams. In large temples and
2Q HOLA.
1220 JAPANESE ARCHITECTURE

halls, the interior columns are provided with elaborate compound bracketing to
support the roof. Intercolumniation is regulated by the standard of measurement
known as the ‘ken’, which is divided into twenty parts, termed minutes, and each
minute being again divided into a further twenty-two parts or seconds of space.
Columns, when square, are panelled and when round or octagonal are reeded and
often richly lacquered. Even when plain, columns are objects of beauty, as timber
was split by wedges and smoothed with a spear-shaped plane known as a ‘Yari-
ganna’, which left a very beautiful non-mechanical finish.
MOULDINGS. Circumstances which led to a comparative absence of mouldings
in Chinese architecture, apply also to Japanese work. Wall surfaces were admired
for their own intrinsic beauty, and emphasis by surrounding mouldings was not
required. The plain cyma and ovolo were introduced in column bases, but as there
are no capitals they do not appear as decoration to the head of a column.
ORNAMENTS. Carved and coloured panels formed in enclosure walls, in pro-
jecting eaves to roofs, and in the ‘ramma’ or pierced ventilators below cornices are
characteristic. In friezes, panels in high relief occur, representing cloud forms and
objects of natural beauty—the chrysanthemum, the stork and pine tree being
typical subjects for motifs, which invariably carried a symbolic significance. Orna-
mental brass caps, usually gilded for preservation, are frequently fixed to the ends
of projecting timbers and over connections in wood to hide open joints which may
occur through shrinkage. Embossed gilded metalwork is also freely applied to gables
and pendants. Colour decoration, introduced from China in the sixth century, is
applied to both exteriors and interiors of Japanese temples. Beams, brackets, carv-
ings and flat surfaces are picked out in gilding and bright colours—blue, green,
purple, madder and vermilion—the last a particularly beautiful colour when sub-
jected to weathering. Wall paintings frequently appear upon a gold ground, and
usually depict animal forms, birds, insects and flowers. Supporting pillars are
usually black, red or gold. Lacquering is extensively employed, and is applied with
consummate skill. Subjects for decoration are birds, trees attended by idealistic
mountain, cloud and water forms. Frequently, natural objects are combined with

Were mre | i Hicks

<>
PaoSON tame
ND wn ee gely AT “9°. 25. ale an— a 3
Pubs) ie ==~*~,=
2 Sanieaueuschaneccenued
doscat|“Liuncadierendaveerdireaul ancatiauiionnfvatuticevatoge

The Sacred Shinté Shrine of Kamiji-Yama in Isé. See p. 1214

 JAPANESE ARCHITECTURE 1221

Main Entrance Gate to Temple at Nikk6. See p. 1217

the weird and grotesque, resulting in a curious mixture of realistic and symbolic
forms. Despite rigid conventions and disregard of perspective, Japanese genius
for pure decoration has contrived to invest all major works of every period with
vitality and dramatic presentation. The Japanese are noted too, for their meticulous
treatment of detail. All the accessories of architectural design, lacquer work, ivory
carving, enamels, faience and bronzes vie with each other in minute accuracy and
softness of colour. While inspired by the Chinese, the Japanese are unsurpassed
in whatever branch of artistic expression they employ, with the possible exceptions
only of Chinese painting and porcelain of the finest periods.

REFERENCE BOOKS
CRAM, RALPH ADAMS. Impressions of Japanese Architecture and the Allied Arts. New York,
1905.
HARADA, JIRO. The Lesson of Japanese Architecture. London, 1936.
HUISH,M.B. Japan and its Art. London, 1912.
KISHIDA, HIDETO. fapanese Architecture. Tokyo, 1935.
MINAMOTO,H. An Illustrated History of Fapanese Art. Kidto, 1935.
PAINE, R.T., and SOPER, A. The Art and Architecture of Fapan. Pelican History of Art,
1957.
SADLER, ARTHUR L.A Short History of Fapanese Architecture. Sydney, 1941.
SANSOM, G.B. Japan, A Short Cultural History. New York, 1943.
SOPER, A. The Evolution of Buddhist Architecture in fapan. Princeton, U.S.A., 1942.
 e Toledo

dre Cofdove
2

ZF wh
Damascus eS
Jerusalem fi ed
Wes dH
Cairo

Alithabad
Calcutta
INDIA
SY CAA
Ae (oh
Golconda
Byapur .

Land over 5,000 feet

ABLACK SEA

ARABIAN
SEA

‘Land over 3,000 Feet

° Miles 500
—

The Muslim World

XXXII. MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE*

(seventh century to present day)

INFLUENCES
GEOGRAPHICAL. Arabia, Persia (Iran), Mesopotamia (Iraq), Syria, Palestine,
Egypt, North Africa and Spain were successively conquered, wholly or partially,
by the Arabs during the seventh and eighth centuries; and were then subjected to

* This style of architecture is known by many names: ‘Arab’ or ‘Arabian’ because it was
first evolved by the Arabs; ‘Muhammadan’ (also spelt ‘Mohammedan’ or ‘Mahometan’)
because it was used by the followers of the prophet Muhammad (or Mohammed or
Mahomet), who founded the religion of Islam; ‘Muslim’ (or ‘Moslem’) because those
followers were called Muslims (or Moslems); ‘Islamic’ (for the same reason); and ‘Sara-
cenic’, a name of Greek origin, applied by the Romans and afterwards by the Crusaders to
 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE 1223

the influence of Islam, the religion preached by Muhammad and his followers.
Muslim architecture therefore differs from that of ancient Rome, in that it was the
product of a religion rather than of a country, whereas Roman architecture every-
where reveals the influence of a nation rather than of a religion. Muslim architec-
ture, though exhibiting local divergences in treatment and detail, had many dis-
tinctive features which are found in all countries ruled or influenced by the Arabs.
GEOLOGICAL. Building methods and even architectural style were affected
by the great variation between the materials—marble, stone, brick, timber, plaster
—available in the different countries.. Domes, for instance, were either of brick
covered externally with plaster or faience (as in Persia and Mesopotamia), or of
stone (as in Egypt and parts of India and Persia), or occasionally of timber. Par-
ticularly fine limestone was available from quarries near Cairo, and red sandstone
in parts of India. Plaster ornament reached a high level of intricacy and beauty in
Egypt, Spain, and elsewhere.
CLIMATIC. The Muslim dominions, at their greatest extent (see map) lay
mainly between the twentieth and forty-fifth parallels of latitude, south and east of
the Mediterranean; so that the range of climate was not quite so great as in the
Roman Empire at its maximum; and the consequent influence of climate upon
architectural design was not so varied in the different regions. In all the Muslim
countries, because of the glare of the sun, sheltering arcades were provided, and
windows were small. Moreover, window-openings were usually filled with geo-
metrical lattice-work in marble or plaster, or with intricate wooden lattices (mashra-
biyya). In India, especially, the flat roofs of mosques were provided with wide-
spreading eaves. In dwelling-houses, the flat roofs—protected by a parapet ensur-
ing privacy—formed a welcome resort in the cool of the evening.
RELIGIOUS. The Muslim faith was the last of the three great religions which
have risen from among the Semitic nations, and its essence is contained in the
words from the Koran: ‘There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is his
prophet’. The Koran is a compilation of the utterances of Muhammad (c. 571-
632) which purported to reveal the word of God; it shows many traces of the
influence of the Bible, the Apocryphal Gospels and the Talmud. After Muham-
mad’s death, the supreme spiritual and temporal direction of Islam was exercised
by a succession of Caliphs (‘successors’ or ‘deputies’) who were at first chosen from
amongst his own companions but from 661 were hereditary dynastic rulers
established at Damascus and later at Baghdad and Cordova. The Caliphs, and also
the rulers or governors who effectively controlled major regions of the Muslim
world on their behalf, were responsible for directing the enormous amount of
religious building in their domains, and this individual influence led to marked dif-
ferences in the plan and architectural details of the religious buildings, 1.e. mosques.
The order and development of the plan and arrangement of the mosque are treated
below (p. 1245). In certain passages of the Koran, and in some of the other writings
that contain his precepts, Muhammad forbade the representation of human, animal
and other natural forms in art—apparently as an austere reaction from the exces-
sive devotion to sculptured and painted images by Christians, as represented by the
Byzantine Church of his own day—his greatest enemy. Hence the lavish decoration
of Muslim mosques at all periods consists either of elaborate interlacing and geo-
metrical patterns, often of great beauty, or of conventionalized foliage and orna-
mental lettering, mainly texts from the Koran.
Because Muslims were fatalists, they regarded the present as more important
the nomad Arab tribes of the deserts of Egypt and Western Asia. In North Africa, it is
sometimes called the ‘Moorish’ style after the Moors; in Turkey its earlier stages are called
‘Seljuk’ and its later stages ‘Ottoman’, after Turkish dynasties; in India its later phases
are called ‘Mughal’ or ‘Mogul’ after a line of emperors, all as explained hereafter.
1224 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE

than the future, and were content to build their houses of relatively flimsy materials;
but, on the whole, the structural soundness and fine craftsmanship of their mosques
and tombs is far better than some prejudiced writers have admitted. Indeed, among
the most magnificent of their buildings are the great tomb-mosques erected by rich
and despotic rulers. Many of these are mentioned hereafter.
SocIAL. The wild Arabs who surged over so large a part of the then civilized
world in the seventh and eighth centuries A.D. had no knowledge of architecture
or any of the arts; so that in each country that they occupied they made use of the
traditional skill of the vanquished people—Christians and others—as explained
later. Most of those countries, and especially those hitherto ruled by the Byzantine
Emperor, had an advanced civilization, in which the richer people enjoyed a con-
siderable degree of luxury. As the Arab invaders became settled, they adopted in
their palaces and dwelling-houses many of the social habits of the Near Eastern
nations, notably the seclusion of the women’s apartments (harim). Their houses
had blank exterior walls, with a single entrance guarded by a door-keeper (bawwab
or boab). The various rooms were grouped around an inner courtyard (hosh).
Certain rooms were open to male visitors, but, throughout the ‘unchanging East’,
the women’s quarters were isolated up to the late nineteenth century A.D., since
when the emancipation of women has reached many Muslim countries. In small
town-houses, the harim was usually placed on an upper floor, and the windows
Opening on to the street were filled with wooden lattices which provided shade and
ventilation, enabling the women of the household to look down on to the street
while themselves remaining invisible. Muslim social life in the Middle Ages is
well pictured in The Arabian Nights, a composite production first compiled in
Baghdad under Harun ar-Rashid (786-809), but much altered by editors or
contributors in Cairo many centuries later. Another famous book, the Rubazyat of
Omar Khayyam (1075-1125)—the great Persian poet, philosopher, astronomer
os mathematician—sheds much light upon Persian social life and ideas in his own
ay.
HISTORICAL. Muslim chronology dates from 622, the year of the Hijra (or
Hegira), when Muhammad fled from Mecca to Medina in Arabia. The invasion of
the adjoining countries by his Arab followers, under the first Caliphs, began about
ten years later; and continued till c. 750. The seat of the Caliphate was trans-
ferred from Medina to Kufa in Mesopotamia, and then to Damascus, which
remained the capital of the Muslim world until it was superseded by Baghdad.
Persia (see p. 65) was subjugated during 632-41 by the Caliph Omar. The
Umayyad Caliphs of Damascus governed it till they were overthrown in 750
by the descendants of Abbas (uncle of Muhammad) who established the Abbasid
Dynasty. Their new capital of Baghdad (in modern Iraq), founded in 762, became
an important centre of art and science under the Caliph Harun ar-Rashid (786-809) ,
but was sacked and burnt by the Mongols in 1258.
Syria, including Palestine, was conquered during 632-9, and in c. 639 a
primitive mosque was built near the site of the later magnificent ‘Dome of the
Rock’ at Jerusalem, the erection of which began c. 685. When the Crusaders
entered Palestine four centuries afterwards, they took back with them to Europe
many Muslim notions about architecture which influenced our castles and our
Gothic churches. Parts of Syria and Palestine were governed by the Crusaders for
many years, but they—as well as the Muslim sultans of Egypt who ruled the rest
of the country—were vanquished by the Ottoman Turks in 1516, and the
latter remained in possession up to the end of the First World War.
Egypt fell to the Arabs in 640, and a mosque was built c.642 at Fustat, south
of the present great city of Cairo, which was founded more than two centuries
 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE 1225

later. Egypt was ruled by dynasties of Muslim princes or sultans till 1517,
when it was conquered by the Ottoman Turks. After a period of semi-independence
from the early eighteenth century to the First World War, it became an independent
kingdom in 1922 and a republic in 1952.
North Africa was conquered in 647-709, and a primitive mosque was founded
at Qayrawan c. 670. The Muslim architecture of the North African countries
from Egypt to the Atlantic—comprising modern Cyrenaica, Libya, Tunisia,
Algeria, and Morocco—is commonly called ‘Moorish’, and in France these
countries are known by the convenient name of ‘Moghreb’. In 711, the Arab
armies invaded Southern Spain, and founded the fortress of Gibraltar. An indepen-
dent Western Caliphate was established at Cordova (Cordoba) in 758, and a
magnificent mosque there was begun in 785-6. After much fighting with the
Christians during the fourteenth to the fifteenth century, the Moors were
finally defeated in 1492. Though that date marks their expulsion from Spain,
they had left many important buildings in the country, and these too are known as
‘Moorish’ architecture. For a time, the Moors also ruled Sicily (c. 827-1061),
where a few examples remain showing their influence upon later Romanesque and
Gothic buildings.
Turkey, originally the core of the Byzantine or East Roman Empire, with its
capital at Constantinople (Istanbul), was conquered in part by the Muslim Seljuk
Dynasty, who, during the eleventh to the twelfth century gradually invaded
Asia Minor, via Baghdad, from their home in Central Asia. They established their
capital at Konia, where they erected a number of mosques and other fine build-
ings. This dynasty ended shortly after 1300, and was followed by the Ottoman
Turks, another warlike tribe from Central Asia, who established their capital at
Brusa (now Bursa), built many handsome mosques there, and captured Con-
stantinople in 1453. Turkish rule continued under sultans till 1923, when a republic
was established, with its capital at Ankara; but the area of Turkey is now small
compared with the vast extent of its empire in the past.
India was first invaded in 1001-27 by Muslim armies coming from Ghazni
(then in Persia), who established a sultanate at Delhi in 1206. Here a great
mosque had already been built in 1193-8 by a victorious Muslim general.
This Pathan dynasty ruled the whole of North India; but, after the death of
Muhammad Shah I in 1316, there gradually arose other independent states
with capitals at Jaunpur, Ahmadabad, Mandu, Gaur, Kulbarga, Golconda, Bijapur
and elsewhere. The Mogul or Mughal Empire (1526-1857), founded by Babar,
consolidated the Muslim dominions by the gradual absorption of these petty king-
doms. Akbar the Great (1556-1605) first removed his capital from Delhi to
Agra, and afterwards founded Fatehpur-Sikri as the new capital. In these three
cities are to be found the most famous buildings of the period. Shah Jahan
(1628-58) raised the Mogul Empire to its highest pitch of power and magnificence.
He erected in North India many splendid memorials of his dynasty, such as the
Taj Mahal and the Pearl Mosque at Agra and the Jami Masjid and the Palace at
Delhi. He was deposed in 1658 by his third son Aurangzeb who reigned till his
death in 1707, the date at which the Mogul period may be said to have ended.
Meanwhile the influence of the East India Company, political as well as com-
mercial, steadily increased, and British rule was established by royal proclamation
in 1858. In 1947, India was divided into the Republic of India and the Dominion
of Pakistan.
1226 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE

ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
The character of Muslim architecture varied a great deal in each region, because
of the differing cultures of the inhabitants and the existing local tradition. The fol-
lowers of the Prophet, simple soldiers, carried their faith into many lands but had
no architectural style of their own to accompany it. Thus they were content to
adopt each local style that they found, modifying it mainly in distinctive orna-
mental details, but also introducing several important new features of plan and
structure. The mosque was an entirely novel type of building, originally devised by
Muhammad in Arabia in a very rudimentary form. (Its subsequent evolution is
described on p. 1245). The earliest examples have a large open courtyard surrounded
by colonnades or arcades carrying flat roofs. A later but still early innovation was
the minaret, a tower from the top of which a priest chanted the call to prayer, in
deliberate distinction from the bell-tower used by Christians. The columns used
for the colonnades were generally rifled from Roman temples; but the arches that
replaced them were of a type that became characteristic of Muslim architecture all
over the world and in all periods. The two-centred pointed arch, a device known in
ancient Assyria (p. 86) and employed again in Syria just before the Muslim con-
quests, was brought into use as early as the eighth century by the Muslims in
Mesopotamia (Iraq), and forms a notable feature in the great mosque of Ibn Tulin
at Cairo (876-9), centuries before it appeared in France or England. Some-
times these arches were stilted (10 on p. 1256), sometimes they were prolonged
below their springing to form a ‘pointed horseshoe’ (8). A ‘round horseshoe’ type
is a semicircular arch prolonged below the springing (9). Another form, the four-
centred or ‘Persian’ type (17), closely resembles our so-called “Tudor’ arch, which
it antedates by many centuries. At a later date, cusped or foliated arches (24-7)
were introduced long before they appeared in England.
Domes of stone or brick were largely used for mosques and tombs (pp. 12434,
1244A). They normally rose from a square substructure, and the transition from
square to circle, hitherto achieved either by means of a spherical pendentive, as
used in Byzantine architecture (p. 277), or a squinch-arch (see Glossary), was usually
solved by the Muslims with the aid of tiers of stalactites—rows of upright pointed
niches. So popular did this feature become among Muslim architects that it came
to be introduced for purely decorative purposes on ornamental details, just as
miniature buttresses are represented on wooden chancel-screens in our Late-Gothic
churches. Surface-decoration in relief is applied to the exteriors of stone domes in
Cairo, while in Persia domes are covered with brilliantly coloured faience or with
metal. (For further description of Muslim ornament, see p. 1249.)

EXAMPLES
a. Arabia. e. Persia (Iran), Turkestan, and Meso-
b. Syria and Palestine. potamia (Iraq). ~
Cc fie f. Turkey.
d. North Africa, Spain, etc. g. India and Pakistan.

a. ARABIA
Arabia was the cradle of Islam, which sprang up there among nomads who had no -
permanent architecture. All that Muhammad required of them was that they
should pray at stated times, wherever they might find themselves, whether journey-
ing across the desert, minding their flocks, or resting on the house-top; and that
 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE 1227

B. The Great Mosque, Damascus (c. 706-15). See p. 1229

1228 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE

A. Mosque of Ibn Tulin, Cairo: _ B. Mosque of Qa’it Bay extra

interior arcades (876-9). muros, Cairo (1468-96).
Seep. 1229 Detail of dome. See p. 1230

c. Interior courtyard D. Principal apartment

House of Jamal ad-din az-Zahabi, Cairo (1637). See p. 1230
 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE 1229

when they prayed they should turn towards the holy shrine at Mecca. For this
simple ritual, no man-made temple was essential. The Kaaba at Mecca, the holiest
spot in the world, was its focus, and was an object of veneration long before Muham-
mad founded Islam, but it has no architectural merit. It is simply a small plain
rectangular structure. The imposing mosque which now surrounds it is mainly a
‘building of the sixteenth century, and contains nothing from Muhammad’s
day. When he fled from Mecca in 622 to Medina, some 200 miles away, he
planned a house which became the prototype of all succeeding mosques. It was
merely a square enclosure surrounded by walls of mud-brick. Some part of it,
presumably the north portion where he said his prayers, was roofed over, the roof
being flat and constructed of palm trunks and branches covered with mud. The
congregation in prayer faced the Holy City of Jerusalem and that direction (gibla)
was somehow indicated for worshippers. In 624 Mecca became the focus for
prayer, as it still remains all over the Muslim world. In this primitive mosque at
Medina, there was nothing approaching architectural planning or design.

b. SYRIA AND PALESTINE

Although Syria was conquered by the Muslims in 632-9, nothing remains of
the first mosque that they built in Jerusalem in c. 639. It stood in the temple
enclosure, near the Sacred Rock, and apparently on the site of the Mosque of al-
Aqsa, which has since been rebuilt several times. This locality had long been
venerated, for here had stood successively the Altar of David, Solomon’s Temple,
the later temple erected by the Jews on returning from exile, Herod’s Temple
(destroyed A.D. 70), and Hadrian’s Temple of Jupiter. From the Sacred Rock,
legend asserts that Muhammad ascended to Heaven at his death in 632; and it
was over the Rock that the Caliph Omar or Umar built the magnificent ‘Dome of
the Rock’ in 685-91 (p. 1227A), as a place of pilgrimage rather than as a mosque
for the worship of a large congregation. It was an entirely new type of Muslim
building, an annular rotunda of late-Roman or Byzantine type. (Its fine mosaics
and external faience are later additions.)
The Great Mosque, Damascus (c. 706-15) (p. 1227B), built by the Caliph
Walid, presents many problems, for it stands in the middle of an enormous Roman
temenos, a colonnaded enclosure measuring 1,263 by 1,002 ft, in which was once a
large temple, transformed into a Christian church in 379.. The mosque en-
closure is much smaller than the temenos, and its southern portion is a huge roofed
structure, 446 by 121 ft, with aisles and a transept like a Christian church, but open
towards the courtyard. It is uncertain how far this plan was suggested by the
arrangement of the preceding church. The arcade towards the courtyard has tall
‘round horseshoe’ arches rising from square piers. There is a ‘mihrab’ (niche
indicating the direction of Mecca) and some handsome minarets of later date.

¢. EGYPT
The Mosque of Amr, Fustat (near Cairo), built c. 642 by the Arab general of
that name after the invasion of Egypt two years earlier, has a large square open
court with a fountain in the centre, for ritual ablutions. The surrounding arcades
are single on the entrance-wall facing the mihrab, triple on the two flank walls,
and six in number on the mihrab or sanctuary side. The arches are carried on
antique columns rifled from Roman ruins. Unfortunately, this mosque has been so
often altered that there is no certainty that much of it is original.
The Mosque of Ibn Tultin, Cairo (876-9) (pp. 12284, 1232A, B) is of
1230 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE

similar plan, but of much more original architecture. The Governor of Cairo who
built it had been educated at Samarra in Iraq (p. 1235) where brick pointed arches
and arcades had been used; and he introduced these in his mosque at Cairo, in lofty
arcades. The parapets of the mosque are pierced ornamentally; there is an extra-
ordinary and hideous spiral minaret (also found at Samarra), and a large amount of
delicate and attractive conventional ornament in stucco, including the original
mihrab and window-lattices. Apart from its great size (about 532 ft square), this
mosque, ruined though it now is, forms one of the great landmarks of Muslim
architecture.
The Mosque of Al-Azhar, Cairo (979 onwards) is the first notable build-
ing of the Fatimid Dynasty, which ruled Egypt from 969-1171 and was so
called after Muhammad’s daughter Fatima. It is a very large building, planned like
Ibn Tiliin’s mosque for the worship of great congregations, but has served for
centuries as the religious university of Cairo, and still accommodates thousands of
students. Altered again and again since its first foundation, the building is most
picturesque; although most of the columns supporting its arcades are from Chris-
tian churches, its Muslim features are striking.
The Mosque of Al-Hakim (990-1012) and the small one of Al-Aqmar
(1085) are other important Fatimid monuments in Cairo. To the same period
belong three fine gateways in the city walls (1087-91). The magnificent
Citadel of Cairo, commenced c. 1171, is due to Saladin, whose figure looms
so large in the history of the Crusaders and who founded the Ayyubid Dynasty
which ruled Egypt and Palestine from 1171-1250. It is now realized that the
Crusaders acquired much of their knowledge of fortification from their ‘Saracen’
foes in Egypt and the Holy Land. None of Saladin’s mosques in Cairo have sur-
vived, but there are a large number in excellent preservation from the period of the
Mamlik rulers who governed Egypt from 1250 until the Turkish conquest in
1517. Among them may be mentioned the large Mosque of Baybars I (1266-9);
the Mosque and Mausoleum and Hospital of Qalawiin (1284-5), showing
a definite kinship with European Gothic architecture; the enormous Mosque
and Mausoleum of Sultan Hasan (1356-63) (p. 1232C, D), with four colossal
arch recesses around a square central court; and with walls rising too ft
and rich decorations; the Mosque and Mausoleum of Sultan Barkuk, outside
the city (1399-1412), with its handsome domes and pair of minarets (p. 1251);
the Mosque of Mu’ayyad (1415); and the two Mosques of Qa’it Bay (1468-
96) (pp. 1228B, I23IA, B), one inside and one outside the city walls. All these
later examples are roofed over, not being congregational mosques with a large
central open court; and all are most elaborately decorated. Apart from mosques, of
which hundreds exist in Cairo alone, many palaces were built, but hardly a trace of
them remains. Cairo possesses, however, several handsome dwelling-houses of the
thirteenth to the seventeenth century (p. 1228c, D), notably the so-called Bayt al-
Qady (1495), a beautiful building.
After the Turkish conquest of Egypt in 1516, architecture took its cue from
Constantinople and was of inferior quality. For Egyptian examples of this Turkish
period, see “Turkey’ (p. 1237). From the seventeenth century onwards, European
influence made itself apparent.

d. NORTH AFRICA AND SPAIN

After the Muslim conquest of North Africa and Spain in the seventh to the
eighth century, and the establishment of the Western Caliphate at Cordova in 760,
mosque building proceeded rapidly. As in Egypt, extensive use was made of antique
marble and stone columns. Domes, which in Egypt, Persia, and India usually
 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE 1231

A. Exterior B. Mihrab and Mimbar

Mosque of Qa’it Bay extra muros, Cairo (c. 1468-96). See p. 1230

c. Mosque, Cordova: interior p. Alhambra, Granada: stalactite capital

(786 and later). See p. 1233 (1334-91). See p. 1233
 1232 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE

MOS
Z
i
SEES

& 200 _250FT

=ellellelelle
Uf Spm a,
30 40 50 60M"
DLAI
TE]

al ’
SSIS
PT

SSS

MOSGU
Fi
F4
SOOM eee EEE EES SS a

100 «150 Q00FT Hit 1 Om sO Om mCO g0_,_190F!

30 40 50 GOMTS = © 6 2 2 30M"

HANGING LAMPS
=

[PULPIT_

4
.

ae aan

Tey
uN
mT i
QeI
Ti I 1 | =
SARCOPHAGU: SECTION eS

THE ALHAMBRA.
REFERENCE
TABLE
| HALL OF JUDGMENT
2 HALL OF TWO SISTERS
3 HALLOF ABENCERR-

4COURTOF LIONS PF
5 COURT OFALBERCA *4
6 HALL OF AMBASSADORS
7 BATHS
 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE 1233
indicate a tomb-mosque or mausoleum, were seldom used in these ‘Moorish’ coun-
tries and were generally small; but, like all other parts of the mosque, were lavishly
decorated internally.
The Great Mosque, Qayraw4an, near Tunis, was probably founded in 670.
It contains the earliest known example of a minaret, recorded to have been
built c. 724-7 during the caliphate of Hisham (724-43). This is a huge and clumsy
tower with ‘battered’ (tapering) walls, crowned with battlements. The mosque
itself is very large, and of congregational type, with an oblong courtyard which is
not quite rectangular. The covered arcades are three bays deep on the north-west,
two bays on north-east and south-west, and ten bays on the south-east, where there
is a small dome over the mihrab. The minaret is in the centre of the south front.
The arches of the arcades are stilted and slightly pointed. This mosque has been
altered and partly rebuilt again and again, but remains a fine example.
The Mosque of Zaytunah, Tunis (founded 732) is also of the congrega-
tional type, with stilted arches supported on antique columns. As in many other
Muslim buildings, wooden tie-rods are fixed at the spring of the arches, probably
to counteract the effect of earthquakes.
Other notable examples in North Africa are the Great Mosques of Algiers
(1018), Tlemcen and Sfax.
In Spain, the Great Mosque, Cordova (p. 1231C) was begun in 786 by the
Caliph Abd ar-Rahman, but was more than doubled in area during the tenth cen-
tury. Its original form, however, may still be traced. It was a congregational mosque
with a very deep sanctuary, consisting of eleven aisles separated by arcades, each
carried on twenty antique columns. This sanctuary was so lofty that ordinary
horseshoe arches, resting on the available columns, were not adequate for such a
height. A second range of arches was therefore added above them, and the resultant
complication is restless and disturbing (p. 1231C). If piers of brick or stone had been
introduced, as at Ibn Tiltin’s mosque at Cairo, instead of 1,200 antique columns,
this effect might have been avoided. In 1238 the mosque was converted into a
Christian church and became the Cathedral of Cordova, but is still known as La
Mezquita. It is of enormous size, measuring 585 ft by 410 ft. Of this total area,
about two-thirds is roofed as described above, the northern third being an open
court, the Patio de los Naranjos. The whole interior is finely decorated with
coloured marbles and precious stones.
S. Cristo de la Luz, Toledo was originally a mosque, built in 960, but became
a Christian church in 1186.
Among the famous minarets in North Africa and Spain are the Kutubiyya,
Marrakesh, in Morocco (1169-84), the Minaret of Hasan, Rabat, also in Morocco
(1178-84), and the Giralda, Seville (1184-96). All these are lofty square towers,
but the belfry added to the Giralda in 1568 deprived it of much of its original
race.
Among Muslim secular monuments, the Alcazar, Seville (Arabic al-kasr =the
castle), chiefly built in 1350-69 but much altered since and badly restored in
the nineteenth century, is the finest example of a palace in the so-called ‘Mudéjar’
style (i.e. erected by Muslims for Christians). Begun by Pedro the Cruel with the
aid of craftsmen lent by the Sultan of Granada, it contains a wealth of delicate
ornament.
The Alhambra, Granada is a vast red castle (Arabic al-hamra=the red),
built on a ridge above the city. It includes a complex of buildings dating from the
twelfth to the sixteenth century; but the most famous and notable among them
is the Moorish palace which was chiefly erected by Yusuf I (1334-54) and
Muhammad V (1354-91). It is the last purely Muslim building in Spain, and one
1234 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE

of the most richly decorated pleasure-houses in the world. The plan (p. 1232£) in-
cludes two oblong courts at right angles to each other. The elaborate Court of the
Lions, 115 ft by 66 ft, is surrounded by columns with stalactite capitals, supporting
wooden arcading decorated in stucco (p. 1231D). At the eastern end of the court is
the Hall of Judgement (p. 1232F), and on either side are the smaller Halls of the
Two Sisters and of the Abencerrajes, with roofs formed of stuccoed vaults. The
Court of the Alberca, 138 ft by 74 ft, has a two-storeyed arcade on the south; and,
on the north, in the massive Tower of Comares, is the Hall of the Ambassadors,
35 ft square, crowned with a polygonal dome, and having deeply-recessed windows
giving fine views of the city below. The profuse decoration of all the principal
rooms consists chiefly of a dado of coloured enamelled tiles on the walls, and of
most elaborate ornament above, modelled in plaster and coloured. This plaster or
stucco ornament displays the features characteristic of all Muslim architecture—
geometrical interlacings, stalactites, bands of decorative lettering, conventionalized
foliage; but nowhere else in the Muslim world was so much of the decoration
carried out in so impermanent a medium as plaster; and the Alhambra is largely
responsible for the common belief that all ‘Saracenic’ architecture is flimsy and
unsubstantial. It must be added that the fountains and gardens within the palace
add greatly to its charm.
Sicily, at that time a part of the Byzantine Empire, was invaded by the Moors
in 827, and Palermo became their capital. Gradually the whole island was con-
quered. The Normans who had settled in Southern Italy, invaded Sicily under
Robert and Roger Guiscard in 1061; and completed their conquest by Iogo.
Roger’s second son was crowned King of Sicily at Palermo in 1130. Muslim
influence is apparent in many churches and palaces in Palermo, especially in the
use of the horseshoe arch, stalactite pendentives, and decorative inscriptions.

e. PERSIA (Iran), TURKESTAN, AND MESOPOTAMIA (Iraq)

The Arab armies conquered Persia from the Sassanian kings in 632-41, and
built a primitive mosque at Kufa in 638. Under the Sassanian dynasty
(226-641), a number of important brick buildings had been erected, including
the great palaces of Firuzabad, Sarvistan, Ctesiphon, and Kasr-i-Shirin, from
which the Muslims learned much about vaults and domes. They also employed
Persian architects. From 661-750, Persia was ruled by the Umayyad caliphs
of Damascus; then, in 750, the Abbasid line of caliphs was established, and
reached its apogee during the reign of Harun ar-Rashid (786-809), whose
grandfather, Mansur, had laid out the new city of Baghdad in 762. In 962, a Tur-
kish governor from Ghazni (in modern Afghanistan) usurped the throne, but
this Ghaznavid dynasty was superseded in 1037 by two brothers from Turke-
stan, sons of a shepherd named Seljuk. The Seljuk (Turkish) dynasty, reference to
which is made under Turkey (p. 1237), lasted till 1300 and moved the capital
from Baghdad to Rayy. Mongol invasions, under Jenghiz Khan in 1220 and
Hulagu Khan in 1258, laid Persia waste and destroyed most of the buildings
in Baghdad and elsewhere. Another disastrous invasion by Timur (“Tamerlane’)
occurred in 1380. He had been born in Samarkand, where he established his
capital and erected some notable buildings. His “Timurid’ dynasty endured until
1500, and was followed by the Safavid rulers (1502-1736) who made their capital
at Isfahan and enriched it with many fine mosques and palaces.
The Mosque at Kufa (638) was of the congregational type, with a large open
court, and a sanctuary (liwan) which had a flat roof supported on antique
columns,
 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE 1235

The Great Mosque, Baghdad (764) has been so often altered and rebuilt
that hardly anything of its original form remains. Other mosques of the late eighth
and early ninth centuries, all in ruins, are at Ukhaidir, Rakka, Abu Dulaf, and
Samarra—all in Mesopotamia (Iraq).
The Malwiyya Mosque, Samarra (847) is of the congregational type with
spacious open court surrounded by porticoes, that on the Mecca side being the
deepest and forming the sanctuary. The porticoes have flat roofs, carried on brick
piers, not on palm-trunks or antique columns. The lofty external walls have several
towers. There is a curious spiral minaret, and windows with cusped or foliated
heads. Ibn Tilin, whose famous mosque at Cairo has already been described (p.
1229), was educated at Samarra, and certainly borrowed many features from it,
including the ugly spiral minaret.
The small Mosque at Nayin, in Persia (early tenth century) is the oldest in
that country of which any considerable portion remains. It has shallow brick domes
on brick piers, ‘Persian’ arches, and stucco decoration. The domed Tombs of Pir
i-Alamdar (1026) and Chihl Duktaran (1054) at Damghan are mausolea used
for private prayer, and each is therefore provided with a mihrab. Later examples
of note are the Tombs of Mumine Khatun (1186) and of Yusuf ibn-Kutayyir
(1162), both at Nakhshewan.
The Tomb of Khudabanda Khan, Sultaniya (1320) is the next important
monument, as architecture naturally languished during the Mongol invasions. It is
an enormous octagonal structure in brick with eight minarets, now mostly fallen.
The roof consists of a steeply-pointed double dome, measuring over 80 ft in dia-
meter and 150 ft high internally. The whole building is faced with glazed bricks
and tiles, a fashion derived from ancient times in Persia.
Timur embellished his new capital at Samarkand with many notable monu-
ments during the years preceding his death in 1405. His own mausoleum, the
so-called Gur Amir (‘Prince’s Tomb’, 1386-1404) (p. 1236B), is octagonal
externally, square internally, with a curious and slightly swelling dome rising from
a tall drum. He also built the Tomb of Shah Zinda (1392-1434) and the
Madrasa of Bibi Khanum (1389-1403), which has eight minarets. These,
together with some later buildings, including the large Mosque of Ulugh Beg (c.
1430), make Samarkand a perfect museum of Persian art.
The Blue Mosque, Tabriz (c. 1437-67), so called from the fine blue tiles
with which it was covered, but now ruined, is still a notable building; as is the
Mosque of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, also of the fifteenth century. The Friday
Mosque, Veramin (1322-26) is sadly ruined.
The city of Mashhad contains a group of buildings which attract an enormous
number of pilgrims annually. The finest of these is the Mosque of Gawhar Shad
(1418) (p. 1236A), a Persian princess, and provides perhaps the best example of
coloured tile decoration in all Persia. The Shrine of the Imam Riza consists of a
congeries of mosques, mausolea, etc., and attracts pilgrims because here was buried
Harun ar-Rashid himself in 809, and also his successor as Caliph, the Imam
Ali-ar-Riza of Mecca, in 811. The Tomb of the Imam Riza, with a helm-
shaped dome covered with gold, is, however, a building of 1607.
During the seventeenth and the early eighteenth century, Isfahan became the
most important architectural centre in Persia. It contains over 200 mosques and
colleges. Of these, the old Masjid-i-Juma (‘Friday mosque’ or congregational
mosque, as opposed to a tomb-mosque or mausoleum used only for private
prayers) was founded in 760, much enlarged c. 1080 and further enlarged in the
seventeenth to the eighteenth century Shah Abbas I, who ruled over Persia from
1587-1629, laid out Isfahan on monumental lines, thus providing almost the only
1236 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE

B. The Gur Amir (‘Prince’s Tomb’), Samarkand (1386-1404). See p. 1235

 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE 1237

known example of early town-planning in an Oriental city. The central feature is

the Maidan-i-Shah (=‘Royal Square’). On the east of that vast space stands the
small but beautiful Mosque of Lutfullah, the Shah’s father-in-law; on the west,
a great gateway, with the dainty little pavilion known as the Chihil Sutun behind
it; on the north the entrance to the Great Bazaar; and on the south the Masjid-i-
Shah (=‘Royal Mosque’). Round the remainder of the square run arcades, two
storeys high. The Masjid-i-Shah (1612-27) does not lie parallel with the
Maidan, but obliquely, so that its orientation with Mecca is preserved, yet this
peculiarity is not perceptible from the Maidan. Through a magnificent portal, 90 ft
high, one passes into a vestibule and thence into one of the four great porches or
recesses placed centrally on each side of the courtyard. Through the porch oppo-
site, one enters the sanctuary containing the mihrab. The dome and the slender
cylindrical minarets are covered with glazed tiles or bricks.

f. TURKEY
Long before the Ottoman Turks captured Constantinople (Istanbul) in 1453, they
had been erecting mosques and other buildings elsewhere. The Seljuk Turks who
had invaded and subjugated Persia in 1037 (p. 1234) gradually extended their
dominions westwards into Asia Minor, hitherto ruled by the Byzantine Emperor;
and, after making their headquarters at Nicaea for some time, established their
capital at Konia—the ancient Iconium—in 1097, after Nicaea had fallen to the
Crusaders. Here the Seljuks employed Persian craftsmen to design and build for
them numerous mosques and palaces. The dynasty of Seljuk sultans of Konia
ended c. 1300, when they were superseded by the Ottoman Turks who had
come, like them, from Central Asia and had hitherto accepted Seljuk suzerainty.
Brusa, in Asia Minor, became the first Ottoman capital, and here again the Turkish
invaders relied heavily upon Persian tradition in building their new mosques and
other buildings. After Constantinople fell in 1453, the great Byzantine church
of S. Sophia was adopted as the model for future Turkish mosques; but many
Persian details, and especially the tall pencil-shaped minarets, came to be incor-
porated in Turkish architecture, not only in Turkey itself but in Egypt and Syria
(conquered in 1516), and in some of the Balkan countries which remained in
Turkish hands up to the nineteenth and twentieth century.
In Konia all the principal monuments are of the thirteenth century: viz. the
great Mosque of Ala ad-Din (1221) which dominates the city; the domed
Karatay Mosque (1251), formerly used for religious instruction and now a
museum; the Ince Minar (=‘Slender Minaret’, 1265-7); the Mausoleum of
Meylama, the mystical poet (d. 1273), with a curious fluted cupola covered
with glazed tiles; the Mosque of Sirceli (1242); and the Mosque of Energhe
(1258 or 1269).
In Brusa the chief early Ottoman buildings are the Ulu Jami ( =‘Great Mosque’,
1379-1414); the Muradiye (1414); the Yesil Jami (=‘Green Mosque’, 1424);
and the Yilderim Jami (1389-1402).
When Constantinople was conquered by the Turks in 1453, S. Sophia was
soon converted into a mosque and furnished with minarets. Six very large new
mosques were erected during the next two hundred years, viz.: the Mosque of
Muhammad II, the Conqueror (1463-9); the Mosque of Bayazid (1497-1505);
the Selimiye (1520-6); the Suleym4aniye (1550-7) (p. 1239A); the Mosque of
Sultan Ahmed (1607-14); and the Yeni Valide (1615-1663). The Suleymaniye
was designed by the architect Sinan, as was the splendid Selimiye (1570-4) at
Adrianople, now ‘Edirne’.
1238 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE

Outside Turkey itself, many mosques of Turkish type were erected, e.g. the
Tekkiya or Dervish Mosque, Damascus (1516); the Mosque of Sinan Pasha
(1571), Bulak, near Cairo; the Mosque of Al Malika Safiyya, Cairo (1610); and
the huge Mosque of Muhammad Ali in the Citadel, Cairo (1824-57), with
its tall pencil-shaped minarets. Among other features common to nearly all Otto-
man mosques are spherical domes on pendentives, and apses covered with semi-
domes, following S. Sophia. In many examples, the decoration is rich and profuse,
though it deteriorated during the eighteenth century.
Turkish domestic architecture resembled that of other Muslim countries, but was
often flimsily constructed of wood and was therefore liable to fire. Overhanging
windows filled with wooden lattices, inner courtyards, the rigid seclusion of women,
and graceful interior decoration with glazed tiles are normal features. Well-designed
fountains are found in many streets, also in the courtyards of mosques and large
houses (p. 1239B). In Damascus, many fine mansions, e.g. the House of Abdalla
Pasha, date from the Turkish period; as does the Khan Asad Pasha.

g. INDIA AND PAKISTAN

Muslim architecture entered Northern India from Persia via Afghanistan in the
twelfth century. A previous invasion of 712 had established a small Muslim colony
in Sind, but it soon expired and left no architectural remains of any importance.
It was in c. 962 that a Turkish slave from Turkestan had established a small prin-
cipality at Ghazni. He raided the Punjab in 987 and founded the Ghaznavid
dynasty. His son Mahmud, succeeding him in 997, made Ghazni a place of some
importance until it was sacked by a rival chieftain in c. 1150. A contemporary
chronicler wrote that ‘the capital was . . . ornamented with mosques, porches,
fountains, aqueducts, reservoirs and cisterns, beyond any city of the East’. The
scanty remains of all this glory show that the buildings of Ghazni were essentially
Persian, owing nothing to Hindu India.
In 1193, a later ruler of Ghazni, Mahmud the Ghori, with his general, Qutb
ad-Din, conquered Northern India and established a new capital at Delhi. This
date marks the real beginning of Muslim architecture in India. From 1193-
1554 the Pathan dynasty ruled a large part of the country, excluding a number of
important principalities.
The Mosque of the Quwwat al-Islam (=‘Might of Islam’), Delhi (1198)
was erected on the site of a Hindu temple and originally measured about 210 ft by
150 ft externally on plan, the inner courtyard being 142 ft by 108 ft. The sanctuary
(which in India is, naturally, on the west as that is the side towards Mecca), had an
arcaded facade; but, as this Persian feature was unfamiliar to Hindu craftsmen, they
used projecting courses to form the arches, instead of proper voussoirs. Here, as in
most subsequent Muslim buildings in India, one can distinguish Persian from
Hindu forms. The founder’s son and successor Altamsh proceeded in about 1225
to enlarge the mosque; and also built the large and clumsy minaret, 238 ft high,
known as the Qutb Minar. Its tapered form and its fluting are both derived from
Persian examples, and it has tiers of stalactites under its galleries. The neigh-
bouring Tomb of Altamsh (1235) is a fine specimen of nearly pure Persian
design.
The Great Mosque, Ajmer (c. 1200) is of the congregational type, and has an
imposing arcade of Persian arches, but these are unscientifically constructed.
The Mongol invasions of the thirteenth century interrupted building in
India, as in Persia. The Alai Darwaza (1310), a noble gateway in the mosque
at Delhi, combines Persian and Hindu features. The Adina Mosque, Gaur, in
 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE 1239

A. The Suleymaniye, Constantinople (Istanbul) (1550-7). See p. 1237

B. Fountain in court of S. Sophia, Constantinople (Istanbul).

See opposite page
1240 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE

it eam led’, gi
SicTomb Of Humayam Oldein (1565). See p. 1242

c. The Diwan-i-Khass, D. The Taj Mahal, Agra: Great Gateway to garden

Fatehpur-Sikri court (1630-53). See p. 1245
(1569-75).
See p. 1242
 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE 1241

Bengal (c. 1360) and the Jami Masjid, Kulbarga or Gulbarga (fourteenth
century) are both notable for the enormous number of their small domes,
which in the latter mosque cover the whole area, 216 ft by 176 ft.
The Jami Masjid (=congregational mosque or ‘Great Mosque’), Jaunpur
(1438-78), has its court surrounded by five-aisled colonnades, of which the inner
and outer rows are of double columns with bracket-capitals supporting a roof of
flat slabs in the Hindu method. The great arched portals show the usual mixture of
Hindu and Persian elements. The interior domes and roofs are beautiful in design
and colour.
The Jami Masjid, Mandu (1405-54) has a square courtyard enclosed by
arcades, each of eleven pointed arches supported on red sandstone piers and roofed
with numerous domes.
Ahmadabad, capital of the kingdom of Gujarat, was the most important archi-
tectural centre during the fifteenth century. The Jami Masjid (c. 1411-24) is
a huge mosque which shows the combination of Muslim pointed arches with Hindu
trabeated construction. The sanctuary on the Mecca side has two hundred and
sixty columns supporting fifteen symmetrically-placed stone domes, all built up of
horizontally projecting courses in Hindu fashion. The smaller mosques at Ahmada-
bad are those of Muhafiz Khan, Sidi Sayyid, and Rani Sipari—all in the same
mixed style. In Ahmadab4d are also the fine Tombs of Sayyid Usman (1460)
and of Sayyid Mubarak (1484).
The Jami Masjid, Champanir (1500-8), one of the largest and most im-
posing mosques in India, has a spacious court, a many-domed sanctuary, and two
minarets flanking the central entrance gateway.

In 1526, Babar, the Mongol King of Kabul, defeated the great army of the
Sultan of Delhi at Panipat, and inaugurated the Mogul or Mughal dynasty which
may be considered to have lasted up to the death of the emperor Aurangzeb in
1707. The buildings of this period are more definitely Persian than Hindu in
character, though Hindu features were freely used.
The Tomb of Sher Shah, Sahsaram (1540-45) is built on a platform,
with four angle-pavilions, in the middle of an artificial lake. It is octagonal on plan,
with a deep gallery round the central tomb-chamber, which is crowned by a dome
71 ft in diameter. Small domed octagonal kiosks are grouped round the central
dome.
The Mosque of Sher Shah, Delhi (1541), without courtyard or minarets,
is simple in design, and a prototype of others to follow. It measures 168 ft by 145 ft,
and has five entrance portals with depressed pointed arches, and panelled piers
inlaid with coloured marbles. The facade is crowned with a carved cresting, behind
which rises the single central dome.
At Bijapur, capital of an independent kingdom which was not added to the
Mogul Empire till 1686, a remarkable outburst of monumental building took
place between 1565 and 1686. The principal buildings include the unfinished
Jami Masjid (c. 1576) (p. 1247G, H), a great mosque measuring 330 ft by 260 ft,
roofed with a number of small domes over square compartments, and a central
dome 57 ft in diameter supported on interlacing pointed arches—a remarkable
example of Muslim skill in construction. The fine group of buildings known as the
Ibrahim Rauza, Bijapur (1626-33), includes the tombs of Ibrahim II and his
family, and a fine mosque, in a courtyard which was once a royal garden embel-
lished with kiosks and fountains, all enclosed within a wall with a lofty portal. The
Mausoleum of Mahmid, Ibrahim’s successor, commonly called the Gol Gombaz,
Bijapur (1636-59) is a bold and magnificent building with a dome nearly 125 ft
1242 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE

in diameter, supported on a gallery formed by intersecting pendentive arches, a

method devised to counteract the outward thrust of the dome, as used in the Jami
Masjid, Bijapur.
The noble Tomb of Humayin, Delhi (1565) (p. 1240A) the next Mogul
building to be mentioned, was erected by the widow of the Emperor Humaytn
during the reign of his son, the great Emperor Akbar. Surrounded by a formal
garden, it stands on a vast platform of red sandstone, 22 ft high, with arches in
white marble. From this base rises the domed tomb itself, 156 ft square and 125 ft
high. This great block, though square on plan, consists in fact of a central domed
octagon buttressed by four octagonal towers. It is faced with red sandstone, picked
out with white marble, and the dome itself is faced with white marble. It is of
double construction and is slightly bulbous in form, thus introducing into India for
the first time a feature characteristic of late work in Persia and Samarkand, whence
its architect presumably came. This great building is generally regarded as the pro-
totype of the Taj Mahal (p. 1245).
The Tomb of Muhammad Ghaus, Gwalior (1562), in a city famous for
its fine craftsmanship, is 100 ft square on plan externally, with hexagonal domed
towers at each corner, and a central dome carried on pointed arches. The gallery
has a screen of exquisitely pierced tracery.
The city of Fatehpur-Sikri, near Agra, was founded by the Emperor Akbar
in- 1569, and was the seat of his court till c. 1585. It was formally planned and
splendidly built but is now in ruins. The Jami Masjid (pp. 1243A, 1247c) has an
immense courtyard, 433 ft by 366 ft, surrounded by arcaded cloisters and entered
by a magnificent gateway, the Buland Darwaza ( =‘high gateway’), which is 130 ft
high, plus a flight of steps 42 ft high. Though its huge recessed portal, with a wide
rectangular frame of flat ornament, is essentially Persian in character, the kiosks
(chatris) on its roof give it an Indian flavour. The Diw4n-i-Khass (1569-75)
(p. 1240C) was Akbar’s private audience chamber. The walls are lined with precious
stones. The flat ceiling is supported by a central pillar with an intricately bracketed
capital (p. 1240C) carrying the Emperor’s throne. From this capital four stone
bridges radiate to the four corners of the hall, where his four ministers sat. The
Tomb of Salim Chishti (1571-80) (pp. 1243B, 1247D, E) is a domed square
chamber lit by windows with geometrical tracery, and has over-elaborate brackets
under the eaves.
The great Palace of Akbar, Allahabad (1583) is now an arsenal, and the
only remaining portion is the square Zenana Hall, with a roof carried on sixty-four
columns in eight rows, these columns having elaborate bracket-capitals.
The Mausoleum of Akbar, Sikandra, near Agra (1593-1613) is unique
among the tombs of India. A massive gateway of red sandstone, inlaid with white
marble, leads into the garden surrounding the four-storeyed pyramidal tomb en-
circled by an arcaded cloister with angle-pavilions and a domed entrance-portal.
From this terrace rise three more in succession, each diminishing in size. On the
topmost terrace, surrounded by dazzling marble trellis-work, is Akbar’s cenotaph,
raised high above his tomb beneath.
The huge Palace, Delhi (1639-48), within the Fort, has been much altered
but still displays a great deal of the work of Shah Jahan (1628-58), who carried
out much important building at Delhi and Agra. The palace occupied a space of
c. 1,600 ft by c. 3,200 ft, entered by a lofty gateway and containing many courts,
halls, baths and gardens. It was all laid out with great splendour on formal lines.
The Jami Masjid, Delhi (1644-58), also built by Shah Jahan, has a fine
courtyard 325 ft square, and two minarets 130 ft high. It is raised on a lofty base-
ment and entered by three handsome gateways. These features, together with its
 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE 1243

A. The Jami Masjid, Fatehpur-Sikri: western side of court

(1569-85). See opposite page

B. Tomb of Salim Chishti, Fatehpur-Sikri (1571-80). See opposite page

 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE

GwAUSOLEUM
e30

Pe gy ae

IGREAT GATEWAY)”

jac] ENTRANCE |e
COURT NS

FEE=-190 50 0 Igo 2 30 O
METRES" IDO ss eae 160

B. Plan showing entrance court, c. Marble screen enclosing tombs.

gateway, garden court and
Mausoleum
The Taj Mahal, Agra (1630-53). See opposite page
 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE 1245

domes and angle-towers, make its external appearance much more attractive than
most Indian mosques.
The Moti Masjid (=‘Pearl Mosque’), Agra (1646-53) forms part of the
Palace. It is an elegant three-domed marble building facing on to a court 150 ft
square, adorned with kiosks or chatris. It was one of Shah Jahan’s additions to the
Palace, which also included the Nagina Masjid in the women’s quarters, the
Diwan-i-Khass or private audience-hall (1637), and the noble Diwan-i-Am
or public audience-hall, measuring 208 ft by 76 ft (p. 1240B).
The Taj Mahal, Agra (1630-53) (pp. 1244, 1247A, B) was, however, Shah
Jahan’s greatest building, and indeed one of the greatest buildings in the world,
erected to the memory of his favourite wife, Mumtaz-i-Mahal, Persian by
descent. The Mausoleum itself is 186 ft square, with canted angles, and has a
central inner dome 80 ft high and 58 ft in diameter, surmounted by an outer dome
nearly 200 ft high (p. 12478). Around this central dome are two-storeyed aisles, and
at each angle is a small dome. The entrance-portal in the centre of each side is of
the usual recessed type, crowned with a four-centred arch set in a square frame.
The actual tombs of Shah Jahan and his queen are enclosed in a marble screen of
incredible elaboration and delicacy, possibly erected after Shah Jahan’s death. The
interior of the Mausoleum is dimly lit through pierced marble lattices, which pro-
vide a most impressive half-light, just sufficient to enable a visitor to see the amaz-
ing beauty of the inlaid marble decoration of the walls. ‘The Mausoleum stands on a
marble platform 313 ft square and 22 ft high. At each corner is a white marble
minaret 137 ft high. This platform is surrounded by an outer court, 880 ft by 440 ft,
on one side of which is a great gateway. The approach to the Taj from the bank of
the Jumuna River is along a water-course or canal, lined with cypresses. The reflec-
tions of these trees, the minarets, and the domed Mausoleum enhance a splendid
view.
Shah Jahan was deposed in 1658 by his third son Aurangzeb, whose build-
ings were inferior in character to those of his father. They included the Moti
Masjid, Delhi (1659), with delicate marble decoration. From that date on-
wards the Mogul tradition continued right through the seventeenth and the eigh-
teenth century with diminished vigour, and was imitated by the Mahratta rulers of
India; but it may be said to have reached its real end when the Mogul dynasty
expired at the death of Aurangzeb in 1707. Moreover, by that time, European
influence was making itself felt in Indian architecture.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
PLANS. Throughout the history of Muslim architecture, the principal type of
building was the mosque (Arabic masjid =‘place of prostration’). The “congrega-
tional mosque’ or ‘Friday mosque’ (fami Masjid) was used—especially on Friday,
the Muslim Sabbath—for public or congregational worship, as opposed to private
prayer which was enjoined upon Muslims at stated hours several times a day, wher-
ever they might be. Such mosques normally had a large open court (sahn) corre-
sponding to the Early Christian atrium, and surrounded by arcades or colonnades
(iwanat, plural of liwan) affording protection from the sun (pp. 12324, 1247c). The
liwan on the side facing Mecca was of greater depth than the other three, and con-
stituted the sanctuary. In the middle of the wall towards Mecca, the gibla or direc-
tion for prayer (i.e. towards Mecca) was indicated by a niche (the mzhrab). By the
side of the niche stood the pulpit (minbar or mimbar) (p. 12318), and a reading-desk
(dikka) from which the priest (imam) read passages from the Koran and intoned
the prayers. A portion of the sanctuary was often enclosed by a screen (magsura),
1246 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE

corresponding to a Christian chancel-screen. One or more tall towers, ‘minarets’

(Arabic mandra) were invariably provided, from which the ‘muezzin’ (Arabic
muadhdhin) chanted the call to prayer at prescribed times. All the above requisites
apply to a modern mosque. On the centre of the open court stood a fountain
(fawwara), often sheltered by a dome, for ritual ablution.
Another type of mosque was the Madrasa or collegiate mosque, e.g. the Madrasa
or Mosque of Sultan Hasan at Cairo (p. 1232C, D), which is cruciform on plan, the
central portion being open to the sky. The four arms of the cross are spanned by
enormous pointed vaults; and behind the mihrab is the founder’s tomb crowned
with a dome, a most unusual arrangement. A third type of mosque, the tomb-
mosque, is sometimes entirely covered with domes, vaults, or flat roofs, and may be
used for private prayer.
The khans (caravanserais or inns for travellers and merchants) in large cities
such as Cairo, Damascus, and Constantinople (where there are said to have been
180) were large buildings, usually planned around an open courtyard. The lower
storey provided stabling for camels, etc.; the upper storeys contained rooms for
merchants and their goods. The Khan Asad Pasha, Damascus, is a particularly
fine example.
Dwelling-houses were planned in the normal Oriental fashion, with the principal
rooms grouped around an internal courtyard, often adorned with a fountain. The
windows facing the street are small, and strongly barred in the lower storeys. Those
above often overhang and have wooden lattices (p. 1248c). The women’s quarters
(hari) in all Muslim houses are carefully secluded from the portions accessible to
male visitors.
WALLS. Walls were of brick or stone according to locality, and were often
covered with delicate surface ornament in plaster, precious stones or glazed tiles
(p. 1249). At the Alhambra, Granada, walls have a dado of glazed tiles 4 ft high;
above this are geometrical patterns in plaster. The horizontal bonding of walls in
alternate courses of light and dark stone (p. 1231A) is a fashion borrowed from the
Byzantines. External walls of mosques are often crowned with bold cresting (pp.
I23IA, I232B, 1243A, 1248N) or stalactites instead of a cornice. In Mogul architec-
ture, walls were sometimes crowned with rows of small kiosks (chatris) (p. 1243A, B).
OPENINGS. Arcades were largely used to provide shade from the sun. Five main
types of arches were used: (a) the two-centred pointed arch, without mouldings
(p. 1248K); (6) the four-centred or ‘Persian’ arch, resembling the English “Tudor’
arch (p. 1256 No. 17); (c) the pointed horseshoe arch (p. 1256 No. 8); (d) the
round horseshoe (pp. 1231C, 1248L, 1256 No. 6); (e) the ogee arch (p. 1256 Nos.
28, 29); the multifoil or cusped arch (pp. 1231C, I240B, I1248M, 1256 No. 7). In
some of the earliest mosques, arches rest on antique Roman columns (p. 1231C);
and in a few late examples, specially-made columns are used, but piers are more
general (p. 12324, B). Wooden beams or iron rods are occasionally fixed as ties across
the springing of arches, partly as a precaution against earthquakes. The various
types of arches mentioned above are also used over door-openings and windows. In
some of the later Cairo mosques, the voussoirs of arches are of alternating colours
and are interlocked joggles which form a counterchange pattern (pp. 1231B, C,
1248E). Partly because all woodwork shrinks in excessive heat, doors are divided into
very small panels forming a geometrical pattern, with elaborate mouldings and inlay
(p. 1247F). Windows are usually small, to suit the hot climate, occasionally grouped
together, and generally filled with elaborate stone or marble or stucco tracery (gama-
riyya) in the case of mosques, or with wooden lattices (mashrabiyya) in the case of
houses. Glass was occasionally used from the thirteenth century onwards ;the coloured
glass windows in the Dome of the Rock at Jerusalem were inserted in 1528.
 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE 1247

THE TAJMAHAL [yg

AGRA
AD 1630 -'53

SCALE FOR PLAN

Q 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 FE
20 30 40 SOMET®S

Q 20 40 60 80 190 120 140 160 I80FE

10 20 30 40 SOMETES SCALE FOR SECTION
te)

peccees ase

ECTION b- S|
‘|TOMB OF
:|ISLAM KHAN |
Toy

Toy
|
|
|
|
|
|
if
1

a DOOR: SALIM
TOMB
CHISTI

150 200F!
for ‘ 10 20 5 40 50 6OM™ FE ae
Ms
SCALE FOR PLAN

80 4| 2°

20

50 4 15

2a.40+
+ 10
304 |

204
+ 5
104

4; 0

104
 1248 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE

SRSUTRAU ESI Hes

et
URSSI Bal
g A
wy NX. 4

WORE LL 2))))))
SE

Kgl <2
x
Ne

gun (ON ADIN

moma K) ¥
¢S, 30 ee
mM 2 it SL EEE,
=a
,
TYPICAL DOME §STILTED ARCH HORSESHOE ARCH MULTIFOIL ARCH = CRESTING TO W
 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE 1249

ROOFS. Roofs were normally either flat or domed; but pointed vaults were also
used occasionally. Flat roofs were mainly constructed of palm-trunks or other
timber, covered with clay or mortar reinforced with palm-branches. In India, flat
roofs of corbelled stone slabs repeated an older tradition from Jain temples. Flat
ceilings were often richly decorated: at the Alhambra much of this decoration is of
coloured stucco. Domes were very widely used in Muslim mosques and tombs.
They are seldom, if ever, spherical as in Byzantine architecture; seldom bulbous,
as commonly believed; very occasionally saucer-shaped, as in Gujarat; but for the
most part are slightly pointed. Only in later examples, and in the eastern of the
Muslim countries, is there a slight pinching-in of the dome at its base foreshadow-
ing the bulbous Tartar or ‘onion’ domes of Russia and the Central European
Baroque style.
Domes are usually of stone in Egypt and in parts of Persia and India, of brick
elsewhere. A few examples are of double construction. In Cairo especially, where
fine limestone was readily available, their exterior was decorated with elaborate
geometrical carved ornament—either to mitigate the glare of the sun on such large
surfaces, or in sheer exuberance. Fluted or ribbed domes are characteristic of parts
of Persia and Turkestan. Domes are almost invariably placed on square compart-
ments; but, unlike the Byzantine type which rests upon smooth pendentives, the
typical dome pendentive is formed of tiers or rows of small arches known as
‘stalactites’ (p. I232D).
COLUMNS. Ready-made columns, from old Roman and Byzantine buildings in
the locality, were often utilized for colonnades of mosques, and as they are of
various designs they naturally produce an incongruous and haphazard effect, very
much as in some Early Christian churches. The new columns designed by Muslim
architects were founded on old models varied with Muslim ornament (p. 12486).
The columns in the Alhambra, Spain, are very slender, 12 diameters in height,
surmounted by capitals (p. 1248A, B), with long necking and square upper portion
carved with stalactite ornament (pp. I23ID, 1248F). Above this singular capital rises
again a square post, like an elongated dosseret-block, carved with geometric and
arabesque ornament, and against its sides abut the springings of the stilted arches
carried on stalactite brackets resembling the stalactite capitals below (pp. 1231D,
1232F). In India, local Hindu influence produced a short, stunted pier quite Eastern
in character, and also a variety of columns founded on Jain models, with cubiform
capitals and deep abacus-block, while two-thirds of the way up the shaft start
curious brackets or serpent-like struts which appear to support the outstanding
beam of the roof (p. 1243B).
MOoUwLDINGS. Mouldings are unimportant in Muslim architecture, and usually
consist of small flat bands as a capping to a dado or around doors and window-
openings. Where cornices might be expected, e.g. to crown a facade, rows of
stalactites are generally employed, beneath an ornamental pierced parapet (p.
I231A, B,D).
ORNAMENT (p. 1248). Ornament in general was restricted, as far as ‘motif’ was
concerned, by passages from the Koran prohibiting the representation of natural
forms. Thus Muslim ornament is in sharp-contrast to the elaborate naturalistic
sculpture of a Greek temple, a Roman triumphal arch, or the facade of a Gothic
cathedral. The Muslims, debarred from imitating natural forms, devised and per-
fected a system of decoration in which geometry was a ruling factor; and covered
their principal buildings, inside and out, with geometrical interlacing patterns,
sometimes enhanced and enriched with gorgeous colouring, and thus producing a
brilliant surface resembling a carpet (p. 1248D). The term ‘arabesque’ (=Arab-like)
seems to have been originally coined in the eighteenth century to describe this form
1250 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE

of Muslim geometrical ornament; but in modern scholarly usage is applied only to

Renaissance panels decorated with conventional foliage, figures, and emblems.
Among different types of Muslim surface ornament are: (a) Mnemonic inscrip-
tions or ‘texts’, consisting of extracts from the Koran, either in the stiff characters
known as ‘Kufic’ and so called from their origin at Kufa; or in the more flowing
Nashki alphabet, equally old in origin. In either case, the letters are intertwined
with conventional foliage to form ornamental bands or panels (p. 1231D), and may
well have inspired our Late-Gothic texts in churches. (b) Superimposed ornament,
made up of conventional designs in different planes, in which one scheme of design
forms the background to the one over it, enhancing the intricacy of detail beloved
of Muslim craftsmen (p. 123ID). (c) Stalactite ornament, already mentioned (p.
1249), devised primarily to decorate the pendentives of domes (p. 1232D, F) but
afterwards applied decoratively to door-heads (p. 1248H), capitals (pp. 123ID,
1248F) and other features.
The-mashrabiyya grilles in windows were formed of wooden bobbins, framed
together in geometrical patterns, and are of great delicacy, originality and beauty.
The pulpit (mimbar) in the mosque was richly ornamented with panelling, carving
and inlay; while the adjoining prayer-niche (mihrab), as being the focal point of
worship, was gorgeously treated with joggled voussoirs, stalactite ornament, and
inlay. A fine example exists in the mosque of Qa’it Bay at Cairo (p. 1231B).
Taken as a whole, ornament forms an exceptionally important part of Muslim
architecture. It varies greatly in form, treatment, and colour, while restricted every-
where by the prohibitions of the Koran. To our modern eyes, this style seems to
present an effect of restlessness, a striving after excess, in contrast with the Greek
spirit which recognized perfection in simplicity and was content to let a fine line
tell its own tale. In Muslim architecture generally—but especially in India and at
the Alhambra, rather than in Persia and Cairo—we find intricacy rather than sim-
plicity. There are brackets of such tortured forms as to be structurally useless;
crestings of pierced and carved marble as delicate as lace-work (p. 1248N); surface
panels inlaid with the precious stones of the jeweller as well as with the coloured
marbles of the sculptor; geometrical polychrome patterns of labyrinthine design
(pp. 1231C, 1243A). To these features must be added the distinctive stalactite orna-
ment, monotonously repeated.

It is now generally admitted that European Gothic architecture owes a sub-

stantial debt to Islamic prototypes, many of which became familiar to the Crusaders
in Egypt, Palestine and Syria. Some of the skill in building brick vaults which the
Muslim craftsmen of Persia had inherited from their Sassanian forebears seems to
have reached Europe from those countries, as certainly did many notions of military
architecture such as the ‘crooked entrance’, crenellation, and machicolation. On the
other hand, many details probably transmitted by the Crusaders to Europe appear
to have been originally borrowed by the Muslims from their Byzantine foes, e.g.
the use of striped facades, which are common in Cairo as in Pisa and Genoa—both
of which cities were in touch with the Levant; this practice may as easily have been
borrowed from Constantinople as from Cairo. Engaged shafts built into the angles
of brick piers were used in pre-Muslim buildings, and the Muslims must have
transmitted them to the West.
More important is the very early Muslim use of the two-centred pointed arch—
centuries before it appeared in Europe—and also the four-centred (or ‘Persian’ or
‘depressed’ or “Tudor’) arch—hundreds of years before England adopted it. Ogee
and cusped (or foliated) arches appear to have had the same origin. The graceful
form of the Cairene minaret, diminished in stages, may well have influenced the
 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE 1251

designers of Renaissance campanili in Italy, to say nothing of Wren’s steeples. The

dainty wooden mashrabiyya of Muslim houses was copied in metal on several grilles
of English churches. Beautiful inscriptions in Kufic lettering may have affected the
design of Late-Gothic inscriptions; and ornamental parapets surely reached us from
the Islamic countries.
* Almost the first person to suggest the possible kinship between Gothic and
Muslim architecture was Wren, who, in attempting to summarize the history of
Westminster Abbey wrote (in 1713) that: “This we now call the Gothick Manner of
Architecture ...tho’ the Goths were rather Destroyers than Builders; I think it
should with more Reason be called the Saracen style; for those People wanted
neither Arts nor Learning’. This surmise, daring indeed when it was made, has
since been proved reasonable by modern scholarship.

REFERENCE BOOKS
BELL, G.L. Palace and Mosque at Ukhaidir. London, 1914.
BOURGOIN, J. Les Arts arabes. Paris, 1873.
BRIGGS, M.S. Muhammadan Architecture in Egypt and Palestine. Oxford, 1924.
BROWN; P. Indian Architecture: The Islamic Period. Bombay, 1942.
CALVERT, A. Moorish Remains in Spain. London, 1906.
COHN-WIENER,E. Turan: Islamische Baukunst in Mittelasien. Berlin, 1930.
COSTE,P. Architecture arabe... du Caire. 2 vols., Paris, 1837-9.
CRESWELL,K.A.C. Early Muslim Architecture. 2 vols., Oxford, 1932-40.
—. The Muslim Architecture of Egypt. Vol. i, Oxford, 1952.
—. A Short Account of Early Muslim Architecture. London, 1958.
DIEZ, E. Die Kunst der Islamischen Volker. Berlin, 1917.
—. Islamische Baukunst in Churasan. Hagen, 1923.
EGLI,E. Sinan[Turkish architect]. Zurich , Stuttgart, 1954.
FERGUSSON, J. History of Indian and Eastern Architecture. 2 vols., London, 1910.
FRANZ, J. Die Baukunst des Islam. Darmstadt, 1887.
GAYET,A. L’ Art arabe. Paris, 1893.
—. L’ Art persan. Paris, 1895.
HAVELL,E.B. Indian Architecture. 2nd ed., London, 1927.
JONES, O. Plans and Details of the Alhambra. 2 vols., London, 1845.

Tomb-Mosque of Sultan Barkik extra muros, Cairo

(1399-1412). See p. 1230
1252 MUSLIM ARCHITECTURE

JUNGHANDEL, M. Die Baukunst Spaniens [vol. i, Moorish Work]. Dresden, 1893.

KUHNEL,E. Maurische Kunst. Berlin, 1924.
MARGAIS, G. L’ Architecture musulmane d’ Occident [North Africa, etc.]. Paris, 1954.
MAYER,L.A. Islamic Architects and their Works. Geneva, 1956.
POPE, A. U. A Survey of Persian Art. 6 vols. [vol. ii, pp. 897-1246, Architecture of the
Islamic Period]. London, 1939.
PRISSE D’AVENNES,E. L’ Art arabe... du Caire. 3 vols., Paris, 1877.
RICHMOND,E.T. The Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. Oxford, 1924.
—. Moslem Architecture. Royal Asiatic Society, 1926.
RIVOIRA,G.T. Moslem Architecture. Oxford, 1918.
SALADIN, H. Manuel d’art musulman. (Vol. i, Architecture.) Paris, 1907.
SARRE, F. Denkmédiler persischer Baukunst. 2 vols., Berlin, 1901-10.
TARCHI, Uv. L’Architettura musulmana in Egitto. Turin, 1922-3.
TERRY, J. Indo-Islamic Architecture. London, 1955.
 The Auditorium Building, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, Massachusetts (1952-5). See p. 1160

GENERAL REFERENCE BOOKS

N.B. Lists relating to special periods are given at the end of each chapter.
Architectural Association Sketch Book. Folio. 1867-1918.
ATKINSON, R., and BAGENAL, H. Theory and Elements of architecture. Vol. I. Pt. I.
London, 1926.
BRIGGS, M.S. Concise Encyclopaedia of architecture. 1959.
Cambridge Ancient History. 12 vols. 1924-39; Mediaeval History. 8 vols. 1911-36; Modern
History. 14 vols. 1902-12 (New edition in progress, 1957-).
CHOISY, A. Histoire del’ architecture. 2 vols. Paris, 1899.
CUMMINGS, Cc.A.A History of Architecture in Italy. 2 vols., Boston and New York, 1901.
DEHIO, G., and BEZOLD, G. v. Die Kirchliche Baukunst des Abendlandes. Folio. 1884.
Dictionary of Architecture, issued by the Architectural Publication Society. With Detached
Essays and Illustrations. 6 vols., folio., London, 1848-92.
DURAND, J.N.L. Paralléle des Edifices de tout genre. Paris, 1800.
FERGUSSON, J. History of Architecture. 6 vols., London, 1893, etc.
GAILHABAUD, J. L’architecture du V au XVII siécle. 5 vols., folio and 4to, 1869-72.
—. Monuments anciens et modernes. Paris, 1850.
GARDINER, A. H. Outline of English Architecture. 3rd edition. 1949.
GODFREY, W.H. A History of Architecture in London. 1911.
GWILT, J. Encyclopaedia of Architecture. London, 1900.
HAMLIN, A.D. F. Text Book of History of Architecture. New York, 1896.
—.A History of Ornament. 2 vols., New York, 1916.
HAMLIN, T. Architecture through the Ages. New York, 1941.
Handbuch der Architektur. Stuttgart.
HARVEY, J. The Gothic World. London, 1950.
JONES, O. Grammar of Ornament. London, Folio, 1856; and 4to, 1868.
KIMBALL, F., and EDGELL, G.H. A History of Architecture. New York, 1920.
1254 GENERAL REFERENCE BOOKS
KUGLER, F. Geschichte der Baukunst. § vols. Stuttgart, 1859-72. Continued by Burckhardt,
Lubke and Gurlitt as Geschichte der neuern Baukunst. 4 vols. 1887-1911.
LAVEDAN, P. French Architecture. 1944, English trans., Penguin Books, Harmondsworth,
1956.
LETHABY, W.R. Architecture. London, 1912.
LLOYD,N. A History of English Brickwork. London and New York, 1925.
—.A History of the English House. London and New York, 1931.
MILIZIA, F. Lives of Celebrated Architects. 2 vols., London, 1826.
MUMFORD,L. The Culture of Cities. London, 1938.
—. Technics and Civilization. London, 1934.
PARKER, J. Glossary of Terms used in Architecture. 3 vols. 1850.
PERROT, G., and CHIPIEZ, C. History of Ancient Art. 12 vols. 1883-94.
PEVSNER,N. The Buildings of England. A series of guide books, by counties, from 1951.
—.An Outline of European Architecture. 5th (Penguin) ed., 1957.
QUENNELL,M.,andc.H.B. A History of Everyday Things, 1066-1942. 4 parts. 1918-42.
RICHARDSON, A.E., and CORFIATO,H. 0. The Art of Architecture. London, 1938.
Royal Institute of British Architects’ Transactions. 1836 et seq.
SCOTT-MONCRIEFF, G. The Stones of Scotland. London, 1938.
SIMPSON, F.M.A History of Architectural Development. 3 vols., London, 1905-11. Revised
edition in 5 vols.:
I. Plommer, Hugh. Ancient and Classical Architecture. London, 1956.
II. Stewart, Cecil. Early Christian, Byzantine and Romanesque Architecture.
London, 1954
STATHAM, H.H. A Short Critical History of Architecture. 3rd ed., London, 1950.
STURGIS, R. A Dictionary of Architecture. 3 vols. New York, 1901.
STURGIS, R., and FROTHINGHAM,A.L. History of Architecture. 4 vols., New York, 1916.
TOY,S. A History of Fortification from 3,000 B.C. to A.D. 700. London, 1955.
VAN DER MEER; F. Atlas of Western Civilization. Trans. Birrell, T. A.Amsterdam, 2nd ed.,
1960
VASARI, G. Lives of the most Eminent Painters, Sculptors and Architects. Edited by Blash-
field. 4 vols., New York, 1897.
VIOLLET-LE-DUC,E.E. Dictionnaire del’ architecture. 10 vols., Paris, 1859.
—. Lectures on Architecture. 2 vols., London, 1877-81.
VITRUVIUS, MARCUS POLLIO. The Ten Books on Architecture, Trans. M. H. Morgan,
Harvard University Press, 1914.
WATERHOUSE, P.L., and CORDINGLEY,R. A. The Story of Architecture. 3rd ed., London,
1950.
Various articles in the Encyclopaedia Britannica and Chambers’ Encyclopaedia dealing with
Architecture may be referred to with interest. Articles on aspects of architectural history
appear from time to time in various journals, such as the Journal of the Royal Institute of
British Architects, the Fournal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, the Architectural
Review, Architectural History, Fournal of the Society of Architectural Historians and the
Art Bulletin.
 “ “a ese

First Church of Christ Scientist, Berkeley, California (1912)

Architect: Bernard R. Maybeck (1862-1957)

GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS

Abacus (Lat. abacus =table, tablet). A Acanthus. A plant whose leaves, con-
slab forming the crowning member of a ventionally treated, form the lower por-
capital. In Greek Doric, square without tions of the Corinthian capital (pp. 138,
chamfer or moulding (pp. II0A, 113, 160A). 156, 162A, 246D).
In Greek Ionic, thinner with ovolo mould- Acropolis (Gk., upper city). Most
ing only (p. 160c). In Roman Ionic and ancient Greek cities were on hills, the
Corinthian, the sides are hollowed on plan citadel on the summit being known as
and have the angles cut off (pp. 160F, 189], the Acropolis, containing the principal
246D). In Romanesque, the abacus is temples and treasure-houses (p. 104).
deeper but projects less and is moulded Acroteria (Gk., summits or extre-
with rounds and hollows, or merely mities). Blocks resting on the vertex and
chamfered on the lower edge (pp. 503B, C, lower extremities of the pediment to sup-
E, 504A, B). In Gothic, the circular or port statuary or ornaments (pp. 117A, B, C,
octagonal abacus was favoured in England D, I22B, D, 157B).
(pp. 503L, Q, U, 504), while the square or Adyton or Adytum. The most sacred
octagonal abacus is a French feature room of a Greek temple. Usually
(p. 567A,
C). approached from the naos by a doorway
Abutment. Solid masonry which re- (pp. IO9H, 124).
sists the lateral pressure of an arch (pp. Aedicule (Lat. aedicula =a little house).
2775 369). A small temple-like arrangement originally
 1256 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS

COMPARATIVE ARCHES
we Nest
Up,

6) .
\w yy) (3)SeMPCIRCULAR
A SEGMET
‘ RIANGULAR (2 )coRBeLLED

ey
2 ee se4 ~ eee

MOORISH POINTED (Horseshoe POINTE

MULTIFOIL cae HOF SARACE

POINTED
EGMENTAL

D
°
/1
1
i
’
‘
oy fa \
\ Ma

DEPRESSED THREE-CENTRED FOUR-CENTRED (TUDOR) RAMPANT \

Ne
/
Ne

PSEUDO-FOUR-CENTRED

MS \ sy \ j Ie sn S y,

ROUND (25) POIN

OUND TREFOIL OINTED TREFOIL TRIFOLI
22 RIFOLIATED
(21)parasotic

i
>>| A
C7
(26)cnaveror
METHOD OF SETTING
OUT THE, VOUSSOIRS
ee. tee
ae t~

ITALIA
POINTED
 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS 1257

limited to shrines but which became a com- Antiquarian. The term is applied to a
mon motif in the Classical system: columns phase of change in Western European
or pilasters carry a pedimented entablature Renaissance architecture (p. 660), lasting
and enframe a niche or a window. The from the eighteen-fifties to about 1830,
term ‘tabernacle’ sometimes is used to con- wherein renewed inspiration was sought
vey a similar meaning (pp. 249D, 716B, 756, from ancient Greek and Roman and from
757D; F, IO2TA). Mediaeval architecture. The more concrete
Agora. The Greek equivalent of the manifestations of the Antiquarian move-
Roman forum, a place of open-air assembly ment were the Greek and Gothic Revivals
or market (p. 105A). (q.q.v.), both continuing further into the
Aisles (Lat. ala =wing). Lateral divi- nineteenth century. These Revivals were
sions parallel with the nave in a basilica more strongly marked in some countries
or church (pp. 259, 264J, 560, 910D). than in others.
Alure (Fr. aller =to go). An alley, walk Apophyge (Gk., a flying off). The
or passage. A gallery behind a parapet cavetto or concave sweep at the top and
(pp. 436A, 438). bottom of the column shaft connecting
Ambo (Gk. ambon=a stage, a pulpit). it with the fillet (pp. 126R, s, 127C, 160B,
A raised pulpit from which the Epistle and 165R, I95B, 972B).
the Gospel were read (pp. 255C, H, K, 256A). Apse (Lat., an arch). The circular or
Ambry (or Aumbry). A cupboard or multangular termination of a church
recess in a church to contain sacred sanctuary, first applied to a Roman
vessels (p. 630H). basilica. The apse is a Continental feature,
Amorino (pl. amorini). Diminutive and contrasts with the square termination
of Amor, the Roman god of love, identified of English Gothic churches (pp. 200, 255],
with the Greek Eros. Amorini were usually K, 256A, 259C, E, 264A, D, J, K, 269, 273;
represented by Renaissance artists as 281D, G, 322, 330E, F, G, 334C, E, F, 3555 3565
cherubs or juvenile angels. (pp. 740B, 749G, 391A, 424D, 49IC, D, E, 561, 698B, D, E,
750A, D, E, 768A). 723G, H, 9IOC, D).
Amphi-prostyle. A temple with por- Apteral (Gk., without wings). A term
tico at both ends (pp. I09D, 132A). applied to a temple without columns on
Ancones (Gk., elbow or hollow). Con- the sides (p. I09A-D).
soles on either side of a doorway support- Arabesque. Surface decoration, light
ing a cornice (p. I59D, E). Also, projec- and fanciful in character, much used by
tions left on blocks of stone such as drums Arabian artists, in elaborate continuations
of columns for use in hoisting and setting of lines. Applied also to the combinations
in position (p. II0G). of flowing lines interwoven with flowers,
Annulet (Lat. annulus=a ring). A fruit, and figures as used by Renaissance
small flat fillet encircling a column. It is artists (pp. 758E, 838]).
several times repeated under the ovolo Arzostyle. A term used when the
or echinus of the Doric Capital (pp. 110A, space between two columns is more than
II3, 972A). three diameters (p. 113A).
Anta (plural antz). A pilaster termi- Arcade. A range of arches supported
nating the side wall of a Greek temple, with on piers or columns, attached to or
base and capital differing from those of detached from the wall (pp. 166, 269, 391,
adjacent columns; also seen in Egyptian 422B, 611, 720B).
temples (see Pilaster) (pp. 55L, 109, I20E, Arch (Lat. arcus=an arc of a curve,
G, J, 132B, E, F, 163L). an arch). A structure of wedge-shaped
Antefixz (Lat. ante =before +figo =I blocks over an opening, so disposed as
fix). Ornamental blocks, fixed vertically to hold together when supported only
at regular intervals along the lower edge of from the sides. Various forms are shown
a roof, to cover the ends of tiles (pp. 110H, on the opposite page.
II7E, G, 134A, 163C). Architrave (Gk., chief beam). The
Anthemion (Gk., a flower). A term beam or lowest division of the entablature,
given to honeysuckle or -palmette orna- which extends from column to column
ment of several varieties, in cornices, neck- (pp. IIOA, I44B, 160, 972). The term is also
ings of Ionic capitals and elsewhere in applied to the moulded frame round a door
Greek and Roman architecture (pp. 126R; or window (pp. 159, 267R, 759J, L).
S, 157G, I59D, E, 163A; C, D, 164G). Archivolt. The mouldings on the face
 1258 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS

of an arch, and following its contour Baldachino. A canopy supported by

(pp. 203A, 223B, F, 224, 350K). columns, generally placed over an altar
Arris. The sharp edge formed by the or tomb, also known as a ‘ciborium’
meeting of two surfaces (pp. II3E, I60A, (pp. 256, 263, 720B).
165)). Ball-flower. The ornament of Deco-
Art Nouveau (Fr., new art). A decorative rated Gothic architecture (p. 508P), possibly
movement in European architecture heral- from a flower form or a horse-bell.
ded in the eighteen-eighties (p. 1069C) Baluster. A pillar or column support-
and flourishing strongly in the period 1893- ing a handrail or coping, a series of such
1907. Its particular characteristics were a being called a balustrade (pp. 740A, 741A,
flowing and sinuous naturalistic ornament 750J, 880A, C, 957D, 960B, 962A, 969D, 971J;
and avoidance of historical architectural L, 980B).
traits. The style went under other names in Baptistery. A separate building to
certain European countries: Le Modern contain a font, for the baptismal rite
Style (France); Jugendstil (Germany and (pp. 313A; 314B, E-G, 32IC).
Austria); and Stile Liberty (Italy) (pp. Barbican. An outwork of a mediaeval
1065, I069D, I070B, C, IIO5C, E). castle, of which the object was to protect
Ashlar. Masonry of smooth squared a drawbridge or the entrance (p. 44IC, D).
stones in regular courses, in contradistinc- Barge board. A board fixed to the
tion to rubble work (pp. 132E, F, 798A). verge of a pitched roof (p. 456A).
Astragal (Gk., knuckle-bone). A small Baroque (Fr. bizarre =fantastic or ir-
semicircular moulding, often ornamented regular). A term applied to design during
with a bead or reel (p. 1648). Torus is the late Renaissance period (from 1600 to
the name applied to large mouldings of 1760 in Italy), after the stages of learning
similar section (p. 164L). and experiment had been passed and
Astylar. A treatment of a facade with- Renaissance architecture had reached a
out columns (pp. 681, 685). characteristic, non-Roman expression; rich,
Atlantes. Carved male figures serving bold and vital. A description is given on
as pillars, also called Telamones (p. 114J). Pp. 659 (pp. 693C, 697A; B, 727; 728, 730;
Atrium. A highly important apart- 739A, B, 821C, D).
ment in a Roman house, forming an Bartizan. A small, overhanging turret
entrance hall or court, the roof open to the (p. 487).
sky in the centre (p. 234A, B, D, F). Some- Base (Gk. basis=that on which one
times the rim of the roof aperture (com- stands). The lower portion of any struc-
pluvium) was supported by four or more ture or architectural feature.
columns. In Early Christian and later Basement. The lowest stage of a build-
architecture, a forecourt (pp. 259C, E, 260C, ing; also applied to an underground
281G, 285C). storey (pp. 899C, 9038).
Attic. A term first applied in the Basilica (Gk. basileus=a king). A
Renaissance period to the upper storey of hall for the administration of justice
a building above the main cornice; also (p. 200).
applied to rooms in a roof (pp. 223B, F, 224, Batter. A term applied to a wall with
742A, D). an inclined face (pp. 38E, 47, 5I, 1084A).
Attic base. A base to a Classic column, Battlement. A parapet having a series
so named by Vitruvius, and formed of of indentations or embrasures, between
upper and lower torus and scotia joined which are raised portions known as mer-
by fillets, and the most usual of all column lons (pp. 455A; 484], SIID-F).
bases (pp. 135B, 165H;, S). Bays. Compartments into which the
Aureole (Lat. aurum=gold). A quad- nave or roof of a building is divided (pp.
rangular, circular, or elliptic halo or frame 369, 494, 495, 909B). The term is also used
surrounding the figure of Christ, the for projecting windows (pp. 455A, 456A,
Virgin, or certain saints. Also known as 458B).
the Mandorla or Vesica Piscis (q.v.). When Bead. A small cylindrical moulding
a circular halo envelops only the head, it is often carved with an ornament resembling
called a Nimbus. a string of beads (pp. 164B, 165P_ Q) (see
Astragal).
Bailey. Open area or court of a fortified Beak-head. A Norman enrichment
castle (pp. 440C, 441A, 442E, L). like a bird’s head and beak (p. 508D).
 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS 1259

Belfry (Old Fr. berfrei=a tower—not Brise Soleil (Fr., sun shield). A screen
connected with ‘bell’). A term generally to break the glare of sunshine upon win-
applied to the upper room in a tower in dows. In recent architecture such screens
which the bells are hung, and thus often to often take the form of louvres, and are usu-
the tower itself (pp. 259D, 264, 314, 325A, ally made a permanent and effective part of
431D, E, 579C, 611A, 615A, 628D). the architecture (p. 1165B).
Belvedere (Ital. =beautiful view). A Broach Spire. An octagonal spire
roofed but open-sided structure affording tising without a parapet above a tower,
an extensive view, usually located at the with pyramidal forms at the angles of the
roof-top of a dwelling but sometimes an. tower, as in Early English churches
independent building on an eminence in a (Pp. 492A).
landscape or formal garden (pp. 680F, 706E). Buttress (Old Fr. bouter=to bear
Bema (Gk., a raised platform). A against). A mass of masonry built against
raised stage reserved for the clergy in a wall to resist the pressure of an arch or
Early Christian churches; it forms the vault. The development is noted in each
germ of the transept when expanded style (p. 497). A flying buttress is an
laterally in later architecture (p. 259C, E). arch starting from a detached pier and
Billet. A Norman moulding of short abutting against a wall to take the thrust
cylinders or square pieces at regular of the vaulting (pp. 369, 497, 532C, 539A,
intervals (p. 508A). 544E, 564A, B).
Boss (Fr. bosse=lump or knob). A Byzantine Architecture. The style
projecting ornament at the intersection of evolved at Constantinople (Byzantium, now
the ribs of ceilings, whether vaulted or Istanbul) in the fifth century (p. 271),
flat. The term is also applied to the and still the style of the Eastern or
carved ends of weather-mouldings of doors Greek Church.
and windows. Bosses are often carved
with great delicacy, with heads of angels, Cable. A Norman moulding enrich-
flowers, or foliage (pp. 399C-G, 400C, 422C, ment like a twisted rope (p. 455G).
468, 47IH, 512J—M, 566A, C). Caisson (see Coffer).
Bouleuterion. A Greek Senate build- Caldarium or Calidarium. A
ing or council house (p. 105). chamber with hot water baths in a Roman
Bowtell (supposed to be so called from baths building (see also Tepidarium and
its resemblance to an arrow shaft or belt). Frigidarium) (pp. 203B, 204B, 207D).
A Norman convex moulding (usually Camber. Slight rise or upward curve
three-quarters of a circle in section) of an otherwise horizontal structure.
applied to an angle—a form of roll mould- Cames. Slender strips of lead, grooved
ing (p. 508B, C, E, G, H, K, L). at the sides for the reception of pieces of
Pointed bowtell, a roll moulding in glass, in casement, stained glass and other
which two faces meet in a blunt arris types of window (p. 510).
(p. 508H, K). Campanile (It. campana=bell). An
Brace. In framed structure, a subsi- Italian name for a bell-tower, generally
diary member placed near and across the detached from the main building (pp. 259p,
angle of two main members in order to 264B, F, 314, 325A, 628D, 611A, 615A).
stiffen them, as in carpentry roofs (p. 486J). Canephore (Gk., _basket-carriers).
Brace-moulding. See bracket-mould- Sculptured female figures bearing baskets
ing. on their heads (p. 157D).
racket A projecting member to sup- Canopy. A covering over a niche or a
port a weight, generally formed with scrolls tomb (pp. 415C, 472G, K, L, 517D, E, F, Ny
or volutes; when carrying the upper 581A, 631B, C, G, 650B).
members of a cornice, brackets are generally Capital (Lat. caput=head). The
termed Modillions or Consoles (see also crowning feature of a columnor pilaster (pp.
Ancones) (pp. I9IB, C, 700J, 749B, 750G, 55> 127, 138, 162, 191, 195, 503, 504, 972).
753Cs 97ID; E). Caryatids. Sculptured female figures
Bracket Moulding (also called ‘bracc’ used as columns or supports (pp. 135A,
or ‘double ogee’). A late Gothic moulding 136, 157).
consisting of two ogee mouldings with con- Casement. A wide hollow used in late
vex faces adjoining, resembling a printer’s Gothic (pp. 498P, 507W, xX), so called as it
‘brace’ or bracket (p. 507V). encased bunches of foliage.
1260 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS

Casement window. A window of Chatri (Hindi, chatta=umbrella). An

which the opening lights are hinged at the umbrella-shaped cupola (p. 1243A, B).
side and open in the manner of a door (pp. Chevet (Fr. chef=head). A term ap-
484G, L, 969H). plied to a circular or polygonal apse when
Casino. A summer- or garden-house surrounded by an ambulatory, off which
of ornamental character (pp. 715B, 970E). are chapels (pp. 424D, 544G, 560B, 561).
Castellation. Fortifying a house and Chevron (Fr., rafter). A zigzag mould-
providing it with battlements. ing used in Norman architecture, and so
Caulicoli (Lat. caulis=a stalk). The called from a pair of rafters, which give
eight stalks supporting the volutes in the this form (pp. 499A; 508C).
Corinthian capital (pp. 138, 162A, I9I, Choir (see Chancel).
246D). Ciborium (see Baldachino).
Cavetto (It., from Lat. cavus =hollow). Cimborio. The Spanish term for a
A simple concave moulding (p. 164D). lantern or raised structure above a roof
Cella (Lat.). The chief apartment of a through which light is admitted into the
temple, where the image of a god stood. interior (pp. 637B, 641D, 650D, F).
(pp. 189, 190G, 192). Cinquefoil (Fr. cinque feuilles =five
Cenotaph (Gk., an empty tomb). A leaves). In tracery an arrangement of
sepulchral monument to a person buried five foils or openings, terminating in cusps
elsewhere (pp. 220H, I032C). (see Cusp).
Chaines (Fr. chaine =a chain). Vertical Cladding. An outer veneer of various
strips of rusticated masonry rising between materials applied to a building facade
the horizontal string-mouldings and cornice (p. 1064).
of a building, and so dividing the facades Classic, Classical. The architecture
into bays or panels (p. 782B, 784B). Apopular originating in ancient Greece and Rome,
mode of wall-ornamentation in French the rules and forms of which were largely
seventeenth-century domestic architecture revived in the Renaissance in Europe and
(p. 769). elsewhere. Classicism, a classic idiom
Chamfer (Fr. chanfrein=channel). A or style.
diagonal cutting off of an arris formed by Claustra. A term which had some cur-
two surfaces meeting at an angle. Hollow rency in the late nineteenth and early
chamfer, the same but concave in form, twentieth century to describe panels,
like the cavetto. pierced with geometrical designs, as em-
Chancel (Lat. cancellus=a_ screen). ployed by the French architect, Auguste
The space for clergy and choir, separated Perret (1874-1954) in certain of his rein-—
by a screen from the body of the church forced-concrete buildings (pp. 10834, B,
(Pp. 424D, 431C, 491, 910D). I084B). {
Chantry (Fr. chanter, to sing). A Clear-story, clere-story, clearstory
small chapel, usually attached to a church, or clerestory (probably from Fr. clair=
endowed with lands or by other means, for light). An upper stage in a building with
the maintenance of priests to sing or say windows above adjacent roofs; especially
mass for the donor or such as he may applied to this feature in a church (pp. 4oB,
appoint (p. 472). F, 4IA, 122], 200, 207A, 369, 658, 663, 9IIF).
Chapels. Places for worship, in Clepsydra (Gk., a stealing away of
churches, in honour of particular saints. water). A water-clock or instrument for
Sometimes erected as separate buildings measuring time by the discharge of water
(pp. 424D, 426, 468, 469, 470, 471). through a small opening (p. I41F-H).
Chapter House (Lat. capitulum =coun- Cloisters (Lat. claustrum=a_ secluded
cil). The place of assembly for abbot, place). Covered passages round an open
prior and members of a monastery for space or garth, connecting the church to
the transaction of business, and often the chapter house, refectory, and other
reached from the cloisters, as at West- parts of the monastery. They were
minster (p. 424D). In England, it was generally, as at Westminster, south of
usually polygonal on plan, with a vault the nave and west of the transept, prob-
resting on a central pillar, e.g. Lincoln ably to secure sunlight and warmth
(pp. 396B, 410F), Wells (p. 412J), West- (pp. 424D, 425A, 560A, 679D).
minster (p. 422Cc). It was sometimes Coemeteria. Underground burial
oblong, as at Canterbury (p. 41 1B). places, in ancient Rome often taking the
 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS 1261

form of vaults each containing a number of Cortile. The Italian name for the
interments in funerary receptacles (p. 217). internal court, surrounded by an arcade,
Coffers. Sunk panels, caissons or in a palace or other edifice (pp. 680C, 6856,
lacunaria formed in ceilings, vaults, and 690C, D, 699B, D, 7338; F).
domes (pp. IIOB, I165P, I77J, I9IB, C, 196B, Cove, coving. A large hollow, forming
759S). part of an arch in section, joining the walls
Colonnade. A range of columns (pp. and ceilings of a room. Often decorated
I7I, I9OA, 721A, 1023C). with coffering or other enrichment (pp.
Column (Lat. columna=a post). A 936D, 9396; E (left)).
vertical support, generally consisting of Credence. A small table or shelf near
base, circular shaft, and spreading capital the altar, on which the elements were
(pp. 41A, 46B, 55, 76B, D, 160, 972). placed (p. 519K).
Compartment. A division or separate Crenellation (Old Fr. crenel, a notch).
part of a building or of an element of a An opening in the upper part of a parapet.
building (see Bays and Severy). Furnished with ‘crenelles’, or indentations
Composite. An Order employed by (pp. 454B, 484J). In Britain, a licence to
the Romans, with a capital composed of the crenellate was necessary before houses
upper part of the Ionic and the lower part could be fortified.
of the Corinthian (pp. 223G, 224G, 244, 972). Crepidoma. The steps forming the
Conoid. Having the form of a cone. base of a columned Greek temple (pp. 103A,
The term is usually applied to the lower IIOA, II6A, II8B, 135A, 136).
part of a Mediaeval vault where the ribs con- Cresting (Old Fr. creste=crest or
verge against the outer wall and form an summit). A light repeated ornament,
approximation of an inverted half-cone or incised or perforated, carried along the top
half pyramid (p. 399D, E, F, H). of a wall or roof (pp. 74E, 5IIJ; K, 1248N).
Console (see Bracket). Crocket (Fr. croc=a hook). In Gothic
Coping. The capping or covering to a architecture a projecting block or spur of
wall (pp. 388A, 940A). stone carved with foliage to decorate the
Corbel (Fr. corbel=a raven, hence a raking lines formed by angles of spires and
beak-like projection). A block of stone, canopies (pp. 492, 498F, 5IIE, N-T, 512F, H,
often elaborately carved or moulded, pro- 566], 630C, H).
jecting from a wall, supporting the beams Cross. The symbol of Christianity,
of a roof, floor, vault, or other feature generally placed on the summit of a gable
(pp. 211A, 231A, 260K, M, 330D, 5I2N-Q). and in other prominent positions. It is
Corbel Table. A plain piece of pro- often contained in a circle, and in the
jecting wall supported by a range of corbels fourteenth and fifteenth centuries is richly
and forming a parapet, generally crowned floriated and of complicated forms (pp.
by a coping (pp. 332H, 350C, G, 5IIA, B, C). 252B, 260B, E, 267, 287, 294, 359, 396D,
Corinthian. The third Order of Greek 512, 516C, L, 572, 663B, 722).
architecture (pp. 137, 138, I60E, F, 972E). Crossing. Area at the intersection of
Cornice (Fr. corniche). In Classic or nave, chancel and transepts (pp. 395A,
Renaissance architecture, the crowning or 431C, 560).
upper portion of the entablature, also Crown-post. A post standing upright
used as the term for any crowning projec- on the tie-beam of a timber roof and by
tion (pp. IIOA, 160, I9I, 246B, 681A). means of struts or braces giving support to
Coro (Sp.). Choir. In Spain the choir a central collar-purlin and adjacent rafters
usually occupied two or more bays of the (p. 446E) but not reaching the apex of a roof,
nave, the Capilla Mayor (comprising as in the case of a king-post (q.v.).
sanctuary, high altar and presbytery) Crucks. Pairs of timbers, arched to-
filling the east end (pp. 637D, 649B, D). gether and based near the ground, erected
Rejas (q.v.) often served as dividing screens. to form principals for the support of the
Corona. The square projection in the roof and walls of timber-framed small
upper part of a cornice, having a deep houses (p. 467B): in use in the western half
vertical face, generally plain, and with its of England until the sixteenth century or
soffit or under surface recessed so as to later.
form a ‘drip’, which prevents water from Crypt (Gk. kryptos=hidden). A space
running down the building (pp. 165A, N, entirely or partly under a building; in
191, 97IE). churches generally beneath the chancel
 1262 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS

and used for burial in early times (pp. squares, repeated continuously over the
260A, 322A, 426F, 722A, 9IIF). wall surface, as in the spandrels of the
Crypto-porticus (Lat. concealed or en- nave arcades in Westminster Abbey
closed portico). A passage way wholly or (pp. 422B, 51 IB, 566H).
mainly below ground (pp. 48B, 51B, 1023B). Diastyle. A term used when the space
Cunei (Lat. cuneus =wedge). The between two columns is three diameters
wedge-shaped sections into which seats are (p. 113A).
divided by radiating passages in ancient Diazoma. A horizontal passage divid-
theatres (p:.145). ing upper and lower levels of seats in an
Cupola (Lat. cupa=cup). A spherical ancient theatre or amphitheatre (p. 145).
roof, placed like an inverted cup over a Die. The part of a podium or pedestal
circular, square, or multangular apartment between its cap-mould and base (pp.
(pp. I195H, 196A, 460A, 679, 700, 704, 720, 189,224). (See Dado).
739, 743B, G, 800E, 927, 959A, B). (See Dipteral (Gk. dipteros =double-winged).
Dome). A temple having a double range of columns
Curtain. In modern architecture, a on each of its sides (p. I09H, N).
glazed wood or metal frame suspended on Distyle-in-antis. A portico with two
the face of a building in lieu of a solid, columns between antae (p. 109A).
load-bearing wall (pp. 1051B, II17). Dodecastyle. A portico of twelve
Curtain wall. In mediaeval architec- columns (rare).
ture, the wall surrounding a courtyard: Dog-tooth. An ornament resembling a
usually interrupted by towers at intervals row of teeth specially occurring in Early
(pp. 436A, B, 439A, 441C). English buildings (p. 508L, M).
Cusp (Lat. cuspis =a point). The point Dome (It. duomo=a cathedral, from
formed by the intersection of the foils in Lat. domus=a house). The custom in
Gothic tracery (pp. 499, 515F; G, M, 1256). Italy was to erect cupolas over churches,
Cyma (Lat. cyma=wave or billow). A and the word ‘dome’ has passed in English
moulding with an outline of two contrary and French from the building to this form
curves—either the cyma recta or cyma of roof (see Cupola).
reversa (pp. 164G, H, 165Q). Donjon. See Keep.
Cymatium. The crowning member of Doric. The simplest Order of Greek
a cornice generally in the form of a cyma, architecture (pp. 108, I10, 113, 116).
so called from its contour resembling that Dormer. A window in a sloping roof,
of a wave (p. 144B). usually that of a sleeping-apartment, hence
the name (pp. 760, 763B, 767, 771B, H,
Dado. The portion of a pedestal be- 772E; 783C; 784B, 788B, C, 803H).
tween its base and cornice (p. 976E). A Dosseret. A deep block sometimes
term also applied to the lower portions of placed above a Byzantine capital (pp. 252B,
walls when decorated separately (p. 904c). 267E, 285D, 300B-E) in order to support
Dais. A raised platform at the end of the wide voussoirs of the arch above.
a Medizval hall, where the master dined Sometimes held to be a survival of the
apart from his retainers. The term is piece of entablature similarly placed in
now applied to any raised portion of an Roman architecture (pp. 177], L, 2006, F).
apartment (p. 449C). Dripstone. In Gothic architecture, the
Decastyle. A portico of ten columns projecting moulding over the heads of
(p. ION). doorways, windows, and archways to throw
Decorated. The second of the three off rain; also known as ‘hood-moulding’ or,
divisions of English architecture, which when rectangular, a ‘label’ (pp. 4956, J, L,
was prevalent during the fourteenth 498).
century (p. 393). Dromos. A long, uncovered narrow
Demi-columns. Columns semi-sunk passage leading to an underground tholos
into a wall. or chamber tomb (p. 100B, C).
Dentils (Lat. dentes=teeth). Tooth- Drum. The upright part below a dome
like blocks in Ionic and Corinthian cornices or cupola, in which windows might be
(pp. 127E, F, I60D, 164J, I65N,P, I91C,246B). placed to light the central area of a building
Diaper. A term probably derived from (p. 658c).
tapestry hangings of Ypres, and applied to
any small pattern, such as lozenges or Early English, The first of the three
 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS 1263

divisions of English Gothic architecture, to an apse or niche in a church (pp. 190c,

prevalent during the thirteenth century 193D, F, I99B, 203B, 207D, 281G).
(p. 390). Extrados (Lat. extra =without +dor-
Eaves. The lower part of a roof sum =back). The outer curve of an arch.
projecting beyond the face of the wall
(PP. 332H; 435A; C, 456B, 464A, B, F, 552A). Facade. The face or elevation of a
‘ Echinus (Gk. — echinos=sea-urchin). building (pp. 122B, 232A, 403, 690A).
The term applied to the convex or project- Faience. Glazed earthenware, often
ing moulding, resembling the shell of a ornamented, used for pottery or for
sea-urchin, which supports the abacus of building. Originally made at Faenza in
the Greek Doric capital; sometimes Italy from about 1300 (pp. 676A, D, 1223,
painted with the egg and dart ornament 1226).
(pp. IIOA, II13). Fan Vault. A system of vaulting
Elizabethan. A term applied to English peculiar to the Perpendicular period, in
Early Renaissance architecture of the which all ribs have the same curve, and
period 1558-1603 (p. 868). resemble the framework of a fan (pp. 398,
Embrasure. An opening in a parapet 399H, 4266, E).
between two merlons; (pp. 442A, C, 450G, Fascia (Lat. facies=face). A vertical
454B, 484]), the inward splaying of a door or face of little projection, usually found in
window (p. 4466, K). the architrave of the entablature of an
Encaustic. The art of mural painting Order. The architrave of the Ionic and
in any way in which heat is used to fix the Corinthian Orders is divided into two or
colours (p. 179). Encaustic tiles; orna- more such bands (pp. 157J, I60D-F, I9IC).
mental tiles of different clays, producing Also, a board or plate covering the end of
colour patterns after burning. Used in the roof rafters.
Middle Ages and revived in the nineteenth Feretory (Lat. ferre=to carry). A
century. shrine for relics designed to be carried in
English Bond. Brickwork arranged in processions (p. 581D).
alternate courses of stretchers and Fielded panels. Panels of which the
headers. surface projects in front of the enclosing
Enneastyle. A portico of nine columns frame.
(p. IOQK). Fillet. A small flat band between
Entablature. The upper part of an mouldings to separate them from each
Order of architecture, comprising archi- other; also the uppermost member of a
trave, frieze, and cornice, supported by a cornice (p. 164A).
colonnade (pp. 110, 144B, 160, 972). Finial (Lat. jfimis=end). The upper
Entasis (Gk., distension). A swelling or portion of a pinnacle, bench-end, or other
curving outwards along the outline of a architectural feature (pp. 450C, 46ID,
column shaft, designed to counteract the 5 12E-H, 556).
optical illusion which gives a shaft bounded Flamboyant (Fr. jflambeau =flame).
by straight lines the appearance of curving Tracery in which the bars of stonework
inwards (p. 95D). form long wavy divisions like flames
Entresol (see Mezzanine). (p. 563D).
Ephebeion (Ephebeum). An impor- Fléche (Fr., arrow). A term applied to
tant room connected with an ancient Greek a slender wooden spire rising from a roof
or Roman gymnasium, or with the gym- (p. 564C, H).
nasium element of a baths building (pp. Flemish Bond. Brickwork arranged in
203B, 207D, H). alternate headers and stretchers in the same
Epinaos (see Opisthodomos). course.
Eustyle. A term used when the space -Fluting. The vertical channelling on
between two columns is 2} diameters the shaft of a column (pp. 144B, I65F, J, K,
(p. II3A). M).
Exedra (Gk., out-door seat). In Greek eps Buttress (see Buttress).
buildings, a recess or alcove with raised Foil (Lat. folium=leaf). Each of the
seat where the disputations of the learned small arc openings in Gothic tracery
took place. The Romans applied the separated by cusps. Trefoil, quatrefoil,
term to any semicircular or rectangular cinquefoil, etc., signify the number of foils
recess with benches, and it is also applied (p. 1256).
1264 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS

Formeret. In a Medizval vault, the Late Renaissance architecture of the period

half-rib against the wall, known in England 1702-1830 (p. 868).
as the ‘wall rib’ (p. 373C). Glyph (Gk., a groove). A carved
Formwork. Temporary casing of vertical channel (see Triglyph).
woodwork, within which concrete is Glyptotheca (Gk. glypton =carving +
moulded. theke =repository). A building to con-
Forum. A Roman public open space, tain sculpture.
for social, civic or market purposes. There Gothic. The name generally given to
was at least one in every Roman town (pp. the pointed style of Medieval architecture
182, 185, I90C, 226). prevalent in Western Europe from the
Fresco (It. fresco=fresh). The term thirteenth to the fifteenth century (p. 367).
originally applied to painting on a wall Gothic Revival. A manifestation first
while the plaster is wet, but is often used evident in the late eighteenth century
for any wall painting not in oil colours. (p. 660), but belonging principally to the
Other processes are called ‘tempera’ or nineteenth. The countries most affected
‘encaustic’, etc. (pp. 179, 247). were England (pp. 875, 986), France and
Fret ~(Old Fr. frettes=grating). An Germany (p. 1063) and, less strongly, the
ornament in Classic or Renaissance U.S.A. (p. 1327).
architecture consisting of an assemblage Greek Revival. Like the GothicRevival
of straight lines intersecting at right (q.v.), this had its beginnings in the late
angles, and of various patterns (pp. 163F, eighteenth century (p. 660). In England it
745G). Sometimes referred to as the culminated in the eighteen-twenties and
Key Pattern. had concluded by 1840 (later in Scotland),
Frieze (It. jfregio=ornament). The while in France it similarly was at its most
middle division of the Classic entablature evident in the early nineteenth century
(pp. IIOA, I20N, 160, 163H, 351J, L) (see (p. 770). In Germany it endured to mid-
Zoophorus). nineteenth century) (p. 1062). Inthe U.S.A.
Frigidarium. An apartment in a it was the especial characteristic of the
Roman baths building, equipped with a architecture of the period 1815-60 (p. 1126).
large, cold bath (pp. 203, 204A, B, C, 207B, Groin. The curved arris formed by the
D) (see also Caldarium and Tepidarium). intersection of vaulting surfaces (pp. 177M,
207A, 370B; D, 373A; B, D, 399A).
Gable. The triangular portion of a Guilloche. A circular interlaced orna-
wall, between the enclosing lines of a ment like network, frequently used to
sloping roof. In Classic architecture it is ornament the ‘torus’ moulding (p. 1641).
called a pediment (pp. 387E, K, M, 403A, 450, Guttz (Lat. gutta=drop). Small cones
456B, 458). under the triglyphs and mutules of the
Galilee. A porch used as a chapel for Doric entablature (pp. IIOA, 120M).
penitents, etc., in some Medizval churches. Gymnasium (Gymnasion). In ancient
The origin of the term is conjectural. Greece, a place for physical exercises and
Some derive it from the Latin galeria, a training, including running, larger than the
long porticus or porch. Others suppose palaestra (q.v.).
that the verse in S. Mark xvi, 7, ‘He
goeth before you into Galilee: there shall Hagioscope (Gk. hagios =sacred +
ye see him,’ suggests a meeting-place, and skopein=to view). An oblique opening
hence the name. Examples at Ely (p. 410A), in a Medizval church wall to give a view
Lincoln (p. 410F), and Durham (p. 411). of the altar, and sometimes known as a
Gallery. A communicating passage or ‘squint’ (p. 491E).
wide corridor for pictures and statues Half-timber Building. A _ structure
(pp. 884A, 965F). An internal and external formed of timber posts, rails, and struts,
feature in Medieval buildings (p. 355A, C). and interspaces filled with brick or other
An upper storey for seats in a church material, and sometimes plastered (pp.
(pp. 264A, C, D, E, 281D, G, 282B, 918). 456B, 462C, 464, 478], K, 484, 485, 595A, C).
Gargoyle (Lat. gurges=whirlpool). A Hall church. Church in which nave
projecting water-spout grotesquely carved and aisles are of, or approximate to, equal
to throw off water from the roof (pp. 51IL, height (pp. 388B, 591C, 10838).
M, 566B). Hammer-beam Roof. A late Gothic
Georgian. A term applied to English form of roof without a direct tie, the finest
 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS 1265
example being in Westminster Hall (pp. Hypethral (Gk., under the sky). A
434, 435F; H, K, L, 500, G, H). building or temple without a roof or with
Hearth-money; Hearth-penny. A tax a central space open to the sky (pp. 38E, H,
on hearths existing in England from the 122E, F, K, I4 IN, I9QA).
Conquest, sanctioned by Parliament in Hypocaust (Lat. hypocaustum=a fire
1672/3 and abandoned 1689. chamber), A system of ducts by which heat
' Hecatompedon (Gk., a hundred-foot from the furnace was distributed through-
temple). The name given to the naos of the out the building (p. 203).
Parthenon, Athens (pp. 119, 122G), in- Hypogeum. In ancient times, all
herited from a former temple of 566 B.c. parts of a building undergound.
upon the site, of which the length was ex- Hypostyle (Gk. hypo=under + Lat.
actly 100 Doric feet (1 Doric foot =12-88 stylus =pillar). A pillared hall in which the
ins) and the width 50 Doric feet. The roof rests on columns. Applied to the
original Hecatompedon temple was demo- many-columned halls of Egyptian temples
lished in 490-488 B.c. to make way for the (pp. 38E, G, 40F, G, 41).
Older Parthenon, destroyed by the Persians Hypotrachelion (Gk., under the neck).
in 480 B.c. when only partly completed. The channels or grooves beneath the
Helix (Gk., a spiral or tendril). One of trachelion at the junction of capital and
the 16 spirals or small volutes (helices) shaft of a column (p. 113) (see Trachelion).
under the abacus of a Corinthian capital
(pp. 138, 162A, I9IC, D, 195B, I99E, 246D). Iconostas. A screen between nave
Helm. A bulbous termination to the and chancel of a Byzantine church (pp.
top of a tower. The type is found principally 286B, 300L).
in central and eastern Europe (pp. 8168, Imbrex. In classical architecture, a
819B, 822A, C). roofing cover tile over the joint between
Helm Roof. The type of roof in which flat or hollow tiles (p. 110H, 181H).
four faces rest diagonally between the Imbrication. An overlapping, as of
gables and converge at the top (pp. 355C, one row of scalloped roofing tiles breaking
362K, 387E). joint with the next, after the manner of the
Henostyle-in-antis. A portico with scales of a pine cone (pp. I4IA, 754K).
one column between antae. Impluvium. In Greek and Roman
Heptastyle. A temple having seven houses, a shallow tank under the Com-
columns on the front (p. 109G). pluvium, or opening in the roof of an
Hermes. A Greek deity. A bust atrium (p. 234B).
(Hermes, Herm or Term) on a square Impost (Lat. imponere=to lay upon).
pedestal instead of a human body, used in The member, usually formed of mould-
Classic times along highways and to mark ings, on which an arch rests (pp. 207A,
boundaries, and decoratively in Roman and 223, 224, 256A, 498).
Renaissance times (pp. 759K, 975F). Indent. A notch. Indented mould-
Heroum. In Greek architecture, a ing. A moulding cut in the form of zig-
small shrine or chapel dedicated to a semi- zag pointed notches (p. 504B—abacus of
deified person or to the memory of a mortal. left capital).
Hexastyle. A portico having a row of Intarsia. In furniture, a decorative
six columns (pp. I09J, 116A, 118, 377B). inlay of various materials in another,
Hieron (Gk., a holy place). The whole usually wood.
of the sacred enclosure surrounding a Intercolumniation. The space be-
temple, as at Epidauros (pp. 105B, I06B). tween the columns (pp. 113A, 970G).
Hippodrome. In ancient Greece, a Intrados (Lat. intra =within + dorsum
course for horse and chariot racing, the =back). The inner curve of an arch.
equivalent of the Roman circus (p. 216A, D). Ionic. The second Order of Greek
Hood Moulding (see Dripstone). architecture (pp. 125, 126, 127, 130, 132,
Hoop-tiePrinciple. Amethod developed 134, 160, 972).
in the Renaissance period, by whicha pieced
ring of timber, or a metal chain or hoop, Jacobean. A term applied to English
binds the lower part of a dome or cupola to Early Renaissance architecture of the
prevent splitting outwards or to minimise period 1603-25 (p. 868).
the burden on external buttresses having a Jambs (Fr. jambe=leg). The sides
similar purpose (pp. 616C, 722C, 912A). of doors and windows (pp. 159, 498). The
1266 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS

portion exposed outside the window-frame vertical frame, allowing ventilation without .
is the ‘reveal’. admitting rain. A roof ventilator embodying
Jubé (Fr.). The equivalent of the the principle. Sometimes applied to roof
English rood-screen between nave and ventilators in general (p. 449A).
chancel (p. 795A). Lozenge. Diamond-shape.
Lunette (Fr. /une=moon). A _ semi-
Keel Moulding. A moulding like the circular window or wall-panel let into the
keel of a ship formed of two ogee curves inner base of a concave vault or dome (p.
meeting in a sharp arris (p. 507J, K); 658F).
used rounded in form in the fifteenth Lych gate (see Lich gate).
century. The word ‘keel’ is also applied to
the ogee form of arch (p. 1256, Nos. 28, 29).
Keep. The inner Great Tower or Machicolation (Fr. mache=melted
Donjon of a castle (pp. 436D, E, 440A, B, matter + coulis =flowing). A projecting wall
442L, 445B, D, E; F). or parapet allowing floor openings, through
Keystone. The central stone of a which molten lead, pitch, stones, etc.,
semicircular arch, sometimes sculptured were dropped on an enemy below (pp.
(pp. 223A, B, C, F, M, 224, 970, 1256). 445C, H, 552B, C, 612H, 625A).
King-post. A vertical post extending Maeander. Running ornament in the
from the ridge to the centre of the tie-beam form of a fret or key pattern (p. 163F).
below (pp. 264A, 321B, 433, 435B; E). Mandorla (It., almond) (see Aureole).
Mannerism. Aterm of recent invention
Label (see Dripstone). coined to describe the characteristics of the
Laconicum. A dry sweating room ina output of Italian Renaissance architects of
Roman baths building. the period 1530-1600, who, after the long
Lacunaria (see Coffer). period occupied in imbibing Roman
Lancet Arch. A sharp pointed arch, classical rules chose to work in a relaxed
resembling a lancet, chiefly in use during nonconformist style (p. 671). Architecture of
the early English Period (pp. 3884, 415D, this character (pp. 682D, 686B, 706B, 709A,
424A, B, 499B, C, 1256). 716A, B, 724D), which in fact is common to
Lantern. A construction, such as a the European Renaissance as a whole, is for
tower, at the crossing of a church, rising that reason herein distinguished as ‘Proto-
above the neighbouring roofs and glazed Baroque’ (pp. 660, 671), the Baroque being
at the sides (pp. 375, 408A). the ultimate outcome (pp. 659-60, 671-2).
Lararium. A room or niche ina Roman Mansard Roof. A roof with steep
house, in which the effigies of the house- lower slope and flatter upper portion, named
hold gods (Lares) were placed (p. 232£). after Mansart (pp. 1032A, 1138c). Also
Later. A Roman unburnt brick. known as a ‘gambrel’ roof.
Lich Gate (A.-Sax. lic=body). A Marquise (Fr.). A projecting canopy
covered gateway to a churchyard, forming Over an entrance door, often of metal and
a resting-place for a coffin where portion of glass (p. IIOSC, E).
the burial service is often read. Masons’ Mitre. The treatment in
Lierne (Fr. lien=tie). A short inter- masonry and sometimes in joinery for
mediate rib in Gothic vaulting which does mouldings meeting at right angles, when
not rise from the impost and is not a ridge the diagonal mitre thus formed does not
rib (pp. 398, 399F; G). coincide with the joint, but is worked on
Linenfold. A type of relief ornament, the face of the one piece which is carried
imitating folded linen, carved on the face of straight through and simply butts on the
individual timber panels. Popular in the other (pp. 159D, E, 267R).
late 15th and the 16th century (p. 461). Mastaba. An ancient Egyptian, rectan-
Lintel. The horizontal timber or stone, gular, flat-topped, funerary mound, with
also known as the architrave, that spans battered (sloping) sides, covering a burial
an opening (pp. 46B, 48B, 54H, J, 116, 144B, chamber below ground (p. 24a-G). As royal
146A). tombs, mastabas preceded the great pyra-
Loggia. A gallery behind an open mids of the third to sixth dynasties.
arcade or colonnade (pp. 611, 703, 7IOF, Mediaeval. Atermtakento comprehend
744H, 892A, B). the Romanesque and Gothic periods of
Louvre. A series of inclined slats ina architectural development.
 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS 1267

Megaron. The principal room of an windows into different numbers of lights

Aegean house (p. 99C). (pp. 456B, 458B, 499).
Merlon. The upstanding part of an Mutules. Projecting inclined blocks in
embattled parapet, between two ‘crenelles’ the Doric cornices, derived from the ends
or embrasure openings (pp. 454B, 484]J). of wooden beams (pp. I10, III, I13, 120M,
Metope (Gk. meta =between + ope = 244).
an opening). The space between Doric
triglyphs, sometimes left-open in ancient Naos (Gk., dwelling). The principal
examples; afterwards applied to the carved chamber in a Greek temple, containing the
slab (pp. IIOA, II8B, I20A, C, M, I44B,. statue of the deity (pp. 107, 109, 117, 122).
163K, M). Narthex. A long arcaded porch form-
Mezzanine. An intermediate floor ing an entrance into a Christian basilican
formed within a lofty storey (Fr. entresol) church, originally appropriated to penitents
(p. 804K). (pp. 255K, 259C, E, 264], 278B, F, 281G).
Misericord (Lat. misericordia =pity). Naumachia (Gk., a battle of ships). A
A hinged seat, made to turn up to afford lake for the exhibition of sea fights, en-
support to a standing person, and with circled by seats for spectators; sometimes
underside frequently grotesquely carved refers to the spectacle itself.
(pp. 5I7H-K, 5964). Nave (Gk. naos=dwelling, or more
Mitre. The term applied, especially probably Lat. navis=ship). The ship was
in joinery, to the diagonal joint formed by the symbol of the Church, in which the
the meeting of two mouldings at right faithful are borne safely over the sea of
angles (pp. 5I9E, F, 971K). life to the haven of eternity. The term
Modillions (see Bracket). is applied to the western limb of a church,
Module (Lat. modulus=measure). A as opposed to the choir; also to the cen-
measure of proportion, by which the parts tral aisle of the basilican, Medieval, or
of a Classic Order or building are regulated, Renaissance church, as opposed to the side
being usually the semi-diameter of a aisles (pp. 255K, 259C, E, 369C, 424D, 560A,
column immediately above its base, which B, 9IOD).
is divided into thirty parts or minutes Necking. The space between the as-
(pp. 113, 160, 970, 972). tragal of the shaft and the commencement
Monopteral. A temple, usually cir- of the capital proper in the Roman Doric
cular, consisting of columns only. (pp. 699C, 972).
Mosaic. Decorative surfaces formed by Necropolis. A town of the dead: a
small cubes of stone, glass, and marble; burial ground (p. 183).
much used in Hellenistic, Roman and later Newel. (1) The central shaft, round
times for floors and wall decoration (pp. which wind the steps of a circular stair-
179, 249, 252, 256, 266, 267, 269, 291B, case; (2) also applied to the post into
292, 332K). which the handrail is framed (pp. 7714;
Motte. The earthen conical mound of 838H, 903D, 904A, 971J; L, 975C; E).
a castle; usually has a related Bailey, this a Niche (It. micchio=shell). A recess ina
courtyard or ward (p. 441A). wall hollowed like a shell for the reception
Mouldings (Lat. modulari=to be mea- of a statue or ornament (pp. 192J, L, 193B,
sured). The contours given to project- D, 195H, J; 403; 757F)-
ing members (pp. 155, 164, 165, 507; Nimbus (Lat., bright cloud). A circu-
508). lar halo (see Aureole).
Mudéjar. A Spanish Muslim under Norman. The style, also termed Eng-
Christian rule. A vernacular style of Span- lish Romanesque, of the 11th and 12th cen-
ish architecture, particularly of Aragon and turies (pp. 390, 391A, 392B, 494A-D).
Castile, of the twelfth to the sixteenth cen- Nymphzum (literally a sanctuary of
tury, blending Muslim and Christian the nymphs). A building in Classic archi-
characteristics: its influence survived into tecture for plants, flowers, and running
the seventeenth century (p. 1233). Neo- water, ornamented with statues (pp. 206,
Mudéjar. A perpetuation or revival of 285A, B).
features of the style in the Colonial phase
(sixteenth—nineteenth century) in Latin Obelisk. A tall pillar of square section
America (pp. 1139, 1166). tapering upwards and ending in a pyramid
Mullions. Vertical members dividing (pp. 49, 664).
 1268 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS
Octastyle. A portico with a range of high, in balconies, platforms, and bridges
eight columns (pp. 103, 109H, M, 377C). (PP. 245, 334, 449A, SIIA-F, 552B, C, 663;
Odeion (Gk., music-room). A _ build- 690, 1023C).
ing, resembling a Greek theatre, designed Parclose Screen (Old Fr. parclose =an
for musical contests (pp. 103B, I04C). enclosure). A screen enclosing a chapel,
Oecus. The main room of a Greek as a shelter from draughts, or to prevent
house, the successor of the Aegean distraction to worshippers; also applied
megaron (p. 238A). ; to the screen around a tomb or shrine
Ogee. A moulding made up of a convex (p. 516A).
and concave curve. Also applied to an Pargetting (pargeting, parging). Ex-
arch of similar shape (pp. 164H, 1256). ternal ornamental plasterwork having
Ogivale (Fr., pointed). The term given raised, indented or tooled patterns; used
to Gothic architecture in France (p. 534). from Tudor times onward chiefly in East
Opaion. A Greek term for a clear- Anglia and the south-east.
story or top light. Pastas or Prostas. A vestibule in front
Opisthodomos (Gr., a back room). of a Greek house, with a part of one side
The rear porch of a temple. (pp. 117H, open to a forecourt (p. 153B).
122G). Pater. Flat circular ornaments which
Opus (pl. Opera). A work. resemble the Classical saucers used for
Opus Alexandrinum (Lat., Alexan- wine in sacrificial libations (pp. I59D, E,
drian work). Mosaics inlaid in a stone 163D, G, J).
or marble paving (p. 267Q). Patio. A Spanish arcaded or colon-
Opus incertum, — quadratum, — reti- naded courtyard, similar to an Italian
culatum, — testaceum, etc. (see p. 175). cortile (pp. 646A, B, 847B, C, 848A, 849B,
Order. An Order in architecture signi- 850A, 853B).
fies a column, with base (usually), shaft, Pavimentum (Lat. pavire=to ram
and capital, together with the entablature down). A pavement formed by pieces of
which it supports (pp. 160, 972). Also tile, marble, stone, flints, or other material
applied to each ring of voussoirs in a set in cement and consolidated by beating
Medieval arch (p. 507). down with a rammer (p. 249H, K, L, M).
Ordonnance (Fr.). The disposition of Pedestal. A support for a column,
the parts of a building. statue or vase. It usually consists of a base,
Oriel. A window corbelled out from die and cornice or cap-mould (pp. 224A, B,
the face of a wall by means of projecting C, F,H,J, 970C; F,J,K).
stones (pp. 450D, 460F, 485D). Pediment. In Classic architecture, a
Orthostates. In Greek architecture, a triangular piece of wall above the entabla-
course of large squared stones at the base of ture, enclosed by raking cornices (pp. IIOA,
a wall (pp. 120G, J, 132C, E, F). II6A, 130A). In Renaissance architecture
Ovolo. A convex moulding much used used for any roof end, whether triangular,
in Classic and Renaissance architecture, broken or semicircular (pp. Frontis., 903E,
often carved with the egg and dart or egg I023A, B, C). In Gothic, such features are
and tongue (pp. 164F, I65L, Q, 750G). known as gables.
Pendentive. The term applied to the
Palestra (Gk. palaistra=wrestling triangular curved overhanging surface by
school). A public building for the training ~ means of which a circular dome is sup-
of athletes (pp. 105B, 148). ported over a square or polygonal com-
Palladian motif. An arched opening partment (pp. 80H, 177N, 277, 281C, 285,
flanked by two smaller, square-headed 291B, 658, 909B, 917).
openings (p. 741). Pentastyle. A temple front of five
Palmette (see Anthemion). columns.
Panel. A compartment, sunk or raised, Peribolus (Gk. peribole =an enclosing).
in walls, ceilings, doors, wainscoting, etc. The enclosing wall or colonnade sur-
(pp. 159A, 246F, 461J, 519, 904, 97IK, rounding a temenos or sacred enclosure,
977D) (see also Coffer). and hence sometimes applied to the
Parapet (Lat. parare=to guard +pectus enclosure itself (pp. 130A, I90A, C, I92B).
=breast). The portion of wall above the Peripteral. A term applied to an edifice
roof-gutter, sometimes battlemented; also surrounded by a single range of columns
applied to the same feature, rising breast- (p. IO9E, F, H, K, M, N).
 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS 1269

Peristyle. A range of columns sur- Piscina (Lat., a reservoir of water). A

rounding a court or temple (pp. 116, 118B, stone basin in a niche near the altar, to
130, 190, 195, 663B, 70OB, 721A). receive the water in which the priest
Perpendicular. A phase of English rinses the chalice (p. 515E-H). A term also
Gothic evolved from the Decorated style, applied to the tank or fountain in Roman
and prevalent during the fifteenth and six- baths (pp. 203A, 207B).
teenth centuries (pp. 391B, 393, 495L; M). Pitch of Roof. The inclination or angle
Perron (Fr.). A landing or platform of its surface to the horizon.
outside the portal of a domestic or public Plan. The representation of the shape
building, approached in a dignified way by of a building showing the general distribu-
a single or double flight of steps (p. 833D). tion of its parts on the ground (pp. 40G,
Piano nobile (It., noble floor). The 74H, 109, 203B, 23IB, 259C, 281G, 560,
principal floor of an Italian palace, raised 723G, 775E; 899B).
one floor above ground level and con- Plateresque (Sp., plateria =silverwork).
taining the principal social apartments A phase of the Early Period of Spanish
(pp. 703E,
711B, D). Architecture of the later fifteenth and early
Piazza (It.). A public open place, sixteenth century, an intricate style named
square or market place, surrounded by after its likeness to silverwork (p. 845).
buildings: may vary in shape and in civic Plinth. The lowest square member of
purpose (pp. 61ID, 718, 721). the base of a column; also applied to the
Picturesque. The term is used in a projecting stepped or moulded base of any
specialized sense to describe one of the building (pp. 127E, F, 199E, 377D; 388A).
attitudes of taste towards architecture and Plough-share Twist. The irregular or
landscape gardening in the late eighteenth winding surface in a vault, resembling a
and early nineteenth century (c. 1785- plough-share, where the wall ribs, owing
1835): buildings and landscape were to to the position of the clear-story windows,
have the controlled informality of a picture. start at a higher level than the other ribs
Influential publications of the period were (p. 3730).
An Essay on the Picturesque (1794) by Sir Podium. A continuous pedestal; also
Uvedale Price and An Enquiry into the the enclosing platform of the arena of an
Changes of Taste in Landscape Gardening by amphitheatre (pp. I7IA, 189, 190, 2IIB,
Humphrey Repton (p. 876). 798B, 1023C).
Pier (Lat. petra=rock). A mass of Poppy-head (Lat. puppis=poop or
masonry, as distinct from a column, from raised stern of a ship). The ornamental
which an arch springs, in an arcade or termination to a bench-end, frequently
bridge; also applied to the wall between carved with fleur-de-lis, animals, or figures
doors and windows (pp. 166, 214A, 238, (p. 517B; C, G).
245, 351K, 909B, 960A). The term is Portcullis (Fr. porte =a gate; coulisse=
sometimes given to a pillar in Gothic a groove). A heavy lattice grating of
architecture (pp. 422B, 503). timber or iron, sliding in vertical grooves in
Pilaster. A rectangular feature in the the jambs of a portal of a defended
shape of a pillar, but projecting only about building.
one-sixth of its breadth from a wall, and Portico. A colonnaded space forming
the same design as the Order with which an entrance or vestibule, with a roof
it is used (see Anta) (pp. I60F, 196B, 690, supported on at least one side by columns
776; 960, 1023C). (pp. Frontis., 103, I90F, 798B, 813E, 902G,
Pilotis (Fr., stilts). Posts on an unen- 1023C).
closed ground floor carrying a raised Posticum. The Latin term for the rear
building (pp. 1008, 1074B, I077A, 1078). porch of a temple (see Opisthodomus)
Pinacotheca (Gk., picture gallery). A (p. II7H).
building to contain painted pictures (p. Presbytery (Lat. presbyter =elder).
I42H). The space at the eastern end of a church
Pinnacle. In Gothic architecture, a for the clergy, but often applied to the
small turret-like termination on the top whole sanctuary (pp. 410-13, 424D, 560).
of buttresses, parapets, or elsewhere, often Priory. A monastic establishment
ornamented with bunches of foliage called presided over by a prior, who was often
crockets (pp. 369, 403, 418A, 426A, 5IIE, subordinate to an abbot (p. 402).
686A, 739C, 819A, 1022D). Pronaos. The part of a temple in front
1270 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS

of the naos, often synonymous with Quatrefoil (Fr. quatre feuilles =four
portico (pp. 109, I22G). leaves). In tracery, a panel divided by
Propyleum (pl. Propylea) (Gk., a cusps into four leaf-shaped openings (pp.
front portal). An important entrance gate- 499D, 5IID; F).
way or vestibule, in front of a sacred en- Quirk. A sharp V-shaped incision in a
closure, as at Athens, Priene, Sunium, and moulding, such as that flanking the Nor-
Eleusis (pp. 103C, 104, 142). man bowtell (pp. 498B, 507B, E).
Proscenium (Gk., proskenion). In an- Quoin (Fr. com=angle). A term
cient Greek theatres, a colonnade standing generally applied to the corner-stones at
in front of the scene building (skene), the top the angles of buildings and hence to the
of which eventually became the stage angle itself (pp. 756, 940A).
(logeion =a speaking place): thus all of the
stage works in front of the ornamental Rampart. Defensive earthen bank sur-
back-stage. Nowadays, the term means rounding a castle, fortress or fortified city
only the frontispiece of the stage. (p. 441A). May have a stone parapet.
Prostyle (Gk., a column in front). An Rebate. A rectangular sinking, channel
open portico of columns standing in front or groove cut longitudinally in a piece of
of a building (pp. 109C, D, 134B). timber in order to receive the edge of
Prytaneion (Prytaneum). The public another, or a recess in the jambs of an
hall and state dining room of a Greek city opening to receive a door or window (pp.
(p. IO5B). 942C, 944D).
Pseudo-dipteral (Gk., false double- Reeding. A series of convex mouldings
winged). A temple which is planned as of equal width, side by side: the inverse of
a dipteral building, i.e. two columns in fluting (pp. 55], 74F). The fluting of the
depth around the naos, but from which the lower third of column shafts was sometimes
inner range is omitted (p. IO9L). infilled with reeds to strengthen them
Pseudo-peripteral (Gk., falsely perip- against damage (p. 196B).
teral). A temple lacking a pteroma and Refectory. The dining-hall in a
having the flank columns attached to the monastery, convent, or college (pp. 308,
temple walls (pp. 109G, 189A-C). 402, 424D, 432C, 476).
Pteroma (Gk., a wing). The space Regula (Lat., a rule). The short band,
between the lateral walls of the naos of a under the triglyphs, beneath the tenia of
temple and the peristyle columns (p. 109). the Doric entablature, and to which the
Pulpitum (Lat.). A stone gallery or gutte are attached (pp. IIOA, I13, I20M,
rood-loft (q.v.) over the entrance to the 144B).
choir of a cathedral or church (Fr. Jubé, Reja (Sp.). An ornate iron grille or
P- 795A). screen, a characteristic feature of Spanish
Pulvinated (Lat., a cushion). A term church interiors (pp. 637B, 860B, C).
applied to a frieze whose face is convex Reliquary. A light portable receptacle
in profile (pp. 159C, 195H; J, 745A; B). for sacred relics (pp. 630B, 750H).
Purlin. A horizontal beam in a roof, Renaissance (Fr., a new birth). The
resting on the principal rafters and term applied to the reintroduction of
supporting the common rafters and roof Classic architecture all over Europe, in the
covering (p. 500D-F). fifteenth and sixteenth centuries (p. 654).
Pycnostyle (Gk., close columned). A Rendering. Plaster or stucco applied to
term given when the space between two an external wall; a first coat of plaster
columns is 14 diameters (p. 113A). internally.
Pylon (Gk., a gateway). A term applied Reredos. The screen, or ornamental
to the mass of masonry with central work, rising behind the altar. The rere-
opening, forming a monumental entrance doses in Manchester, S. Albans, and
to Egyptian temples (pp. 47, 5IA). Durham Cathedrals are carved structures
reaching nearly to the roof (pp. 420G,
Quadrangle. A broad enclosure or 425D, 581C, 631H, K, 638A, 641D, 750E,
court, defined by buildings (pp. 478A, c, QO9B).
480A, B, D, F). Respond. A half-pillar at end of an
Quadriga. A four-horsed chariot, in arcade.
sculptured form, often surmounting amonu- Retable. A ledge or shelf behind an
ment (pp. 149, 223F, 224F, I1092A). altar for holding vases or candles, The
 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS 1271
Spanish retablo (p. 638A) is a sumptuously Rubble. Stone walling of rough, un-
ornate form of reredos (above). dressed stones.
Retro-choir. The parts of a large Rustication. A method of forming
church behind the high altar (pp. 41op, stonework with roughened surfaces and
412G, J). recessed joints, principally employed in
Reveal. The surface at right angles to Renaissance buildings (pp. 681, 685, 9024,
the face of a wall, at the side of an opening 970A).
cut through it; known as a ‘splay’ when
cut diagonally. Especially applied to the Sanctuary. A holy or _ consecrated
part outside the window-frame (pp. 942c, place. The most sacred part of a church or
944D). temple (pp. 410D, 41IF, 424D).
Rib. A projecting band on a ceiling, Sarcophagus. Richly carved coffin
vault, or elsewhere (pp. 370, 373, 399; (pp. 150G, H, I181C, 267H, 300]).
461C, 507E, L, U, Y, 884, 887, 959A, 977A; B). Scena (Gr. skene). The back scene of an
Ridge. The apex of a sloping roof, ancient theatre (p. 145D, F).
running from end to end (pp. 117A, 132H, Scotia (Gk. skotia=darkness). The
259A, 388A, 418A, 432A, 532C, 539A). concave moulding between the two torus
Ringhiera. A balcony on the main mouldings in the base of a column, throw-
front of an Italian Medieval town-hall ing a deep shadow (pp. 164E, 165H, T).
from which governmental decrees might be Screen. A partition or enclosure of
proclaimed or public addresses delivered iron, stone, or wood, often carved; when
by the magistrates (p. 330D). separating choir from nave, it is termed
Rococo (Fr. rocaille =rock-work). A the choir screen. The Latin cancellus
term applied to a type of Renaissance (screen), corrupted to ‘chancel’, primarily
ornament in which rock-like forms, fan- used for the enclosing object, was after-
tastic scrolls, and crimped shells are wards applied to the space which it en-
worked up together in a profusion and closed (pp. 291B, 392B, 516B, 581E, 595B).
confusion of detail often without organic Scroll Moulding. A kind of moulding,
coherence, but presenting a lavish display so called from its resemblance to a scroll
of decoration (pp. 804, 825B). A later of paper, the end of which projects over the
development of the Baroque. other part (p. 507M).
Roll Moulding. A plain round mould- Section (Lat. sectus=cut). A term
ing (p. 55J). In Medizval architecture, used to express the representation of a
sometimes known as the Bowtell (p. 5078, building cut by a vertical plane, so as to
GD): show the construction. The term is also
Romanesque. The name given to the applied in the same way to any solid
style of architecture, founded on Roman (pp. 32, 38, II7E, F, I99A, 28ID, E, 416E,
architecture, and prevalent in Western 9I0C).
Europe from the ninth to the twelfth Sedilia (Lat., seat). .The seats for the
century (p. 303). priests, generally of masonry, formed in
Rood Loft (A.-Sax., rod, hence cross or the wall on the south side of the chancel
crucifix). A raised gallery over the rood (p. 515K, M,N, P).
screen (p. 516C, D), a name given to the Severy. A compartment or bay of a
chancel screen when it supports the ‘rood vault (pp. 369C, F, 370F, H).
or large cross erected in many churches in Sgraffito (It., scratched). A method of
Medizval times (p. 516L). It was reached decoration by which an upper coat of
by stairs in the chancel wall (p. 516F, G), and white stucco is partially cut away to expose
was also used as a gallery for minstrels and a dark undercoat and so form a design
singers on festival days. (pp. 680F, 684—Pal. Guadagni).
Rose Window (see Wheel Window). Shaft. The portion of a column be-
Rostrum (Lat., the prow of a ship). tween base and capital (p. 110A, 160, 972);
The plural ‘rostra’ denoted the raised also applied in Medizval architecture to a
tribune in the Forum Romanum, from small column, as in a clustered pier, sup-
which orators addressed the people, and porting a vaulting rib (pp. 3888, 503).
was so called because decorated with the Shrine. A sacred place or object, e.g.
prows of ships taken in war (p. I7I) as a receptacle for relics (p. 581D).
were rostral columns (p. 228). Soffit. The ceiling or underside of any
Rotonda. A round building. architectural member (pp. I20M, 1386,
1272 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS

I9OD, I9IB, C, 224A, E, 426C, D, 705A; 759B; tombstone or carrying an inscription (pp.
G, 977A; B). 157G, 163D).
Solar (Lat. solarium=a sunny place or Stilted Arch. An arch having its
balcony). A Medizval term for an upper springing line higher than the line of
chamber, usually the private room of the impost mouldings, to which it is con-
owner (pp. 442, 446, F). nected by vertical pieces of walling or
Span. The distance between the sup- stilts (pp. 391A, 424B, 1256).
ports of an arch, roof, or beam. Stoa. In Greek architecture, a portico
Spandrel. The triangular space en- or detached colonnade, corresponding
closed by the curve of an arch, a vertical with the Latin ‘porticus’ and the Italian
line from its springing, and a horizontal ‘portico’ (pp. I04C, 132K).
line through its apex (pp. 223B, D, E; F, Storey (pl. Storeys). The space be-
267E; 351M, 416D, 498M). tween two floors.
Specus. The duct or channel of a Strapwork. A type of relief ornament
Roman aqueduct, usually rectangular in or cresting resembling studded leather
section and lined with a waterproofing of straps, arranged in geometrical and some-
successive coatings of hydraulic cement. times interlaced patterns; much used in the
Ducts were covered by stone slabs or by Early Renaissance architecture of England
arched vaults and, where necessary, were and the Low countries (pp. 839G, 969A, J;
partially or wholly cut through rock 976B,
E, 977B; C; E).
(p. 2168). String Course. A moulding or pro-
Spina. The spine wall down the centre jecting course running horizontally along
of an ancient hippodrome or circus, the face of a building (pp. 196A, 387C, E,
around which the contestants turned L, M, P, 681A, 685B, 880A, C, 895A, 9I7C).
(p. 216A, D). Stuart. A term applied to English Late
Spire (A.-Sax. spir=a_ stalk). The Renaissance architecture of the period
tapering termination of a tower in Gothic 1625-1702 (p. 868).
or Renaissance architecture, which was the Stucco (It.). <A fine quality of plaster,
result of elongating an ordinary pyramidal much used in Roman and Renaissance
or conical roof (pp. 415B, 419B, 431, 492, architecture for ornamental modelled work
540A, 547A, 548D, 572D, 590B, 591A; C; in low relief (pp. 219B, C, 7I5B, C, 768A). In
637E, 919). England, it was extensively employed in the
Splay (short form of ‘display’, cf. late eighteenth and early nineteenth century
‘reveal’). The diagonal surface formed by as an economical medium for the modelling
the cutting away of a wall, as when an of external architectural features, in lieu of
opening is wider inside than out or con- stone (p. 947B).
versely. Stupa or Tope. A mound forming a
Springer. The lowest unit or voussoir Buddhist sacred monument (p. 1182a).
of an arch, occurring just above the spring- Stylobate. In Classic architecture, the
ing line. upper step forming a platform on which a
Squinch Arches. Arches placed dia- colonnade is placed (pp. IIOA, II6A, I18B).
gonally at the internal angles of towers to Collectively, the three steps of a Greek
bring them from the square to support the Doric temple constitute a crepidoma.
octagonal spire (pp. 322A, D, 43IE, 638A, Sudatorium. The sweating room in a
641D). Roman baths building (p. 203B).
Stalls. Divisions with fixed seats for Systyle. A term used when the space
the clergy and choir, often elaborately between two columns is two diameters
carved, with projecting elbows, ‘miseri- (p. I13A).
cords’, and overhanging canopies. The
bishop’s seat is called the ‘throne’ (pp. Tabernacle. A recess or receptacle—
417B, 418B, 517D, E, F, G, 596H, 651C, 977M). usually above an altar—to contain the
Starling. The pointed mass of masonry eucharistic Host (p. 581A), and is also
projecting from the pier of a bridge, for applied to a niche or arched canopy
breaking the force of the water, hence (p. 515], L). ‘Tabernacle work’ is the name
known also as a ‘cutwater’ (p. 487H-M). given to elaborately carved niche and
Steeple. The term applied to a tower canopy work (pp. 517D, E, F, 581).
crowned by a spire (pp. 431A, 917B, C, 919). Tegula. The Latin term for a large
Stele. An upright slab forming a Greek flat tile (pp. IIOE, H, 18TH).
 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS 1273
Telamones (see Atlantes). which the beam forms the constructive
Temenos. A sacred precinct in which feature (pp. 38, 40, 41A, 46B, 48B, 51B, II0,
stood a temple or other sanctuary (pp. 116, 118B, 130A, 135A, I144B).
48A, I103B, IO5B, 106). Tracery. The ornamental pattern-
Tempera (It.). In painting, the same work in stone, filling the upper part of a
as distemper. Gothic window; it may be either ‘plate’ or
Tempietto. A small temple. The term ‘bar’ tracery. ‘Plate’ tracery appears to
is usually reserved for Renaissance and later have been cut out of a plate of stone,
buildings of an ornamental character, com- with special reference to the shape of the
pact circular or temple-like structures lights, whereas ‘bar’ tracery was designed
erected in the parks and gardens of country principally for the pleasing forms produced
houses. The most famous instance, how- by combinations of geometrical figures. It
ever, is the small, colonnaded circular is also applied to work of the same character
chapel by Bramante in the cloisters of S. in wood panelling (pp. 499, 516, 519H, 563,
Pietro in Montorio, Rome, a prime ex- 598, 602B, 626C, 628A, B).
ample of the Italian High Renaissance (p. Trachelion. The neck of a Greek
7OOA-C). Doric column, between the annulets and
Tenia or Taenia. The band or fillet the grooves or hypotrachelion (p. 113).
forming the upper member of the Doric Transept. The part of a cruciform
architrave (pp. IIOA, 144B). church, projecting at right angles to the
Tepidarium. An apartment in a main building (pp. 410-13, 425B, 431C,
Roman baths building equipped with 560, 9IOD).
warm baths (pp. 203B, 204B) (see Caldarium Transoms. The horizontal divisions or
and Frigidarium). cross-bars of windows (pp. 499D, M, 803H,
Terra-cotta. Earth baked or burnt in 888).
moulds for use in building construction Trefoil (Fr. trois feuilles =three leaves).
and decoration, harder in quality than A term applied to this distribution in
brick. Gothic tracery (pp. 499D, E, H, 5I5F, G, L,
Tessera. A small cube of stone, glass, M, 1256).
or marble, used in making mosaics. Triclinium. A Roman dining room
Tetrastyle. A portico of four columns with couches on three sides (p. 234B).
(pp. I09C, D, 132A, C, D, 135B, 377D). Triforium (Lat. tres =three +fores =
Tholos. The dome (cupola) of a cizcu- openings). The space between the sloping
lar building, hence applied to the building roof over the aisle and the aisle vaulting.
itself (pp. IOOA, B, E, IOQE). The term was first applied to the Norman
Thrust. The force exerted by inclined arcades at Canterbury which had triple
rafters or beams against a wall, or obliquely openings towards the nave, and was
by the weight of an arch, vault or dome. afterwards used for any passages and
Tie-bar. A beam, bar or rod which ties galleries in this position. It occurs in
parts of a building together, and is sub- large churches only, and, from having no
jected to tensile strain. Sometimes of windows to the open air, is often called a
wood, but usually of metal. Tie-bars are ‘blind-storey’ (pp. 369C, F, 4I4E, 424B,
especially notable in Byzantine, Italian 494, 495).
Gothic and Renaissance architecture to Triglyphs (Gk., three channels).
stiffen arcades or to contain the outward Blocks with vertical channels which form a
thrust of vaults (pp. 268B, 277N, 282A, B, distinguishing feature in the frieze of the
60IB, 606C, 6I1IC, 615B, C, 622B, 628F, Doric entablature (pp. I10A, E, I20M, I60A,
735C). B, 972A, C).
Tierceron. An intermediate rib be- Tristyle-in-antis. A portico having
tween the main ribs of a Gothic vault three columns between antae.
(p. 399D,
E). Tudor. A term applied to English Late
Tope (see Stupa). Gothic architecture of the period 1485-
Torus (Lat., a swelling). A large con- 1558
(p. 389).
vex moulding, used principally in the Turrets. Small towers, often contain-
bases of columns (pp. I41M, I64L, 165H, ing stairs, and forming special features in
S) (see Astragal). Medieval buildings (pp. 436D, 445H, 460A,
Trabeated (Lat. trabs=a beam). A 461B, 470A).
style of architecture such as the Greek, in Tympanum. The triangular surface
1274 GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS

bounded by the sloping and horizontal Weathering. The slope given to off-
cornices of a pediment (pp. IIOA, I16A, sets to buttresses and the upper surface of
196A, 902G); also the space enclosed be- cornices and mouldings, to throw off rain
tween the lintel and the arch of a Medieval (pp. 199A, 388A, 497, 744C).
doorway (pp. 351B, 567D). Westblock. A multistorey gallery at
the west end of some German and Nether-
Undercroft. In Medizval architecture, landish churches, surmounted by towers or
vaulted chambers upon which the principal turrets.
rooms are sometimes raised (p. 442]J). Wheel Window. A circular window,
whose mullions converge like the spokes
Vault. An arched covering in stone or of a wheel (pp. 325A, 414A, C, 532A, 5435
brick over any building (pp. 74J, 80M, 177, 563E, H, 628A).
192G, 200F, 207A, H, 370, 373; 399). Window-tax. A tax levied in Britain
Velarium. A great awning drawn over from 1695-1851 upon all house windows
Roman theatres and amphitheatres to above six.
protect spectators against the sun
(p. 211B). Ziggurat or Ziqgarat. A high pyramidal
Vesica Piscis (Lat., bladder of a fish). staged tower, of which the angles were
A pointed oval form, so called from its orientated to the cardinal points, which
shape (p. 351B) (see Aureole). formed an important element in ancient
Vestibule. An ante-room to a larger Mesopotamian temple complexes. An espe-
apartment of a building (pp. 203B, 207F, cially sacred ceremony took place annually
690C, 703C, H). at the top of the ziggurat in an ‘upper
Volute (Lat. voluta=scroll). The scroll temple’ having the form of a shrine or
or spiral occurring in Ionic, Corinthian, bower. The number of stages rose from one
and Composite capitals (pp. 126, 127, 162A, to seven in the course of time, and in the
165D, I9ID, 223G, 224G, 246D). Assyrian version the stages were developed
Voussoirs. The truncated wedge- into a continuous inclined ramp, circulating
shaped blocks forming an arch (pp. 373A, the four sides in turn (pp. 68, 71A, 72A; 744A,
B, D, 1256). E, G, H).
Zoophorus. A frieze in which reliefs of
Wave Moulding. A typical moulding animals are introduced, as in the portico
of the Decorated period consisting of a of the Theseion and the Panathenaic
slight convexity flanked by hollows (p. frieze on the naos wall of the Parthenon
507P, R; S). (pp. I20N, 163H).
 Parliament Building, Ottawa, Ontario (1861-7). See p. 1151

INDEX

EXPLANATORY NOTE
Page numbers in bold type are main references.
Page numbers within square brackets [ ] refer to illustrations.
Bis, ter, or quater after a page number means that the subject is mentioned two, three
or four times on that page.
(i) or (ii) after a page number indicates the first or second column on that page.

Aachen, see Aix-la-Chapelle Abbey:

Aalst, Pieter Coecke van (writer), 831 Bath, 510; Bayham, 304; Bernay, 344;
Aalto, Alvar (archt.), 1068, 1094, 1127, Byland [507H]; Cluny, 304, 343, 3713
TI59 Dryburgh, 522; Dunfermline, 522;
Abacus, 57, 108, III, 128, 140, 244 (ii), 1255 Easby, 304; Fontevrault, 343, 347 [346a,
[160]; Byzantine, 279, 383, 298; English 350D]; Fonthill, 948 [9454]; Fountains,
Mediaeval, 505 bis, 565 (ii); French, 565 304, 308, 382, 429-30 [432]; Furness,
(i); Romanesque, 309, 310 304; Holyrood, 522; Kelso, 522; Kirk-
Abadie, Paul (archt.), 1080 stall, 304, 382, 429; Melrose, 522 [524¢];
Abbaye-aux-Dames (La Trinité), Caen, Mont S. Michel, 347; Rievaulx, 382,
307, 344 [338B, C, 350Q] 429; S. Albans, see S. Albans Cathedral ;
Abbaye-aux-Hommes (S. Etienne), Caen, S. Denis, near Paris, 340, 344, 534 [310A,
3073 344s 345> 347> 348, 397 [342] 341c]; Senanque, Arles, see S. Gilles;
Abbeville (France), S. Vulfran, 542 Sherborne, 394, 502 [497s]; Tewkesbury,
[546c] 390, 398, 473, 509; Waltham, 381, 390,
1276 INDEX

Abbey (cont.) Aemilia, Basilica, Rome, 202

496, 505, 506 [499A, 503E, 507D]; Waver- Aerschot (Belgium), church at, 582 [580G]
ley, 382; Westminster, see Westminster Aesculapius, see Asclepius
Abbey; Whitby [507L] ‘Agamemnon, Tomb of’, Mycenae, 101;
Abbey Church: see also Atreus, Treasury of
Abbiategrasso, 696; Braisne, 587; d’Agnolo, Baccio (archt.), 678
Bristol, see Bristol Cathedral; Cluny, Agora, Greek, 102, 147, 183, 1257 [105A]
343; Conradsburg [362A, B, D]; Gern- Agra (India):
rode, 358 [362H]; Laach, 358, 363 [361B, Diwan-i-Am, 1245 [1240B]; Diwan-i-
362M]; Ottobeuren, 818; Oxford, see Khass, 1245; Fort, 1245 [1240B]; Moti
Oxford Cathedral; S. Philibert, Tournus, Masjid, 1245; Nagina Masjid, 1245;
344; Villers, 574 Palace, 1245; Taj Mahal, 1242, 1245
Abbey Dore (Herefordshire), farm, 469 [1240D, 1244, 12474, B]
465A Agrigentum (Sicily): Temple of Concord at,
Abbiategrasso (Italy), Abbey-church, 696 112; Temple of Hera Lacinia at, 112;
Abbot’s Barn, Glastonbury, 483 [486D-F] Temple of Zeus Olympius, 107, 108, 115
Abbot’s Hospital, Guildford, 897 [109G, 114J-L]
Abbot’s House, Butcher’s Row, Shrews- Agrippa: Temple of, Rome, 197; Thermae
bury, 469 [464F] of, 206 [177H]
Abd ar-Rahman, 1233 Aha, Mastaba of, Sakkara, 25-6 [24]
Aberdeen: Cathedral, 522; King’s College, Ahmadabad (India): Jami Masjid, 1241;
421 Muhafiz Khan, 1241; Rani Sipari, 1241;
Abingdon (Berks.): Christ’s Hospital, 479; Sidi Sayyid, 1241; Tomb of Sayyid
Town Hall, 928 [927F] Mubarak, 1241
Abraham Ackerman House, Hackensack Aircraft hangars: France, 1066, 1104
(N.J.), 1132 [11064]; Italy, 1111 [1060]
Abramovitz, Max (archt.), 1163 bis Aisle roofs, 437 [4356; J]
Abu-Simbel (Egypt), rock temples at, 18, Aisled halls, 444
44 bis [37E, 45] ; Aisles, church, 257, 258, 261, 265 bis, 1257
Abusir (Egypt), Pyramids at, 17, 35 [24N] [255K; 259C, E, 264]] 7
Abutment, 178, 1255 Byzantine, 283, 293 [282A]; English
Abydos (Egypt), Temple of Seti I at, 18, Mediaeval, 405, 406, 559 (ii); English
43-4 [37B, 41B] Renaissance, 914 [915B]; French, 538,
Acanthus leaf, 1255: 559 (i); German, 587-8; Italian, 604,
Byzantine use of, 266, 301 [300D]; 624; Romanesque, 309, 323, 329
Early Christian use of, 266; Etruscan use Aix-la-Chapelle Cathedral (Germany), 280,
of, 183; Greek use of, 139, 140 bis, 156, 357 [285E-G]; capitals at, 348 [351K];
244 (i) [138B, c]; Norman use of, 506; cloisters in [351K]; tomb of Charle-
Roman use of, 197, 244 (ii), 247 (ii), 266 magne, 357, 587
[1646, H, 199D] Ajanta (India), rock-cut chaitya, 11755
Acoma (N. M.), San Estevan, 1136 [11374] 1180, 1196 bis [1181B]
Acropolis, 102, 1255: Athens, 7, 102, 133, Ajmer (India), Great Mosque, 1238
143 [I03B, 104, IO5A, 146A] Akbar, 1242; Mausoleum of, 1242; Palace
Acroterion, 119 bis, 140, 156, 1255 [I17A, of, 1242
B, 157B] Akhnaten palace of, Tell el-Amarna,
Adam, James (archt.), 875, 876, 932; 938 50
Adam, Robert (archt.), 874, 875-6, 932 bis, Al Aqsa, Mosque of, Jerusalem, 1229
9373938,948,949,950, 956 quater,963,964 Al-Azhar, Mosque of, Cairo, 1230
Adam brothers, 968, 1168 Al-Hakim, Mosque of, Cairo, 1230
‘Adam’ manner, the, 928, 950 Al Malika Safiyya, Mosque of, Cairo, 1238
Adams, Holden and Pearson (archts.), 1048 Ala ad-Din, Mosque of, Konia, 1237
Adcote (Shropshire), 999 [994F] Alabaster, 61, 66, 168, 1011; Byzantine,
Adelaide (Australia), Cathedral, 1059 289, 298
Adelphi, London, 949 Alae (recesses), 233
Adina Mosque, Gaur, 1238 Alai Derwaza, Delhi, 1238
Adler, Dankmar (archt.), 1152, 1155 Alaja (Anatolia): Sphinx Gate at, 81;
Admiralty, Old, Whitehall, 956 temple at, 83
Adobe brick, 1125, 1136, 1164, 1166 Alatri (Italy), Etruscan Temple at, 180
Adrianople (Turkey), Selimiye, 1237 [181L]
Adyton (inner sanctuary), 123, 1255 Alban, S., his shrine, S. Albans, 473 [4726]
Aegean architecture, 82 [99, 100]; charac- Albaro (Italy), Villa Cambiaso [759G, K]
ter of, 92-3; examples of, 97-102 Albergati, Palazzo, Bologna, 702
Aegina (Greek island), Temple of Aphaia Albert Memorial, London, 1025, 1055
on, II2, 115 [I13D, 154B] [1024C]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1277

Albert Memorial, Manchester, 1025 [1028] Altis, the, Olympia [1058]

Alberti, Leon Battista (archt.), 9, 614, 683, Alton Estate, Wandsworth, 1008 [1006D]
684, 696, 731; 732, 831, 874 Alure (rampart walk), 438, 1257
Albi Cathedral (France), 534, 549, 562 (ii), Amadeo, Giovanni Antonio (archt.), 604,
643 bis [550C, D, 561F] 684—
Alcala de Henares (Spain): Archbishop’s Amaravati (India), stupa at, 1180
‘ Palace, 648, 846 [646G]; University, 846, Amber (India), Hindu temple, 1188[1186c]
[844c, 860D] Ambo (pulpit), 258, 1257 [255C; H, K]
Alcantara (Spain), Roman bridge at, 222, Amboise, Chateau d’ (France), 549 [553]
239 [23883] Ambulatory, 115, 143, 213 [37F, G, 120H;, J;
Alcazar: Segovia, 644; Seville, 1233; To- L, 560B]; Romanesque, 309
ledo, 846, 851, 855 [848A, 8544] Amel de Boulogne, Jean (archt.), 574
Alcoa Building, Pittsburgh, Pa., 1163 American architecture: colonial phase,
Alcobaga (Portugal), Cistercian church, 644 1126, 1131-40; indigenous phase, 1125,
Alcove, Tomb of the, Cerveteri, 183 1128-31; modern, 1127-8, 1156-63;
Alderley Edge (Cheshire), inn at, 483 [484E] national phase, 1126, 1140-56
Aldwinkle Church (Northumberland) American Gothic Revival, 1144
[491L] Amiens Cathedral (France), 376, 421 bis,
Aleotti, Giovanni (archt.). 691 530, 541, 639 [374C, 535] ;
Alessi, Galeazzo (archt.), 687-8, 691 fléche, 541, 562 (i) [564C, H]; flying but-
Alexander sarcophagus, Sidon, 151 [150G, tresses, 541 [369D]; pedestal [566]; plan
H of [560B]; roof, 565 (i); tower [563A];
Alexandria (Egypt): Pharos lighthouse at, transepts, 559 (i), 587 [560B]; vault and
19; Serapeum at, 19 columns, 541 [369F]; western facade,
Alfeld-an-der-Leine (Germany), Fagus 541, 565 (i) [535A]; windows of, 534
Factory, 1066, 1104 [I110B] anati, Bartolommeo (archt.), 672,
Alford House, London, 999 [998a] 678, 687, 714 '
Alfriston (Sussex), Star Inn, 483 [484G] Ammon: Great Temple of, Karnak, 17 bis,
Algiers, basilican church at, 265 18, 39 [6, 40, 41A]; Temple of, Luxor, 18,
Alhambra, the, Granada, 1233-4, 1246 43 [428]
[1231D, 1232E-F] Amorini, 846, 1257
Ali-ar-Riza, Tomb of, Mashhad, Persia, ‘Amphi-antis’ temples, Greek, 107, 108
1235 [109B]
Aliotti, monument of, Florence [6318] ‘Amphi-prostyle’ temples, 108 67s, 133, 1257
All Hallows, Barking, London, 878, 974 [109D]
[976G] Amphitheatres, Roman, 8, 170, 187, 210-14
All Hallows, London Wall, London, 950 Amr, Mosque of, Fustat, Egypt, 1229
All Saints: Camden Town, London, 950; Amritsar (India), Golden Temple, 1187
Evesham, pendant [512R]; Margaret St., Amsterdam (Netherlands):
London, 990, 108-11 [1009Cc, D]; New- Dageraad Housing Estate, 1072-5
castle-upon-Tyne, 950; Stamford [503k] [1073D]; Diamond Workers’ Union
All Souls, Langham Place, London, 955 Building, 1093 (1118]; Henriette Ronner-
All Souls’ College, Oxford, 473 [475A, 507Y plein, 1075; Muiden Castle, 577 [575c];
926 (7 & 8)]; north quadrangle, 963 North Church, 836; Rijksmuseum, 1086
Allahabad (India): Palace of Akbar, 1242; [10914]; Royal Palace [834A]; No. 460,
stambha at, 1180 Singel, 835; South Church, 835-6;
Allegheny County Courthouse and Gaol, Station, Amstel suburb, 1111 [1109B];
Pittsburgh, 1151 Stock Exchange, 1093 [1095A]; Trippen-
Almack’s Club, S. James’s, London, 956 huis, 835 [833E]; West Church, 835-6
Almshouses: Cobham (Kent), 479 [480A-C] ; Ancestral temples, Chinese, 1202
English Mediaeval, 479; Georgian, 956; Anchor Inn, Ripley, 483 [484D]
Jacobean, 897 Ancona (Italy), Arch of Trajan, 222 [224]]
Alnwick (Northumberland), school at, 474 Ancy-le-Franc, Chateau d’ (France), 774
Altamsh, Tomb of, Delhi, 1238 Ancyra (Asia Minor), basilican church at,
Altar of Zeus, Pergamon, 156 265
Altars: Angers Cathedral (France), 549
basilican church, 258, 261 bis, 262 Anglo-Palladian architecture, 872, 873-5;
[255K, 259E]; Belgian and Dutch, 578, 905, 928, 938; 955
§82; British, 1011, 1012, 1019; Byzan- Anglo-Saxon architecture, 383-4, 389,
tine, 287; Italian, 713, 719, 752 [704G, 389-90 [387]; columns, 502 [387B,
758F]; Roman [250B, C, F, J]; Roman- D, F, G, H, J]; dwellings, 444; mouldings,
esque [332C]; Spanish, 643, 653 [638A, 505; Openings, 496; ornament, 506;
6 51B plans, 489; Roman influence on, 389;
Althorp (Northants), 938 [944C] roofs, 501; vaulting, 397, 5013 walls, 490
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1278 INDEX
Angouléme Cathedral (Aquitaine), 340, 343, hs (contd.)
348 [334]; sculptured frieze in [351J] 258, 261, 262 quater, 267 [264J]; Eng-
Anguier, Michel (archt.), 785 lish Mediaeval, 405, 489, 490; French
Anhui (China), Buddhist temple at, 1198 Gothic, 559 (i) [545D, F]; French Renais-
Annia Regilla, Tomb of, Rome, 218 [219A] sance, 799; French Romanesque [342D,
Annapolis (Md.), Hammond-Harwood 350G, 351E]; German Gothic, 587, 588,
House, 1135 593; German Renaissance, 818; German
Annulets, 111, 279, 1257 Romanesque, 358 bis, 363 [365A J]; hep-
Anstruc (archt. )s 1079 tagonal, 643; Italian Renaissance, 604,
Antae, 131, 137, 148, 156, 240 (i), 1257 607, 624 [723H]; Italian Romanesque,
[132B, 142D, 163L] 319, 324 [326B, 330E-G]; polygonal, 588,
Antefixae, 121, 128, 156, 243 (i), 1257 604, 607, 623; Roman, 201; Spanish,
[117G, 163C] 643, 644 bis [650C]
Anthemion, 137, 156, 247 (i) bis, 1257 Aquae Solis (Bath), 206
[162D, 163A, 164G] Aqueducts, Roman, 174, 179, 205, 235-6
Anthemius of Tralles (archt.), 280 [203B, 204A, 241B, 242]
Antigua (Guatemala): Real Cabildo, 1139; Anio Novus, Rome, 236; Aqua Claudia,
University, 1139 Rome, 236, 678 [242A]; Aqua Julia, Rome,
Antioch (Turkey), Roman forum in, 194 236; Aqua Marcia, Rome, 236; Aqua
‘Antiquarian’ phase of Renaissance archi- Tepula, Rome, 236; Constantinople, 275;
tecture, 660 bis, 1062, 1147, 1257 Pont du Gard, Nimes, 236 [2168];
Belgian and Dutch, 832, 835; British, Segovia, 236 [241B]
872, 875-7, 928, 932; 938, 949, 968, 987, Aquitaine (France), Romanesque in, 340,
995, 1019; French, 770, 785 bis, 7913 348, 352
German, 808, 817; Italian, 672, 695; a Maxima, Rome [172A]
Spanish, 846, 855, 1126 Arabesques, 324, 846, 856, 802 (ii), 1257
Antoine, Jacques Denis (archt.), 770, 791 Arabia, Muslim architecture in, 1226-9
Antoninus & Faustina, Temple of, Rome, Araeostyle, 1257 [113A]
188 [189D-F] ;frieze in [246]] Arc du Carrousel, Palais des Tuileries, 770,
Antoninus Pius, Column of, Rome, 227 7792 79% [7938]
Antwerp (Netherlands): c de Triomphe de l’Etoile, Paris, 770,
Bourse [580F]; Cathedral, 574, 577 791 [7934]
[374H, 572A-D]; doorway at [838D, E]; Arcaded galleries, 229, 316, 357; 363
gable at [839c]; Guild Houses, 570, 577, Arcades, 213, 215, 225, 230, 1257 [2314]
832 [829A]; Musée Plantin-Moretus, Belgian and Dutch, 578, 836 [580F];
832, 836 [833C, 838D, H]; S. Charles, 835; blind, 578; British, 1036; Byzantine, 272,
Town Hall, 570, 831, 832 bis [829a]; 283, 289, 293, 2973; church, 283 [267E];
Vieille Boucherie, 577; wellhead, 582 columnar, 672; Continental European,
[581F] 1115; English Mediaeval, 496-501,
Anuradhapura (Ceylon), Buddhist remains, 506, 509, 562 (ii); English Renaissance,
118 968 bis [969A]; French, 562 (i); German,
Aosta (Italy), arch at, 222; bridge near, 236 812, 818, 823; Italian, 608, 688, 748-51
‘Apadana’, Persepolis, 78 bis 80x (i), 1103 [611A-C, E, 74IF, 753E]5
Apartment blocks, 235, 1079, see also Flat mock, 989; nave, 262, 265, 358, 493 bis,
blocks 562, 593, 624, 627 [369F]; Romanesque,
Aphaia, Temple of, Aegina, 112, 115 [113D, 309, 316, 319, 358; Spanish, 643, 647,
154B] 852, 856, 1080 [650G]; triforium, 573,
Apodyteria, 202, 205 [203B, 207D] 5743 wall, 319
Apollo, Temples of: Arch of:
See Bassae, Corinth, Delos, Delphi, Augustus, Perugia, 180, 183 [181B];
Miletus, Rome, Selinus, Syracuse Augustus, Rimini, 222, 683; Caracalla,
Apollo Didymaeus, Temple of, Miletus, Tebessa, 225 [224K]; Constantine, Rome,
es 108, 128, 131, 139 [IOQN, I41J-P, 222 [224H]; the Goldsmiths, Rome, 222
I [223H-K]; Janus Quadrifons, Rome, 225
polls Epicurius, Temple of, Bassae, 112, [172A, 223L]; Septimius Severus, Rome,
123-5, 128, 139 bis, 243 (i), 244 (i) 222, 791 [182, 224A-G, 377E]; Tiberius,
[124 Orange, 221-2 [226a]; Tiberius, Pom-
Apollodorus of Damascus (archt.), 188, 201 peii, 225; Titus, Rome, 222, 247 (ii),
Apophyge, 1257 [165k] 963 [223A-G]; Trajan, Ancona, 222
Apostles, Church of the: Athens, 290[2878] ; [2243]; Trajan, Beneventum, 222
Cologne, 358, 363 bis [355]; Constantin- [377D]
ople, 284, 289 Arch-braced roofs, 433, 434, 502 bis
Apses, 1257 Archaic Temple, Ephesus, 128, 129 [127A];
Byzantine, 284, 297; Early Christian, column of [130c]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1279

Archbishop’s Palace: Alcala de Henares, Asam, Egid Quirin (archt.), 811, 818
846; Croydon, 452; Lambeth, 393, 3943 Asbestos, 1035
Palermo, 624 bis [626c] Aschaffenburg Cathedral (Bavaria), clois-
Archer, Thomas (archt.), 872, 873, 949 ters of [362P]
Archer frieze, Susa, 87 [766] Asclepius, Temple of: Epidauros [1068];
Arches [1256] Pompeii [250]]
* aqueduct, 236 bis; Belgian and Dutch, Ashbourne School (Derbyshire), 885
578 [s80c]; buttress, 348, 367 [342c]; Ashburnham House, London, 905; stair-
Byzantine, 297-8; Early Christian, 265 case, 967 [904A, 971]
[267E, 269B]; Egyptian, 53; English Ashby-de-la-Zouch Castle (Leics.), 444
Mediaeval, 496-7 [507]; Etruscan, 173, Ashby S. Ledger Church (Warwicks.), ring
240 (ii) [181B]; four-centred, 401; frilled, handle [5181]
643; Gothic, 367; Greek, 240 (i); horse- Ashlar, 1258
shoe, 640, 647 Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, 1020 [1021E]
lancet, 496; paired-column, 725; Ashridge Park (Herts.), 948 [944B]
‘Persian’, 1235; pointed, see Pointed Ashurbanipal, palace of, Nineveh, 64, 73
arch; Roman, 23, 174, 176, 213, 221-5, Ashurnasirpal II, palace of, Nimroud, 64,
230, 236, 240 (ii) [177F, 216F, G]; Roman- 73 [7IA, 84E, G]
esque, 309, 343; semicircular, 309, 319, Ashville (N.C.), Biltmore, 1143 [1142c]
320, 347, 348, 358, 3713 squinch, 79, 309 Asia Minor: architecture in, 96; Doric
[80H]; three-centred, 643, 811, 812; columns, 148-51 [150A, C]; Ionic entab-
transverse diaphragm, 320, 1047; trium- lature, 128; Ionic temples, 128
phal, 221-2, 289, 785, 791 [223-4, 226A, Asian Students’ Sanitorium (China), 1207
793A]; true or radiating, 173; types com- Aslin, C. H. (archt.), 1035
pared [1256] Aspendus (Asia Minor), theatre at, 210
Architects’ Co-Partnership, 1048 Asplund, Erik Gunnar (archt.), 1068, 1094,
Architrave, 155, 1257; Corinthian, 140; IIII
Doric, 108, III, 115, I2I, 133 [110A]; Assembly Rooms, York, 956 [958c]
Tonic, 125, 128, 133, 148 [159E] Assisi (Italy), S. Francesco, 623, 633
Archivolt, 1257 [606B, 620, 621, 630K, 631G]
Arcuated style, 9, 240, 367 Assize Courts, Manchester, 1025
Ardabil (Iran), Mosque of Shaykh Safi, Assyrian architecture, 7, 66, 70-5; palaces,
1235 73, 371 [71A, B, 74]; sculpture, 63;
Arena Chapel, Padua, 633 [610B] temples, 70, 73, 75 [724]
Arezzo (Italy), city walls of, 173 Asti (Italy), Baptistery at, 323
Ariccia (Rome), S. Maria dell’ Assunta, 726 Aston (Warwicks.), monument at [980F]
Arles (Provence): amphitheatre, 213; Aston Hall (Warwicks.), 881, 886 bis, 964
Roman remains at, 183; S. Gilles, 336, [965]; stone frieze, 974 [977C]
343, 347, 348 [349A, 350B, P, 3511]; S. Astragal, 156, 1258 [164B]
Trophime, 336, 343, 347, 348 [350F, K] Astylar facades, 672, 673, 683, 684, 702,
Arlington (Virginia), 1143 748, 801 (i), 988, 989, 996 bis, 999, IOI9,
Arp, Hans (sculptor), 1160 1036, 1085 67s, 1086, 1114, 1258 [681,
Arras (France), Hotel de Ville, 533, 555 685]
[554B] Aten, temple of, Tell el-Amarna, 18
Arris, 1258 Athelhampton Hall (Dorset), 459, 501
Arrona, Juan Martinez de (sculptor), 1135 [4554]
Art Gallery, Johannesburg, 1058 Athena: Old Temple of, Athens, 133 [103B,
Art Nouveau, 11; in Britain, 983, 986, 991, 104C, 134c]; Temple of, Syracuse, 262
992, I000, 1007, 1026, 1047, 1052, 10553 [263C]
in Continental Europe, 1065, 1066, Athena Nike, see Niké Apteros
I072, 1093, I104, 1116 Athena Parthenos: statue of, 119, 123
Art Workers’ Guild, 991 [122H]; Temple of, see Parthenon
Artaxerxes II, Palace of, Susa, 75 [76F, G] Athena Polias: shrine of, Athens, 133;
Artemis (Diana), Temple of: Ephesus, 86, Temple of, Priene, 128, 131, 155 [127F,
128, 129-31, 244 (i), 283 [127A, E, 130]; 132G—M]
Epidauros [1068] Athena Promachos, statue of, Athens
Artemis-Cybele, Temple of, Sardis, 128 [103B, 104C]
Artemisia, statue of, from Halicarnassos, Athenaeum Club, London, 956
148 Athenaeum, Manchester, 1019
oe. and Crafts Movement, 991 07s, 992, Athens:
1000, IOI2, 1055 bis, 1065 Acropolis, 7, 102, 133, 143 [103B, 104,
Arundel Church (Sussex), pier [503T]; pul- 105A]; Bouleuterion, 147 [105A]; Chor-
pit [517N] ; agic Monument of Lysicrates, 139-40,
Asam, Cosmas Damian (archt.), 811, 818 152, 155, 156, 1036, 1152 [138G, I41A-E,
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1280 INDEX

Athens (cont.) Aulnay (France), S. Pierre [350G]

I60E, 163E, 165k]; Church of the Aumbry, 633, 1257 [630H]
Apostles, 290 [287B]; Erechtheion at, see Austin Friars, London, Dutch Church at,
Erechtheion; Kapnikarea Church, 290; 3
Little Metropole Cathedral, 290 [278H- Aceon and New Zealand architecture,
L]; Lysicrates Monument, see Choragic 1057-9; examples, 1058-9; influences
above; Odeion of Herodes Atticus, 148, upon, 1058; Regency phase, 1058
210 [103B, 104c]; Odeion of Pericles, Austrey (Warwicks.), window mouldings
148; old Temple of Athena at; 133 [103B, [507s]
104B] ;Olympeion, see Olympeion Autun (France): Cathedral, 343 [310B];
Parthenon, see Parthenon; Propylaea, Porte d’Arroux, 225; Porte S. André, 225
112, 143, 152, 817 [103B, I04B, IOSA, 142, [216G]
165D]; Prytaneion, 147; public buildings, Auvergne (France), Romanesque in, 340,
147-8 [105B]; S. Theodore, 290 bis 34
[286A]; Stadium, 148 [146B]; stoas in, Avebury (Wilts.), stone circles at, 3, 382,
147 [103B, I04B, IOSA, 158]; Temple of 309
Niké Apteros, 128, 129, 133, 143 [103B, Avignon (Provence), 549 [551C]; Notre
I04C, 135B, 142H]; Temple of Zeus Dame, 343; Pont d’, 347; 549 [551C];
Olympius, 107, 108, 139, 140 [I09H, walls of, 549 [552B]
146A]; Temple on the Ilissus, 108, 131-3 Avila (Spain):
[109D, 127B, I32A-F, 160C]; Theatre of Casa Polentina, 846 [854B]; Cathedral,
Dionysos, 147, 148, 210 [104C, 144A]; 640, 647, 653 bis, 856, 862 [651A, 860];
Theseion, see Theseion; Tower of the Convent of S. Thomas [651c]; S. Vi-
Winds, 139, 140, 152, 950 [138], I41F—-H, cente, 648 [6424]
162B, C] Aylesford Bridge (Kent), 489 [487M]
Athens Museum, antiquities in, 123 Azay-le-Rideau, Chateau d’ (France), 773-4
Athos, Mt., monastery on [277E] [760A]
‘Atlantes’, sculptures of, I15, 155, 1258
[114]
Atreus, Treasury of, Mycenae, 93, 101-2, Baalbek (Syria): “Temple of Bacchus’, 194
240 (i), 27 [100] [193A, C, E, G]; Temple of Jupiter, 194,
Atrium, 1258 283 [193A, B, F]; Temple of Venus, 198
Byzantine, 280 [281G]; Early Christian, [195G-J] ;
258, 265, 280 [255A; B, K, 259C, E, 260C]3; ‘Babel, Tower of? (ziggurat), 70
Etruscan origin of, 174; Roman, 230, Babylon, City of, 70 [88] ; ‘Hanging Gardens
233 ter [238A]; Romanesque, 320, 358 of’, 70; Ishtar Gate at, 70 [71c]
Atrium Vestae, Rome, 230 [182B] Babylonian architecture, 7, 66-70
eee II, Stoa of, Athens, 147, 155 [105A, Bacchus, Temple of, Baalbek, 194 [193A, C,
158 E, G
Attegrene, John (master-mason), 406 Bachelier, Nicholas (archt.), 780
Attic base, 128, 133, 1258 [165H, Ss] Bacon, Henry (archt.), 1151, 1168
Attics, 659, 719, 1047, 1086, 1258 Bacon’s Castle, Surry County (Virginia),
Aubert, A. (archt.), 1094 1132 [1133E]
Audenarde (Belgium): Notre Dame de Badgeworth (Glos.), window at [499K]
Pamele, 574; Town Hall, 577, 582 [5794; Badia di Fiesole, nr. Florence, capital
80E [7498]
Audiencia, La: Barcelona, 6443 Valencia, 856 Reread (Iraq), Great Mosque, 1235
Auditorium: amphitheatre’s, 210 bis; an- Bagnaia (Italy), Villa Lante, 708 [709B, c]
cient theatre’s, 209 [145F]; Colosseum’s, Baguley Manor House (Cheshire), 451
210, 213 [166B]; Royal Festival Hall, Bailey, 437, 438, 443, 444 bis, 522, 525, 1258
London, 1036; Teatro Farnese, 691 Baker, Sir Herbert (archt.), 955, 1026, 1035,
Auditorium Building: Chicago, 1152 1058 bis
[1150E] ;Massachusetts Institute of Tech- Balconies: British, 1041; French, 802 (ii)
nology, 1160 [1253] [8048]; German, 1094; Italian, 608, 627,
Audley End (Essex), 886, 964 [887B, 894A] 674 [612E, 734F; G, 753C; 757B]
Augsburg (Bavaria), S. Ulrich, 594 [585D] Baldachino, 197, 258, 261 bis, 719, 818,
Augustinian Canons, Order of, 304, 406 IOII, 1258 [720B]
Augustus: Baldersby (Yorks.), S. James, 1011
Arch of, Perugia, 180, 183 [181B];
Bale (Switzerland): portal at [362N]; S. An-
Arch of, Rimini, 222, 683; Bridge tonius, 1085 [1083c]
of,
Rimini, 239 [245c]; Forum of, Rome, Ball, J. L. (archt.), 1047
184, 187 [182B, 190A, C]; Mausoleum of, Ball-flower ornament, 506, 509, 565 (ii),
Rome, 217, 218 [237B]; Palace of, Rome, 1258 [508P]
227 [232E] Balleroy, Chateau de, (France), 780 [782B]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1281
Balliol College, Oxford, 473 Barlow, W. H. (engineer), 1042
Balloon-frame, 1127 Barn, The, Exmouth, 1000 [10034]
Balneum (bath), Roman, 206 [23 1D] Barnack Church (Lincs.), 390
Baltard, Victor (archt.), 1079 Barnard Castle (Co. Durham), Butter
Baltimore (Md.), Catholic Cathedral, 1144 Market [9278]
Baluster mullions, Anglo-Saxon, 390, 505 Barns, 433; tithe, 483 [488a, B]
Baluster columns, 852, 856 Barnstaple (Devon): monastery at, 304;
Balusters, 538, 657, 659, 662 (ii), 687, 1258 plaster panel at [977D]
Balustrades, 662 (ii) bis, 7193; Baroque, 659; Barnwell Church (Northants.) [491N]
Early Christian [255D]; English Renais- Barobudar (Java), Buddhist remains, 1183
sance [969D, F]; French, 792. [8041]; Baroli (India), Hindu Temple, 1187, 1195
Italian, 752 bis, 801 (i) [750], 758H] [r190c]
Bamberg (Germany), portal at [362T] Baroque architecture, 10, 659-60 (see also
Bamboo, uses of, 1207, 1208 bis, 1211, 1219 Neo- and Proto-Baroque)
[1210] American, 1126; Austrian, 808; Eng-
Bangor Cathedral (Carnarvonshire), 402, lish, 872-3, 931, 9493; French, 766-9, 785,
405 [412D] 7923 frescoes, 664 (ii); German, 808-11,
Bank of England: Bristol, 1036 [10394]; 812, 817 ter, 818 ter, 823 quater; Italian,
Liverpool, 1036 [1039B]; London, 955, 672-5, 688-95, 725-9, 747, 808, 817,
1035 [10324] 823; Italian ‘High’, 672, 872; Nether-
Banking House, the, Lombard St, London, lands’, 828, 831, 832 bis, 835, 836 bis;
955 ‘Orders’ in, 662 (ii); Spanish, 842 bis
Banqueting hall: Haddon Hall, 452 bis Barrel vaults:
[449]]; Hampton Court Palace [4615] Belgian and Dutch, 836; British, 1042;
Banqueting House, Whitehall, 867, 898 Byzantine, 284 [296E]; Continental Euro-
[896B, 899]; columns of, 973 [899C] pean, 1068, 1085, 1111; English, 397,
Banwell Church (Somerset), pulpit [517P] 433> 502 bis, 914 [435C]; Etruscan, 180;
Baptisteries: Byzantine, 293 [281G, 295E-J]; French, 773; Italian, 687, 717; Roman,
Early Christian, 201; German, 3543 176, 178, 188, 209, 218 [370A, B]; Roman-
Italian, 323, 329 esque, 309, 343, 344, 348 [370c]; Span-
Baptistery, 1258 ish, 640
Asti, 323; of Constantine, Rome, 293, Barrington Court (Somerset), 463
323 [295E-G]; Cremona, 323 [321C]; Barrows, 3, 382, 389, 521
Florence, 613, 672 [615A, 631E]; Novara, Barry, Sir Charles (archt.), 707, 877, 956,
329; Parma, 323 [327A, B, 332L]; Pisa, 987, 996 bis, 1019 ter
319-20 [313A, 314E-G, 330K, 377F; Barry, E. M. (archt.), 956
630D-G] Bartisan (angle turret), 489, 525 bis, 1258
Bar tracery, 496, 562 (i) Bartning, Otto (archt.), 1085
Barabini, Carlo (archt.), 695 Barton Church (Cambs.), chancel screen
Barbarano, Palazzo, Vicenza, 738 [5168]
Barber-Surgeons’ Hall, London, 905 Bas-reliefs: Early Christian, 266; English
Barberini, Palazzo, Rome, 725, 748 [724A, B] Mediaeval, 380; Italian, 752; medallion,
Barbicans, castle, 438, 1258 380, 459; Roman, 215, 222 [216c];
Barcaccia fountain, Rome, 725 Roman spiral, 227 bis [228E, F, H, J]
Barcelona (Spain): Base of column, 96, 1258
Casa Battl6, 1072 [1070B]; Casa. del Asiatic Greek, 129 [1658]; ‘Attic’, 128,
Ayuntamiento, 644; Casa Mila, 1072 133 [165H]; Composite [972F]; Corin-
[1070c]; Cathedral, 640, 643, 647, 653 thian, 137 [165G, T, 972E]; English Medi-
[649B, 652A]; Church of the Sagrada aeval, 506 [503]; French Gothic [566F];
Familia, 1080 [1082A]; Palacio de la Ionic, 131 [165S, 972D]; Persian, 78 [76B,
Audiencia, 644, 647, [646B]; Palazzo D]; quasi-Doric [165R]; Syro-Hittite, 85
Gill, 1065, 1071 [1069c]; S. Justo y [83c]; Tuscan, 174 [972B]
Pastor, 643; S. Maria del Mar, 643, 648 Basel, Basle, see Bale
[649A]; S. Maria del Pino, 643 Basevi, George (archt.), 987, 1019
Barfreston Church (Kent), 390, 496 Basilica, 1258
[491F] Aemilia, Rome, 202; Christian churches’
Barge-boards, 996, 1258 application of, 258; of Constantine,
Bargello, Palazzo, Florence, 623 Rome, 178 bis, 201-2, 205, 209, 717
Barhut (India), stupa at, 1180 [177], 200C-F, 241A]; Diocletian’s palace
Bari (S. Italy), S. Nicolo, 324 [231D]; Domitian’s palace, 229 [232C, E];
Barkiik, Mosque and Mausoleum of Sultan, Fano, 176; Julia, Rome, 202; of Maxen-
Cairo, 1230 [1251] tius, Rome, see Constantine; Nova,
Barley (Herts.), Fox & Hounds Inn, 483 Rome, see Constantine; Paestum, 94,
[484K] 108, I12, 115 [I09K, II4E, H, 136E, H];
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1282 INDEX

Basilica (cont.) Beauvais (France), timber house at, 559

Pompeii, 202; Porcia, Rome, 202; [558]
Trajan’s, Rome, 184, 201 [200A, B]; Beauvais Cathedral, 542, 587, 648 [545];
Tréves, 202; Vicenza, 691, 738 [741] chevet, 542 [545A, C]; flying buttresses,
Basilican Early Christian churches, 253, 542 [545B, D]; model of [374F]; stained-
254, 257-8, 258-65, 308 [252] glass windows, 542 [545E]
Palestine, 262 [260A—D] ;Ravenna, 262, Beazley, Samuel (archt.), 956
266 [252, 263B, 264F-K, 267E, H; J, 269A]; ‘Becket’s Crown’, Canterbury, 406, 469,
Rome, 8, 188, 258, 261-2 [255, 256, 259, 509 [41 1B]
263A, 264A-E, 267A, B, G, N, Q; T, 269B]; Beddington Church (Surrey), arch mould-
Salonica, 265; Syracuse, 262 [268c]; ings [507v]; pier [503v]
Syria, 262, 265 [260J-N]; Torcello, 262 Bede House, Stamford, 479 [480H-K]
[268A, B, 270] Bedford, Francis (archt.), 877, 955
Basingstoke (Hants.), S. Michael [499N] Bedford School, 474
Bassae (Greece), Temple of Apollo Epi- Beehive huts, 521 [2D, E]
curius at, 112, 123-5, 128, 139 bis, 244 (i) Beeston (Notts.), Boots Chemical Factory,
[124, 127C, 138F]; volutes at, 244 (i) 1048 [1049B]
Bassen, B. van (archt.), 836 Béguinage, Ghent, 577
Bastard, John and William (archts.), 873 Behrens, Peter (archt.), 1065, 1066, 1067,
Bastille metro station, Paris, 1104 [1105E] II04
Batalha Monastery (Portugal), 644 [634C] Beit Khallaf (Egypt), Mastaba K.1 at, 26
Bates, Peebles and Smart (archts.), 1059 24B
Bath (Somerset), 183, 948 [946A] Belcher, John (archt.), 992, 1026
Circus, the, 874, 948 [946A]; Prior Belem Monastery (Portugal), 522, 644
Park, 905, 932 [935D]; Pulteney Bridge, Belem Tower, Sefton Park, Liverpool,
964; Queen Square, 948; Roman Ther- 1008 [1006c]
mae at, 206, 383; Royal Crescent, 874, Belfry, 1012, 1019, 1259 [579C] (see also
948 [946A]; South Parade, 948 Bell-tower and Campanile); Florence,
Bath Abbey, ‘Jacob’s ladder’ at, 510 613; Pisa, 319
Bath-houses, Japanese, 1218 [I216E-F] Belgian and Dutch Gothic architecture,
Bath stone, 380, 864, 955, 1020 569-82
Baths, Roman public (see also Thermae), altars, 578, 582 [581C]; analysis, 577—
206, 265; Pompeii, 206 5825 arcading, 573s 574s 5772 578 [580F]
Baths, Roman slipper, 206 [250E, G] Brabantine style, 570, 573 bis, 574 ter;
Baths of Neptune, Ostia [241F] 5772 5783 buttresses, 574, 578; capitals,
Battlements, 316, 489, 608, 623, 1258; 573> 574 ter, 578; castles, 577 bis [575C];
Ghibelline, 323, 608 [325A] character of, 573; columns, 578; dwell-
Baudot, Anatole de (archt.), 1064, 1080 ings, 577 [579D]; ecclesiastical, 573-73
Bauhaus, Dessau, 1094 [1098A, C] fléche, 578; influences upon, 569-73;
‘Baulk-tie’, 433 mouldings, 578; openings, 574, 578;
Baurscheit, J.-P. van, the Younger (archt.), ornament, 578; plans, 577; roofs, 578;
832 bis secular, 577; shrines, 574, 578, 582
Bautista de Toledo, Juan (archt.), 851 [581D]; tombs, 578, 582 [581G]; towers,
Bay windows, 451, 459, 501, 1026, 1051, 573 574: 577s 5783 vaulting, 573, 578
1054 [458B]; English Renaissance, 882, [580F]; walls, 578; westblocks, 573
885, 968 [880A, 888A, 892A, 969C] Belgian and Dutch Renaissance architec-
Bayazid, Mosque of, Istanbul, 1237 ture, 826-40
Baybars I, Mosque of, Cairo, 1230 analysis, 836-40; Baroque, 828, 831,
Bayeux Cathedral, 541 [548B]; sculptured 832, 835 bis, 836 bis; character, 831-2;
spandrel in [351M] columns, 835, 836 [838K]; ecclesiastical,
Bayeux tapestry, 506 835-6; examples, 832-6; influences upon,
Bayham Abbey (Sussex), 304 654, 655, 656, 827-30; mouldings, 840;
Bays, 1258 openings, 836; ornament, 832, 835, 8403
Bayt al-Qady, Cairo, 1230 plans, 836; Rococo, 831, 832 bis, 835;
Bead moulding, 128, 156, 1258 [164B, 165P] secular, 832-5; walls, 836
‘Bead and reel’, 156 [164B] Belgian and Dutch Romanesque architec-
Beak-head moulding, 505, 1258 [508D] ture, 573, 574
‘Beau Dieu d’Amiens’ (sculpture), 541 ‘Bell’ capitals, 565 [503L, Q, U]
Beauchamp Chapel, Warwick, 394 bis, 469 Bell, Henry (archt.), 928
[4708]
Beaugency (France), Hétel de Ville, 779
Bell Inn, Woodbridge, 483 [484c]
Bell-tower (see also Campanile), 323, 527;
[7784] 608, 1025; Chichester Cathedral, 406;
Beaumaris Castle (Anglesey), 438 [441C] Evesham, 490; S. Paul’s Cathedral, 913
Beaune (France), Hétel Dieu, 555 [910D]; Volterra, 623
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1283
Belle Grove, near White Castle, Louisiana, Bhuvaneshwar (India), 1187 bis; Para-
1143 suramesvara Temple [1186B]
Bellur (India), Great Temple, 1188 [1189B, Bianco, Bartolommeo (archt.), 688, 812;
1194J] pice! © by, 691, 725 [689D, 692B, D,
Belton House, Grantham, 905 [903E, 904c, 93
9668]; walls, 967, 968 [903E, 940C] Bibi Khanum, Madrasa of, Samarkand,
Belvedere, Vienna, 817 [816a] 1255
Belvedere Court, Vatican, 701 [720A, 721] Biblioteca Laurenziana, see Laurentian
Bema (church platform), 258, 261 bis, 290, Library
1259 [259C, E, 300L]; extension of, 375 ‘Big Ben’, Westminster New Palace, 1020
Bench-ends: Belgian, 840 [838a, B]; Eng- ' Biga, 158
lish Mediaeval, sro [517A, c]; Italian Bigallo, the, Florence, 623 [612A]
[631D, F] Bignor (Sussex), Roman remains at, 383
Benedictine monasteries, 304, 308, 324, Bijapur (India): Gol Gombaz, 1241; Ibra-
344, 358 brs, 381; churches of, 405; Eng- him Rauza, 1241; Jami Masjid, 1241-2
lish, 381, 423 [1247G-H]
Beneventum (Italy), Arch of Trajan, 222 Billet moulding, 301, 352, 505, 990, 1047,
377D] 1259 [508A]
Beni Hasan (Egypt), tombs at, 17, 35 Biltmore, Ashville (N.C.), 1143 [1142c]
[31B] Binham Priory (Norfolk) [503M, N, 508M]
Bennett, H. (archt.), 1008 Binnenhof, The Hague, 577
Bennington (Lincs.), door mouldings [507R] Bipedales, 176
Bentley, John F. (archt.), 279, 992, IOII Bird and basket capital, S. Sophia, Constan-
Berg, Max (archt.), 1066, 1093 tinople, 301 [300A]
Bergamo (Italy): Colleoni Chapel, 687 Bird’s beak moulding, 156 [164K, 165A, E]
[689A]; S. Agostino, 627 [629H]; S. Birla Temple, New Delhi, 1188
Maria Maggiore, 627 [330E, 629E] Birmingham (Warwicks.):
Bergen-op-Zoom (Netherlands), Town Eagle Insurance Building,1047[1046c] ;
Hall, 582 Holy Trinity, Bordesley, 955; S. Philip
Berkeley (Calif.), church at [1255] (Cathedral), 949 [9*2A]; Theatre Royal,
Berkeley Hospital, Worcester, 897 OS) 6
Berkeley House, Piccadilly, London, 906 Bishapur (Persia): Fire temple at, 793
Berkeley Square (No. 44), London, 948 Palace of Shapur I, 79
Berkhamsted (Herts.): motte at, 4373 Bishop’s Frome (Herefordshire), farm, 469
School, 474 [4658]
Berlage, Hendrick P. (archt.), 1065, 1093 Bishop’s Palace: Alcala, 648 [646G]; Wells,
Berlin (Germany): Brandenburg Gate, 817 452
[815A]; Museum, 817; New Theatre, Bishops’ thrones, 258, 421, 509, 644, 653
817; Polytechnic School, 817; Turbine _[255Es 3324s SITE; 915A]
Factory, 1104 [11074] Bit-hilani (Syrzan porched house), 85 [72G]
Bermudez, Guido (archt.), 1159 Bitonto Cathedral (Italy), 324 [333]
Bernard de Soissons (mason-archt.), 538 Black Pagoda, Kanarak, 1187 [1194c-D]
Bernardo Monument, Venice [758D] Blackheath (Kent), Morden College, 928,
Bernay (Normandy), Abbey of, 344 956 [927A, 966K, 971E]
Bernhard, Johann (archt.), 811 Blandford (Dorset), rebuilding of, 873
Berniéres (Normandy), church at, 344 Blenheim Palace (Oxfordshire), 931-2, 967,
EOS0 Agee
Bernini, Giovanni Lorenzo (archt.), 673
974 [930, 933A]; gateway, 931 [934A];
great hall, 931 [930B, C]
717, 719 bis, 725, 7263 buildings by, 725; Blerancourt, Chateau de (France), 780
726, 729; his work for S. Peter’s, 719, Bletchingley (Surrey), house at, 469 [464G]
726; design for Louvre, 774, 871 Blickling Hall (Norfolk), 886 67s, 964 bis
Bernini, Pietro (sculptor), 725 [883B, 965J]; chimney-piece, 886 [975F];
Berruguete, Alonso (sculptor), 845, 862 entrance, 974 [969G]; staircase, 886
Bessho (Japan), Pagoda, 1214 [975B, C] Ane
Bethlehem (Jordan), Church of the Nati- ‘Blind storey’, 3753 see also Triforium
vity, 262 [260A-D] Bloemfontein (S. Africa), Government
Beverley (Yorks.): Minster, 394 [5046, Building, 1058
SIIB, 5I2F, L, 517G, H]; S. Mary [503U, Blois, Chateau de (France), 555, 770, 7735
V, 507Q] ‘n 780, 802 (ii) [558E, 763A, 771A-F]
Bexhill (Sussex), De la Warr Pavilion, 1048 Blondel, Jacques Fran¢ois (archt.), 770
[1049D] Blondel, N. F. (archt.), 770, 785
Bexley Heath (Kent), Red House, 999 Blore, Edward (archt.), 988
[997A] |. ‘ Bloxham (Oxon.), S. Mary, spire of, 490
Bhaja (India), chaitya at, 1180 [492]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
aS
 1284 INDEX

Blue Coat School, Hertford, 885 Bouleuterion (Council House), 102, 147,
Blue Mosque, Tabriz, 1235 1259 [105A, B, 154A]
Blythburgh Church (Suffolk), alms box Boullée, Etienne Louis (archt.), 770
[519J]; bench-end [517C¢] Bourgeau, Victor (archt.), 1144
Boarhunt Church (Hants.), 390 [387K] Bourges (France): Hétel de Ville, 555
Boarium, Forum, in Rome, 184, 197, 225 [558c, F]; House of Jacques Coeur, 559
[172A] [552A, 557A]
Boboli Gardens, Florence, 673; 678 [680B, Bourges Cathedral, 530, 534, 538, 643
712A] [539, 548A, 561A]; aisles, 562 (i) [561A];
Boccadoro, see Cortona, Domenico da doorways, 538, 562 (i) [539B]; plan of
Bodiam Castle (Sussex), 443 [439B] [561A]; transepts, 559 (i) [561A]
Bodleian Library, Oxford, 886, 967 [475A; Bourgtheroulde, H6tel du, Rouen, 559
895A]; tower of, 897, 973 [8954] [5544]
Bodley, G. F. (archt.), 990 Bourse, Antwerp, arcade & vaulting [580F]
Boffrand, Germain (archt.), 770, 791 ‘Bow Bells’, 913
Bogardus, James (archt.), 1152 Bowtell mouldings, 505, 506, 1259 [507B, C;
Boghazkéy (Anatolia): King’s Gate, 81 E, G,H, K, L]
[834]; Temple 1 at, 81-2 [83]; Town Box Hill (Surrey), Flint Cottage, 938 [934c]
walls at, 81 [83A, B] ‘Box’ ribs, 202, 209 [177H; J, K, M, N]
Boileau, L.-A. (archt.), 1079 bis Bozra (Syria), church at, 290; Roman forum
Boissonas House, New Canaan (Conn.), at, 184
IIS9 Brabantine style, 570, 573 bis, 574 ter, 5775
Bolivia, burial towers, 1125, 1131 578, 831 .
Bologna (Italy): ‘Brace’ or bracket moulding, 506, 1259
Madonna di S. Luca, 729 [724c]; Mer- Braces, rafter, 433, 1259 [435A; 486]]
canzia (Loggia dei Mercanti), 608 [629G]; Bracket, 509, 846 ter, 856, 1116 [512P,
Palazzo Albergati, 702; Portico de Ban- 749B, 750G]
chi, 713; S. Petronio, 604, 607, 701 Bradbury, Ronald (archt.), 1008
[609A, B]; Torre Asinelli, 323 [317C]; Bradford-on-Avon (Wilts.): Kingston
Torre Garisenda, 323 House [969F]; S. Lawrence, 390, 489
Bolsover Castle poate te 870, 886 [387M, Q]; tithe barn, 483 [488a, B]
Bolsward church,5 Braisne Abbey Church (France), 587
Bolton Castle Wee ), 443 [4415] Bramante, Donato (archt.), 9, 673, 687;
Bonatz, P. (archt.), 1104 696-701; plans for S. Peter’s accepted,
Boni, Donato di (archt.), 831 717
Boodle’s Club, London, 956 [957c] Bramhall Hall (Cheshire), 459, 881 [456A]
Bootham Bar, York, 489 [4876] Bramshill House (Hants.), 886, 964 [893A,
Boothby Pagnell (Lincs.), Norman manor 965G]; arcade, 968 [969]]; balustrade
house, 447 bis [446c] [969D]; oriel window, 968 [893A, 969A]
Boots Chemical Factory, Beeston, 1048 Branch-tracery, 594
[1049B] Brandenburg Gate, Berlin, 817 [815A]
Borghese, Palazzo, Rome, 691, 725 [724F] Brandon, Prince George County (Va.), 1132
Borgo di San Sepolcro, Francesco di Braschi, Palazzo, Rome, 748
(archt.), 696 Brasenose College, Oxford, 473 [475A]
Borra, J. B. (archt.), 937 Brasses, church, 479, 509, 510 [518M]
Borromini, Francesco (archt.), 673, 691, Braxted Church (Essex) [491D]
726; buildings by, 726, 729 [727C, D, Breda (Netherlands): Castle, 831, 836;
728A] Notre Dame, 582
Borthwick Castle (Midlothian), 525 Bredgar (Kent), chevron at [508c]
Boscherville (Normandy), S. Georges, 344 Bremen (Germany), Rathaus, 812 [813c]
Bosses, 1259; English Mediaeval, 398, 502, Brenta, River (Italy), House on [742E, F]
§09, 510 [373C, 512J—M]; French Gothic, Brescia (Italy), S. Maria dei Miracoli, 732
565 (i) [566A, Cc]; French Renaissance, [689B]
7733 Spanish Mediaeval, 644, 648 Breslau (Poland), Centennial Hall, 1066,
Boston (Lincs.), S. Botolph [492D] 1093 [1097]
Boston (Mass.): Christ church (Old North), Breton, Gilles Le (archt.), 774
1136; King’s Chapel, 1136 [1137D]; Paul Brettingham, Matthew (archt.), 932 bis
Revere House, 1132; Public Library, Breuer, Marcel (archt.), 995, 1159
1085, 1151 [1149E]; State House, 1147; Brevnov Monastery, Prague, 817-18 [820A]
Tontine Crescent, 1143 Brick and stone buildings, 297, 459, 769,
“Boston Stump’, 955 1012
Bothwell Castle (Lanarks.), 522 Brickwork:
Bottisham (Cambs.), pier at [503P] Belgian and Dutch, 570, 573, 578 bis,
Bouillon (Netherlands), Castle, 577 836, 1067, 1075, 1094; British, 983, 996,
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
he
A
teah
St
INDEX 1285

Brickwork (cont.) British Museum (cont.)

IOII, 1012, 1055; Byzantine, 272, 276, Aegean antiquities in, 102; Assyrian
280; Egyptian, 13-14, 22, 50; English antiquities in, 64, 73 bis, 87 [72B, 84]];
Mediaeval, 380, 444, 451, 459, 469, 4733 Buddhist antiquities in, 1180; Early
English Renaissance, 864, 870, 872, 937; Christian antiquities in, 266; Egyptian
938, 967; Etruscan, 173; French, 549, antiquities in, 19, 57; Etruscan antiqui-
‘ 769, 1080; German, 354, 358, 364, 583, ties in, 180, 183 bis [181D, E, H]; Greek
587, 588, 594, 806, 1094; Indian, 1175; antiquities in, 123 bis, 125, 129, 131, 133,
Italian, 312, 600, 603, 607 ter, 613, 801 (i); 137, 148, 151 ter; Mediaeval objects in,
Roman, 168, 175-6, 198, 202, 218, 221, 509
276, 636 [177D]; Spanish, 636, 855 bis; British r9th and 2oth century architecture,
West Asiatic, 61, 66 982-1056
Bridge: analysis, 1051-6; Art Nouveau, 991-2;
Alcantara, 222, 239; of Augustus, character, 986-95; columns, 1054-5,
Rimini, 239 [245c]; Avignon, 347, 549; 1012, 1047; commercial and industrial
Aylesford, 489 [487M]; Coombe Bisset, buildings, 1036-51, 1054; domestic
489 [488c]; Crowland, 489 [487J]; East buildings, 995-1008; Early Victorian,
Farleigh, 489 [488D]; Kirkby Lonsdale, g87-9; ecclesiastical, 1008-19; examples,
489 [487K]; Old London, 489 [4871]; 995-1051; Gothic Revival, 986-95;
Prior Park, 905, 932 [935D]; Saintes, 222; Greek Revival, 987; High Victorian,
of Sighs, Venice, 731 [733D]; Stopham, 989-91; influences upon, 982-6; Late
489 [487H]; Stowe, 905; of Ten Thou- Victorian, 991-2, 995, 999; mouldings,
sand Ages, Foochow, 1207; of Ten 1055
Thousand Times Peace, Tsienchowfu, Openings, 1054; ornament, 1055-6;
1207; Wakefield, 489; Warkworth, 489; plans, 1051-4; public buildings, 1019-
Wilton, 905, 932 [902D-F]; Yangtse 1036; Queen Anne style, 991; roofs,
River, 1207 1054; Twentieth century era, 992-5;
Bridges: walls, 1052
British, 989; Chinese, 1206-7; English Brixworth Church, Northampton, 390,
Mediaeval, 489 [487H-M, 488c, DJ]; 409
French, 347, 773 [760B]; Georgian, 964; Brno (Czechoslovakia), Tugendhat House,
iron, 964, 989; Italian, 608, 624; many- 1075 [1076]
arched, 239, 489; Palladian, 905, 932 Broach spire, 490 bis, 1259 [4924]
[902D-F, 935D]; Roman, 222, 236, 239 Broadleys, Gill Head, Windermere, 1000
[238B, C, 24IE, 245A, B, 634A]; single- [1001A]
arched, 239; Spanish, 644 [645B]; Swiss, ‘Brochs’ (ancient Scottish forts), 521
1104 [1108a] Broletto, Monza, 608 [330D]
Bridgewater House, London, 996 [994a] Brooklyn (N.Y.), Jan Ditmars House,
Bridgman, Sir John, monument to, Aston 1132
[980F] Bromley-by-Bow Old Palace, London, 885,
Bridlington Priory (Yorks.), mouldings 974 [9778]
[507M]; piers [503K, 504E] Bromley College (Kent), 956
Bridport, Bishop, his tomb at Salisbury, Brooks’s Club, London, 956
509 [472B] Brosse, Salomon de (archt.), 687, 769, 780
Brighton: Royal Pavilion, 876, 948 [947D]; ter, 792
S. Paul, 1008; S. Peter, 987 Brou (France), tomb of Philibert [567F]
rinckmann, J. A. (archt.), 1067, 1104 Broughton Castle (Oxon.), doorway, 974
Brisbane (Australia), S. John’s Anglican [975D]
Cathedral, 1059 Brown, Lancelot (‘Capability’) (landscape
Bristol (Glos.): gardener), 875, 876; 9325 937
Bank of England, 1036 [1039]; Col- Brown stone, 1121, 1143
ston’s House, 469 [464H]; Exchange, Brown University, Providence (R.1.),
955; Mayor’s Chapel [5129]; S. Mary University Hall, 1140
Redcliffe [399G]; S. Peter’s Hospital, 897 Browne’s Hospital, Stamford, 479 [480H-
[894c] K
Bristol Cathedral, 405, 587 Bruant, Libéral (archt.), 799
Chapter House, 405 [413K]; Elder Bruges (Belgium):
Lady Chapel, 393, 405, 469 [413k]; Chapelle du Saint-Sang, 574; Cloth
model of [409A]; monastic foundation of, Hall, 577 [579c]; Guild Houses, 570;
402; plan of [413K]; vaulting of, 398 Hospital, 582 [581D]; Notre Dame, 574;
[399F] Old Chancellery, 831, 832 [833A]; S.
Britannic House, London, 1047 Ursula shrine, 582 [581D]; Town Hall,
British Museum, London, 877, 956 [962D]; 570; 577 [579F] |
Reading Room, 963, 987, 1041 Brunel, I. K. (engineer), 989, 1042
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1286 INDEX

Brunelleschi, Filippo (archt.), 9, 613, 657; Burghley House (Northants.), 881, 964
668, 677-8, 683, 687, 696, 713 [879E, 965A, 969B] ;chimneys, 967
Brunet-Debaines, C. F. (archt.), 1126 Burgos (Spain):
Brunswick (Germany): Gewandhaus, 811 Cartuja, La, 648 [650E]; Casa de
[813B]; old house, 593 [592A]; Town Miranda, 846 [847B]; Cathedral, 640,
Hall, 593 643, 647 bis, 852; 855, 856 [636A-E, 641A,
Brunswick Chapel (now S. Andrews), 65IB, 652B]; Gateway of S. Maria,
Hove, 987 6 44
Brusa (Turkey): Muradiye, 1237; Ulu Burhs, Anglo-Saxon, 437
Jami, 1237; Yesil Jami, 1237; Yilderim Burial towers, Bolivia, 1125, 1131
Jami, 1237 Burlington, Earl of (archt.), 738, 873-4:
Brussels (Belgium): 9325 938, 956 ;
Guild Houses, 577, 832 [8298]; Burma, Buddhist architecture, 1174n
Museum [838F]; Palais de Justice, 1086 BSS & Root (archts.), 1152, 1155
[1090A]; Place Royale, 832 [834B]; Rue 7S
de Turin (No. 12), 1065, 1071-2 [1069D] ; Burnham-on-Crouch (Essex), Royal Corin-
Rue Royale, 832; S. Gudule, 578 [5714- thian Yacht Club, 1035 [1033B]
F]; S. Jacques sur Coudenberg, 832; Burnet, Tait & Lorne (archts.), 1047
Stocklet House, 1072 [1073B]; Town Burton, Decimus (archt.), 877, 956, 963;
Hall, 577 [579E] Jes 987, 1041 bis, 1143
Bruton Parish Church, Williamsburg, 1136 Burton Agnes (Yorks.), gatehouse, 881
[1137E] Bury, Chateau de (France), 773 [77IG,
Brynmawr Rubber Factory, South Wales, H
1048-51 [10534] Bury S. Edmunds (Suffolk): Cathedral,
Bickeburg (Germany), church, 817 402; monastery at, 381
[819A] Bustamente, Bartolomé de (archt.), 851
Buckingham Palace, London, 963, 988 Butchers’ Hall, Haarlem, 835
Buckland House (Berks.), 932 [966L] Butcher’s Row, Shrewsbury, 469 [464F]
Bucklin, James (archt.), 1151 Butter Markets, English Renaissance, 956
Buddhist architecture, 11747, 1180-3 [927B,; D]
Afghanistan, 1174n; Burma, 1174n; Butterfield, William (archt.), 988, 990, 996,
Ceylon, 1183; chaityas, 1178; charac- 1008, IOII, 1059
teristics, 1178-9; China, 1198, 1209; ex- Buttery, 451 [449c]
amples, 1180-3; India, 1167; Indo- Buttress arches, French Romanesque, 348
China, 1174n; Java, 1183; monasteries, [342c]
1178, 1183; shrines, 1178 Buttresses, 1259
Buddhist temples, 1178-9, 1180-3; in _ Byzantine, 279, 283, 284 [285a]; Eng-
China, 1198; in India and Pakistan, lish, 397, 429, 493 quater, 496, 562 (ii)
1180-3; in Japan, 1212, 1213-14; Shinto [497]; flying, see Flying buttresses;
temples compared with, 1218 French Gothic, 562 (i) [530c]; French
Bueno, Pedro (archt.), 1139 Renaissance, 792; French Romanesque,
Buffalo (N.Y.), Guaranty (zow Prudential) 347; German, 587, 817; Gothic in
Building, 1155; Larkin Soap Co. Build- Europe, 178, 367-8, 371, 375, 662 (i);
ing, 1155 [1150B] Italian, 600, 627; Roman, 178, 243 (ii),
“Building Acts’ of ancient Rome, 170 367; Spanish, 643 ter; spur, see Spur
Buildwas (Salop), vaulting ribs [507E] buttress
Bulak (Egypt), Mosque of Sinan Pasha, Buxton (Derbyshire), the Crescent, 948
1238 Buzzi, Carlo (archt.), 604
Buland Darwaza, Fatehpur-Sikri, 1242 Byland Abbey (Yorks.), arch at [507H]
Bullant, Jean (archt.), 766, 773, 774; Byloke, the (hospital), Ghent, 577
779 Byzantine architecture, 8, 209, 271-302,
ee ae Charles (archt.), 1143, 1147 306, 991, 1259
1S baptisteries, 293 [281G]; capitals, 262,
Bunker Hill Monument, Charlestown, 279, 283, 298 [300A-E]; character of,
Mass., 1121 276-9; churches, 257, 272, 280-93, 297,
Bunning, J. B. (archt.), 1041 371; columns, 276, 279, 293, 297, 298
Bunshaft, Gordon (archt.), 1163 [277N]; comparative analysis of, 297-
Ene Giovanni & Bartolommeo 301; domes, 272, 276-9, 280 ter, 289, 290
(archts.),
07 quater, 293 quater [277A, B, E, K, M, 278C,
Burges, William (archt.), 990, 999 281F, 288B, 291A]; Egypt, 19; French
Burgher Watch House, Cape Town, 1058 architecture influenced by, 529, 1080;
[1057] ; mosaic, 279, 280, 289, 293, 301 [290B];
Burghley, Lord, his tomb, Stamford, 974 mouldings, 279, 3013; openings, 279,
[976E] 284, 297-8 ; ornament, 301 [300]; periods
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1287

Byzantine architecture (cont.) Cambridge (England) (cont.)

of, 279; plans, 280, 297; roofs, 298; walls, 974 [908A, B, 971A; 976D]; Peterhouse,
280, 297 473> 878, 974 [976c]; Queens’ College,
473; S. Benet, 489 [387F, P]; S. Cather-
ine’s College, 473; S. John’s College,
Ca d’Oro, Venice, 608 [612C] 469, 473, 882 [461B, 476, 4758]; S.
Cabildo, New Orleans (La.), 1139 [1138] Sepulchre (Round Church), 265, 305, 3903
Cable moulding, 505, 1259 [508G] Senate House, 963 [475B, 960B]; Sidney
Cachemaille-Day & Lander (archts.), 1012 Sussex College, 882; Trinity College,
Caecilia Metella, tomb of, Rome, 217 [220]] 473, 882, 914 [475B, 921F, 922A, 9252];
Caen (France): Abbaye-aux-Dames, 307, Trinity Hall, 473 [475B]; University
344 [338B, c]; Abbaye-aux-Hommes, Library, old, 963 [9628]
307, 344, 347, 348 [342, 345]; houses at, Cambridge (Mass.), 1136; Harvard Uni-
559 [558D]; S. Pierre, 542, 791 [794B] versity, 1139, 1159 [1161B]; Massa-
Caen stone, 326, 380 chusetts Institute of Technology, 1159,
Caerlaverock Castle (Lanarks.), 522 1160 [1253]; Stoughton House, 1143
Caerleon (Monmouth), amphitheatre, 213 [1142D]
Caernarvon Castle, 438 Cambridge Camden Society, 984, 988, 1008
Caerphilly Castle (Glam.), 438 Cames, window, 510, 1259
Cahors Cathedral (Aquitaine), 343 Campanile, 297, 316, 323, 347, IOII, 1259
Caestius, Pyramid of, Rome, 218 [220K] (see also Bell-tower)
Cairo (Egypt): Assisi, 623; Florence, 613, 678 [615A,
Bayt al-Qady, 1230; citadel, 1230, 616A]; Genoa, 688; Milan, 696 [697c];
12385 gateways at, 1230; houses at, 12303 Montepulciano, 702; Pisa, 319 [313A,
Ibn Tuilin Mosque, 1226, 1229-30, 1235 314A4-D]; Ravenna, 262 [264J]; Rome,
[1228A, 1232A-B]; Madrasa (Mosque of 222, 262, 714 [264D]; Siena, 614; Tor-
Sultan Hasan), 1246 [1232c-D]; Mosque cello, 262 [270]; Turin, 695 [694a];
and Mausoleum of Sultan Barkik, 1230, Venice, 607, 608, 732, 737 [611A, DJ;
1251; Mosque of Al Malika Safiyya, Verona, 323 bs, 608 [325A, 628D]; West-
1238; Mosque of Al-Azhar, 1230; minster Cathedral, 1011
Mosque of Al-Hakim, 1230; Mosque of Campbell, Colin (archt.), 738, 871, 873 bis;
Baybars I, 1230; Mosque of Mu’ayyad, 874; 932; 938
1230; Mosque of Muhammad Ali, 1238; Campen, Jacob van (archt.), 831, 835, 836
Mosque of Q2’it Bay, 1230, 1250 [1228B, Campo Santo, Pisa, 319, 614 [313A, 314B,
I231A-B]; Mosque and Mausoleum of 618A]
Sultan Hasan, 1230, 1246 [1232cC-D]; Cancelli, 258 [255K]
Mosque, Mausoleum and Hospital of Candelabra, 653, 846 bis, 862; Early Chris-
Qalawin, 1230; palaces at, 1230 tian [255F]; Etruscan [250Q]; evolution
Caius College, Cambridge, 473, 881 [475B, of baluster from, 687; Italian, 633, 752
895B]; Gate of Honour, 882 [8958] bis [631E, 754C, E, 758C]; Roman [250,
Calah, see Nimroud D, L]; Romanesque, 324
Caledonia Road Free Church, Glasgow, Canephorae, 155, 1259 [157D]
IOII [1013A] Cano, Alonso (archt.), 855
Calidarium, 202, 205 bis, 1259 [203B, 204B, Canonry of S. Ambrogio, Milan, 696
207D] Canons Ashby (Northants.), 882 [879D]
Callicrates (archt.), 119, 131 Canopies, architectural, 509 bis, 510 bis, 1259
Callimachus (bronze-worker), 125, 139 Canterbury (Kent): Falstaff Inn, 483
Cambiaso, Villa Albaro [759G, kK] [484L]; S. Martin, 390; school at, 474;
Cambio, Arnolfo di (archt.-craftsman), 372; walls of, 483
613 bis, 614 bis Canterbury Cathedral, 376 ter, 394, 405-6
Cambridge (England): 418
aerial view of [475B]; Christ’s College, ‘Becket’s Crown’, 406, 469, 509 [4118];
473; Caius College, 473, 881, 882 [475B, Benedictine origin of, 304, 405; Caen
895B]; Clare College, 473, 897 [4753]; stone used in, 380; capitals, 505; Chapter
Colleges, 394, 473-4, 501, 881, 882, 897, House, 405, 406 [4118]; choir of, 382,
914, 963; Corpus Christi College, 473; 397, 405-6, 501, 506 [411B, 418B] ;crypt
Downing College, 963; Emmanuel Col- of, 397, 501 [3994]; doorway, 562 [418a];
lege, 882, 914; Fitzwilliam Museum, East end of, 405; model of [408G]; mon-
1019 [1022c]; Jesus College, 473; King’s astic foundation of, 304, 402; mouldings
College, 473, 510, 878 [4758]; King’s in [507E, 508A]; ornament, 510; Patriar-
College Chapel, 394, 398, 401, 421, 469, chal Chair, 406 [519c]; plan of [4118];
501, 549, 878 [377L 468, 470A; 977M] spire of, 490 [396D]; stained glass, 568
Magdalene College, 473 [475B]; motte (ii); towers of, 394, 405, 406, 562 (ii)
at, 437; Pembroke College, 473, 871, 906, [396D]; transepts in, 405, 559 (ii); Trinity
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1288 INDEX

Canterbury Cathedral (cont.) Carter, John (antiquary), 877

Chapel, 469; vaulting at, 307, 397, 398, Carthusian monasteries, 305, 308, 3823
501, 502 [3994] churches of, 308
Canton (China), Temple of Honan, 1202, Cartouche [824H]
1210 [1204N] Cartuja, La, Burgos, 648 [650E]
Cantoria [750B, 754G]; Monza Cathedral, Caryatids, 155, 156, 1259; Delphi, 1313
633 [630] ’ Erectheion, 131, 133, 137 [134G, 135A;
Cape Town (S. Africa): Burgher Watch 136, 157J]; London, 950
House, 1058 [1057]; Government House, Casa:
1058; Koopman de Wet House, 1058; del Alfefiique, Puebla, 1135 [1134F];
Lutheran Parsonage, 1058 del Ayuntamiento, Barcelona, 644; de
Capel S. Mary (Suffolk), roof at, 437 Ayuntamiento, Seville, 846 [8448]; Bat-
Capella Palatina, Palermo, 324 [327C] tl6, Barcelona, 1072 [1070B]; de las
Capen House, Topsfield (Mass.), 1131 Conchas, Salamanca, 846 [843B]; di
[11334] Diana, Ostia [241c]; del Diavolo, Vicen-
Capilla: del Condestable, Burgos, 640-3 za, 738 [742G]; de los Guzmanes, Leon,
[637A]; Mayor, Granada, 852; Real,Gran- 852 [848B]; Infanta, Saragossa, 8553
ada, 852; de los Reyes, Granada [638D] Lonja, Seville, 852 [850A]; Mila, Barce-
Capitals, 1259: lona, 1072 [1070c]; de Miranda, Burgos,
Byzantine, 298-301 [300A-E] ;Composite 846 [847B]; Polentina, Avila, 846 [8548];
[223G]; Corinthian, 139 [138, 160F]; Pollini, Siena, 702 [692F]; del Popolo,
Doric, 111 [113]; Egyptian, 57 [55]; Como, 1094 [1101A]
Ionic, 125 [126]; Persian, 86 [76B, D]; Casement moulding, 506, 1259
Tuscan, 174 [972B] Cashel (Co. Tipperary): Cathedral, 527;
Capitanio, Palazzo, Vicenza, 738 Cormac’s Chapel, 527 [528A-F, H];
Capitol, the: Richmond (Va.), 1147 [11454]; monastery, 527
Rome, 180, 714, 898 [182A, B, 718]; Casino, Marino, 938, 979 [970E]
Washington, D.C., 1147 [1146A]; Wil- Casino, 672, 1260
liamsburg, Va., 1140 [1141A] Cassiobury Park (Herts.), 906
Capitoline Museum, Rome, 714 [718B, E, F] Casson, Sir Hugh (archt.), 1051
Capra, Villa, Vicenza, 738, 938 bis [742A-C] Cast-iron, 989, 1042; framework, 991, 995,
Caprarola, Cola da (archt.), 702 1047, 1052, 1064; houses, 983; pillars,
Caprarola (Italy): Garden Pavilion, 713 989, 1051, 1054, 1115 [982]
[706c]; Palazzo Farnese, 708, 748 [711] Castel Gandolfo Church, Rome, 726
Caprino, Meo del (archt.), 696 Castello Nuovo, Naples, 624
Capua (Italy), amphitheatre, 213 Castillo de la Mota, Medina del Campo,
Caracalla: Arch of, Tebessa, 225 [224K]; 647 [6465]
Thermae of, Rome, 176, 178, 202, 205-6, Castle:
283, 1156 [177K, L, 203-4] Alcazar, Segovia, 644; Alcazar, Toledo,
Caracas (Venezuela), Edificio Polar, 1163 846, 851, 855 [848A, 854A]; Ashby-de-la-
Carcassonne (France), fortified walls of, Zouch, 444; Beaumaris, 438 [441C];
549 [S51A, B] Bodiam, 443 [439B]; Bolsover, 870, 886;
Carchemish (Syria), 85 Bolton, 443 [441E]; Borthwick, 525;
Cardiff (Glam.): Castle, 999; Castle Coch, Bothwell, 522; Bouillon, 577; Breda, 831,
999 [994D]; City Hall, 1026 [10318]; Law 836; Broughton, 974[975D]; Caernarvon,
Courts, 1026 [1031B]; National Museum 438; Caerlaverock, 522; Caerphilly,
of Wales [1031B] 438; Cardiff, 999; Carisbrooke, 438;
Carignano, Palazzo, Turin, 695 [694B] Chilham, 438; Coch, Cardiff, 999,
Carisbrooke Castle (I. of Wight), 438 [994D]; Colchester, 4383 Conisborough,
Carlisle Cathedral (Cumberland), 304, 402, 438 bis; Conway, 438; Corfe, 438;
406 [4138]; model of [409c] Culzean, 948 [945B]
Carlton House, Pall Mall, London, 949, Deal, 444 [4418]; Dirleton, 522;
989 [1022B] Doune, 525 [520E, F]; Dover, 390;
Carmona Cathedral (Spain), 856 Downton, 948; Dromore, 437 [4414];
Carnac (Brittany), monoliths at, 3 brs Drum, 525 [520C, D]; Falkland, 525;
Carpenter, R. C. (archt.), g90, 1008, IOII Framlingham, 438; Glamis, 525 [5205,
Carpenters Hall, Philadelphia, Pa., 1140 F]; Harlech, 438 [441D]; Hedingham, 438
Carr, John (archt.), 874, 932, 948 [440A, 507B]; Heidelberg, 811, 823 [809,
Carrara Cathedral (Italy), traceried window, 824A, C]; Herstmonceux, 443; Hever, 452
627 [6284] [4544]; Highclere, 996 [993A]; Kenil-
Carrara marble, 666 worth, 443 [442H-M, 507Y]; Launceston,
Carrére, J. M. (archt.), 1151 438; Longford, 881 [965E]; Lowther,
Carson, Pirie, Scott & Co., Chicago, depart- 948; Ludlow, 265; Luscombe, 948
ment store, 1155 Marienburg, 588; Maxstoke, 443;
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1289

Castle (cont.) ; Cathedral (cont.)

Medina del Campo, 647 [646E]; Meissen, 594 [374K, 586A, B]; Cordova, 1233
588; Muiden, 577 [575c]; Orford, 438 [1231Cc]; Coutances, 541 [548D]; Cov-
[4408]; Raby, 443; Raglan, 443-43 entry, 402, ro1z-1g [1018]; Cuenca
Restormel, 438 [441B]; Rochester, 438; [860c]
Rothesay, 522 [520A, B]; S. Angelo, Dol, 541-2, 559 (i); Dublin, 527
Rome, 217; Scotney, 996; Sizergh, West- [413A]; Dunblane, 522; Durham, 371,
morland, 881, 882, 967; Stokesay, 434, 375, 376 bis, 390, 402, 405 ter, 406, 469,
443, 447, 448 [442A-G]; Tattershall, 444 501, 502, 505, 562 (ii) bis, 876 [391,
[440C, 445G-N]; Thornbury, 444; Tre- 408C, 411, 504C, 518w]
maton, 438; Vigevano, 696; Volterra, 623 Edinburgh (S. Giles), 421, 522 [523A];
[625A]; Walmer, 444; Warkworth, 444 El Pilar, 855 [8618] ; Elgin, 522; Ely, 366,
[445A-F]; Windsor, 438 [439A]; Wing- 376 bis, 390, 393 ter, 398, 402, 405, 406,
field, 444; La Zisa, Palermo, 324 [327D] 421, 493 bis, 501 bis, 502, 627, 906 [408A,
Castle Acre Priory (Norfolk), 308 410A, 494E, F,; 495J, K, 504D; J, 511Q;
Castle Ashby (Northants.), 882, 964 [880c- 512N]; Erfurt, 593, 594 [595G, J, 596F];
E] Evreux, 541 [374D, 561B]; Exeter, 376,
Castle Howard (Yorks.), 931, 967 [929]; 390, 398, 402, 406, 469, 501, 505, 506,
Great hall of, 931 [929¢, D] 565 (1i), 643 [399E, 407D, 412E, 503P, Q,
Castle Rising (Norfolk), 438; Trinity Hos- 515L, 517E]
pital, 897 Florence, 607, 613, 624 ter, 627 bis, 664
Castlecoole (Co. Fermanagh), 937 (i), 677 [615A, B, 616]; Freiburg, 588, 593
Castles: bis, 594 [585B, 596D, E]
Belgian and Dutch, 577 bis, 831, 836 Gerona, 639, 643, 648 [649c] ;Glasgow,
[575C]; British, 988, 996, 999 [9934, 522 [413D, 523B]; Gloucester, 308, 376
994D]; English Mediaeval, 384, 393 61s, bis, 382, 390; 3945 397; 398, 401, 402, 405,
394, 437-44, 510, 866; French, 347, 549, 406, 421, 469, 501 bis, 502, 505, 510;
766; German, 363, 388, 809, 811, 823 562 (ii) [399H, 404C, 408D, 41IC];
[824A—C]; Irish, 527 [441A]; Scottish, 522 Granada, 648, 852, 855, 856 [638D, 858Cc];
[520A-H]; Spanish, 644, 647, 846 [646E] Guildford, 402, ro12 [10174]
Castor and Pollux, Temple of, Rome, 187- Halberstadt, 594 [595]; Hereford,
188, 244 (ii) [182, 191] 390, 402, 406, 473, 505, 509, 562 (ii), 876
Catacombs, the, Rome, 198, 217, 258 [409F, 413H, 472J]; Hildesheim, 364;
Cathedral: Jaen, 855, 856 [859c]; Kildare, 327;
Aberdeen, 522; Adelaide Catholic, Kirkwall, 522 :
1059; Aix-la-Chapelle, 280, 348, 357 Laon, 530, 537, 559 (i), 562 (i) [536A, B,
[285E-G, 351K]; Albi, 534, 549, 562 (il), 563G]; Le Mans, 530, 537-8 [536c]; Le
643 bis [550C, D, 561F]; Amiens, 376, 421 Puy, 343; Leon, 639, 644, 648 [652c];
bis, 530, 5345 5415 559 (i), 565 (i) bis, 587; Lerida, 640, 644 [649E]; Lichfield, 376
639 [374C; 535» 560B, 5634]; Angers, 549; bis, 393 bis, 398, 402 bis, 405 bis, 406, 469,
Angouléme, 340, 343, 348 [334 351J]; 490, 501, 562 (ii), $65 (ii), 876 [407E, 413],
Antwerp, 574, 577 [374H; 5724-D]; 419, 495H, 503P]; Lima, 1135; Limburg,
Autun, 343 [310B]; Avila, 640, 653 bis, 587 [362E-G, kK]; Lincoln, 308, 376,
856, 862 [651A, 860E] 393 bis, 398, 402, 406, 493, 502, 506, 509,
Baltimore, Md., 1144; Bangor, 402, 559 (ii), 562 (ii) [396B, 405 ter, 408H, 410F,
405 [412D]; Barcelona, 640, 643, 647, 653 416-17, 508], K, SIIP, 512E]; Liverpool,
[649B, 652A]; Bayeux, 541 [351M, 548B]; 402, 1011-12 [1014A, B]; Llandaff, 402,
Beauvais, 542, 587, 648 [374F, 545]; Bir- 406 [413C]; Liibeck, 358, 588, 593
mingham, 402, 949; Bitonto, 324 [340]; Magdeburg, 593; Mainz, 307, 358
Bourges, 530; 534; 538; 559 (i) bis, 562 (i), [360B]; Malaga, 855, 856; Malines, 574;
643 [5395 548A, 561A]; Bristol, 393, 398, Manchester, 402 bis, 406, 462 (ii) [4128];
402, 405, 469, 587 [399F, 409A, 413K]; Melbourne Anglican, 1059; Messina,
Burgos, 643, 647 bis, 852, 855, 856 624; Mexico City, 1135 [11348]; Milan,
[637A-E, 641A, 651B, 652B] 538, 600, 604, 607, 633, 644 bis, 684, 687
Cahors, 343; Canterbury, see Canter- [374L, 598, 601-2]; Monreale, 319, 324,
bury Cathedral; Carmona, 856; Carlisle, 329, 331 [326B, 328, 332E, F]; Monterrey,
304, 402, 406 [409C, 413B]; Carrara, 627 1135; Monza, 633 [630J]; Munich, 588
[628a]; Chartres, 376, 530, 537, 538, 562 Newcastle, 402, 406; Norwich, 376 bis,
(i) bis, 568, 661 (1) [374E, 540, 56IE, 564B, 390, 402, 405 bis, 421, 505 [407H; 41ID,
567A, D, G]; Chelmsford, 402; Chester, 511s, T]; Notre Dame, Paris, see Notre
308, 376, 402, 406, 469, 653 [409E, 413F]; Dame, Paris; Novara, 329; Noyon, 534,
Chichester, 376, 390, 402, 406, 469, 537» 5413; Orvieto, 603, 614, 627 [619B,
562 (ii) [407F, 412G, 926]; Ciudad Tru- 628c]; Otranto, 324; Oxford, 304, 393,
jillo, 1135; Cologne, 542, 587-8, 593 bis, 401, 421, 502 [400B, 409B, 412C]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1290 INDEX

Cathedral (cont.) Cathedrals:

Paderborn, 587; Palermo, 600, 624 Australian, 644 bis; Belgian and Dutch,
[626A]; Pamplona, 855; Paris, see Notre 573 bis, 574, 577, 578, 582 [S7IA-F;
Dame, Paris; Pavia, 684; Peterborough, 572A-D; 575A, 580B, 839H]; comparative
308, 376, 390, 397 bis, 401, 402, 421, 501, plans of English [410-13]; Continental,
506, 505 [399B, 403A, 408F, 410D, 414, 375» 376, 402 [374]; Early Christian, 262;
494A, B, 503A]; Pisa, 319 [313, 314B, English, 176, 308, 375, 375-6, 393> 401-
630D-G]; Pistoia, 320 [317A]; Poitiers, 423, 559 (ii), 643, 644, 792, 992, IOII,
5495 559 (i); Puebla, 1135 1012 [494—-5, IOIOA, IOI3A, C, IOI4A, B,
Ravello [332G]; Regensburg, 588, 593 IOI7A, 1018]; French, 530 bis, 533 bis,
bis, 594 quater [585C, 586C, 595D, 596L]; 534-45» 549, 559 (i), 643 ter, 791 [547-8,
Rheims, 376, 427, 530, 534, 538, 541; 789B, C]; French compared with Eng-
562 (i), 565 (i) [369E, 543-4]; Ripon, 376, lish, 376, 402, 405, 534, 559, 562 [560-1]
381, 402 bis, 421, 493 [407B, 413G, 494C, German, 537, 817; Gothic, 9, 368, 372;
D]; Rochester, 393, 402, 421, 559 (ii), 375-6 [369F, 374, 3776]; Irish, 402, 527;
562 (ii) [409D, 412H, 503J]; Rouen, 541, Italian, 644 bis; monastic, 402 ter; new
791 [374B, 561C, 789B] foundation, 402; Norman, 309, 381; old
S. Albans, 376, 390, 393; 402, 421, 469, foundation, 402; Scottish, 402, 522;
473 [412F, 472A, 503A, 508U, 512P]; S. Spanish, 639, 640, 643-4, 647 bis, 653;
Denis, France, 791 [789c]; S. Gallen, 852-5 [634A, B, 637, 638, 641, 642B,
Switzerland, 823; S. Gudule, Brussels, 645A; 649-52, 858-61]; Swiss, 823
578 [571A-F]; S. James, Montreal, 1144; Caudebec Church (Normandy), 534 [564D];
5) 1653763) S.) Omer; 376; S.. Patrick, pendant vaulting, 401
Melbourne, 1059; S. Paul’s, London, Caulicoli, 139, 1260 [199D]
see S. Paul’s; S. Peter, Rome, 643; Cavalli, Palazzo, Venice, 608
Salamanca, 640 [643A, 650D, F, Cavetto moulding, 156, 1260 [164D]
652D]; Salisbury, 308, 366, 376 bis, 393, Caythorpe (Lincs.), buttress at [497R]
397, 402 ter, 405 bis, 421, 469, 505, 509 Ceilings:
bis, 559 (ii), 562 (ii) bis, 717, 876 [395, Belgian and Dutch, 836, 840; coffered,
396A, 399C, 407G, 4I0E, 472B, 493 bis, 123, 125, 194, 243 (i, ii), 1261 [165P,
503N, 504F, 5IIN, 560A]; Salzburg, 817; 196B]; coved, 785; English Mediaeval,
Santiago de Compostela, 340, 640, 845, 463, 501 bis, 502, 510 [461C]; English
856 [858B]; Santo Domingo, 1135; Sara- Renaissance, 885, 974 [903A, 977A, BJ;
gossa, 648, 856 [6384]; Segovia, 640, 647 French, 785; Greek, 94, 123; Italian,
[650A, G]; Seville, 643-4, 648, 862 [641C, 802 (i), IIII; peristyle, Greek and
645A]; Siena, 603, 614, 624 bis, 627 [617, Roman, 243; Persian, 66 [764]; Roman,
619A, C]; Siguenza [860A]; Soissons, 537, 229, 2353; Swiss, 1085
538; Southwark, 393, 402, 421 [373c]; Cella, 180, 184, 187 ter, 188 bis, 194 ter,
Southwell, 393, 402 bis, 421, 505, 562 (ii) 262, 799, 1260 [190G, 192A, C, K]
[412K, 497C, 504H, 508N]; Speyer, 307, Cellar, English Mediaeval, 447
344, 358, 363 [359C, D]; Strasbourg, 542 Cellini, Benvenuto (metal worker), 657, 762
[362S, 374G, 547]; Syracuse, 262 [263c] Cells, monastic, 308
Toledo, 640, 643, 647 [634B, 638B, Celtic architecture, 525
642B, 649D]; Torcello, 262 [268, 270]; Cenotaphs: Egyptian, 39; Roman, 221;
Tournai, 573, 574 [580B]; Trani [332]; Whitehall, London, 1026 [1032c]
Trier, 358 [361A, 364]; Troyes, 541, 562 Centennial Exposition, Philadelphia, 1127
(i) bts [548c]; Truro, 402, rorz [1010a] Centennial Hall, Breslau, 1066, 1093 [1097]
Ulm, 588, 593, 594 [586D]; Utrecht, Central Hall, Westminster New Palace,
573 574, 582 [575A, 839H]; Valencia, 1020
644, 647; Valladolid, 855 [859D]; Vienna, Central Station, Newcastle-upon-Tyne,
588, 593 ter [374], 591]; Vienne, 347 1036
Wakefield, 402; Wells, 308, 393 bis, Ceres, Temple of, see Demeter
398, 402 bis, 405 bis, 421, 501, 562 (ii), Cerisy-la-Forét, nave pier at [350N]
565 (ii) [377], 403B, 407A, 412], 508R, Cerro Piloto Housing Estate, Venezuela,
512G]; Westminster (R.C.), 279, 992, TI59
torr [1013A, C]; Winchester, 309, 376 Certosa, la (monastery): Chiaravalle, 603,
bis, 390, 394 bis, 398, 402, 421, 469, 501, 627 [629D]; Florence, 305; Pavia, 305,
510, 661 (i), 648 [408E, 410C, 420, 4951, 600, 603, 604, 624, 684, 751 [617D-F,
M, 503C, G]; Worcester, 376, 402, 405, 686A]
423, 469, 510 [404A, B, 407C, 41IA, 503K]; Cerveteri (Italy), necropolis at, 183
Worms, 358, 363 [356]; York, 376, 381, Cesi, Pietro, monument to, Narni [7541]
393 bis, 394, 402 bis, 405, 423, 469, 501, Ch’i Nien Tien, Peking, 1201, 1202 [1204P]
509 Se 526 (ii) [408B, 410B, 487G, 512H, Chaines, 769, 770, 1260
517D Chaityas, 1178, 1179, I180, 1192
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1291
Chalgrin, Jean Francis (archt.), 770, 791,792 Chapel (cont.)
Challuau, Chateau de (France), 774 tinari, Milan, 678; of the Pyx, West-
Chalons-sur-Marne, Notre Dame [567c] minster, 397, 423 [424D]; Rathaus,
‘Chalukyan’ architecture, 1179 Prague, 594 [§92H]; Rosslyn (Midloth-
Chambers, Sir William (archt.), 876 bis, ian), 522 [524A, B]
938, 956, 963, 979, 1205; books by, 876; S. Dunstan’s, S. Paul’s Cathedral, 906
Classic Orders and, 175, 656, 973 [972]; [910D]; S. Etheldreda, Holborn, London,
on Chinese pagodas, 1208 393, 502; S. George’s, Windsor, 381,
Chambiges, Pierre (archt.), 774 394, 401, 469, 493, 5OI, 502, 662 (i)
Chambord, Chateau de, 773 [763B, 772, [377K, 471G—-K, 499M]; S. John’s College,
803C, F, H] Cambridge, 469, 473 [476]; S. John’s,
Chambre des Députés, Paris, 770, 791 Tower of London, see S. John’s Chapel;
[7944] S. Piat, Tournai, 574 [581G]; S. Sindone,
Chamfer, 506, 662 (i), 1260 Turin, 691 [693E]; S. Stephen’s, West-
Champanir (India), Jami Masjid, 1241 minster, 469, 542 [560c]; Santiago, Tole-
Champneys, Basil (archt.), 992, 1026 do, 643 [638B]; Sistine, Rome, 633, 687,
Champs-Elysées Theatre, Paris, 1093 713, 752 [754G]; Trinity, Canterbury,
[I106B] 469; Trinity College, Oxford, 914 [922B];
Chancel, 258, 261, 308 [431C] U.S. Military Academy, West Point
Chancellery, Bruges, 831, 832 [8334] (N.Y.), 1151 [1149B]; Versailles Palace,
Chandravati (India), Hindu temple, 1187 6
709
Chantilly (France), The Chatelet, 774 Chapelle, La Sainte, Paris, 542 [546A, B,
[764A] 560D, 566B]
Chantmarle (Dorset), doorway at [461K] Chapelle du Saint-Sang, Bruges, 574
Chantry Chapels, 469, 510 bis [472] Chapels, 366, 1260
Abbot Islip’s, Westminster, 473 Belgian and Dutch, 574, 643; Byzan-
[472c]; Canterbury, 510; Henry V’s, tine, 287; cathedral, 340, 376, 405, 406
Westminster, 427 [425G]; Henry VII’s, bis, 5593; chantry, 423, 427, 469-73, 510
see Henry VII’s Chapel; Ramryge, S. bis [420], 425G, 472]; English Mediaeval,
Albans, 473 [472A]; Tewkesbury Abbey, 448, 469-73, 559 (ii) [446F, G, L-N,
4733; Worcester Cathedral, 423, 473, 510 449G, H, 468, 470-1]; French, 534, 537,
[472D-F]; Wykeham’s, Winchester, 510 541, 559 (1), 791; 799 [544A, C]; Lady,
[420] 366, 376, 393, 469, 1012, 1019 [413, 419A,
Chapel: C, D]; Spanish, 640, 643, 644, 647
Arena, Padua, 633 [6108]; Beau- Chapter house, 308, 405, 562, 1260
champ, Warwick, 394, 469 [4708]; Bristol, 405 [413K]; Canterbury, 405,
Charterhouse, 878, 974 [976B]; Cheisea 406 [411B]; Durham, 405 [411]; Glas-
Hospital, 914 [923c]; Colleoni, Bergamo, gow, 522; Lincoln, 405, 406 [396B, 410F,
687 [689A]; Compton Wynyates, 459, 469 416A, 497Q]; Salisbury, 393, 405, 421
[458D]; Cormac’s, Cashel, 527 [528A-F, [396A, 410E, 415G]; Southwell, 393, 421;
H]; Elder Lady, Bristol, 393, 405, 469 Wells, 393, 405, 421 [377], 412], 512G];
[413K]; Eton College, 469 [471D-F, 4774]; Westminster Abbey, 405, 423 [422c,
Henry VII’s, Westminster, 393, 394, 424D, 426A]; Worcester, 405 [411A]
398, 401, 427, 469, 490, 493 bis, 501, Charlecote (Warwicks.), 881 bis
509-10, 881 [377H; 424D, 426, 428, 497P; Charleston (S.C.): County Record Office,
508W, 517E; K] 1148; Miles Brewton House, 1132; S.
Hétel de Cluny, Paris, 559 [558H]; Ight- Michael’s Church, 1136 [1137B]
ham Mote, 451 [453B]; Keble College Charlestown (Mass.), Bunker Hill Monu-
[ro10c]; King’s, Boston (Mass.), 1136 ment, L121
[1137D]; King’s College, Cambridge, Charlottesville (Va.): Monticello, 1143,
394, 398, 401, 421, 469, 501, 549, 878 1148 [1141B]; University of Virginia, 1148
[377L, 468, 470A, 977M]; Lambeth Charlton House (Kent), 886 [894D]
Palace, 393; Lancing College, 1011 Charlton House (Wilts.), 886
[1010B]; Marlborough, S. James’s Palace, Charney-Basset (Berks.), manor house at,
905; Medici, Florence, 713-14 [716A]; 448 [446E-G, 455c] :
Merton College, Oxford, 469, 493 [4823] Charterhouse, the, London, 305, 885 bis;
Nine Altars’, Durham, 406, 469, 559 aerial view [889B]; chapel screen, 878,
(ii) [411E]; Nine Altars’, Fountains, 429, 974 [9768] :
469; Norrey [563J]; Notre Dame, Ron- Charterhouse School, Godalming, War
champ, 1085 [10844]; Palatine, Palermo, Memorial Chapel, 1012 [1016B]
324; Pazzi, Florence, 678, 683, 696 Chartres (France), timber houses, 559
[676A-F] ;Pembroke College, Cambridge, Chartres Cathedral, 376, 530, 537, 538
871, 906, 914 [908A, B]; Pilgrim’s, 40
Houghton-le-Dale, 469 [471A-C]; Por- aisles, 562 (i) [561E]; circular window,
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1292 INDEX

Chartres Cathedral (cont.) 7 : Chesterfield House, London, 942%

562 (i) [540A]; doorways, 562 (i), 565 (i) Chevening Place (Kent), 905 bis, 937, 964
[566D, E, 567A, D, E, G]; flying buttresses, [966H]
538 [564B]; model of [374]; plan of Chevet, 375, 376, 405, 1260 [425D]; Belgian
[561E]; sculpture, 565 (i) [567J]; stained and Dutch, 573, 574, 578; French, 343,
glass, 568 (i); towers, 661 (1) 5345 538, 541 bis, 559 (1) [531C, 544A, C]3
Chastillon, Claude (archt.), 785 German, 588, 593; Spanish, 640 bis, 643
Chastleton House (Oxon.), 886, 964 ter
Chateau: ‘ Chevron, 276, 309, 505 bis, 1260 [508c]
d’Amboise, 549 [553]; d’Ancy-le- Chiaravalle (Italy), la Certosa, 603, 627;
Franc, 774; d’Azay-le-Rideau, 773-4 687 [629D]
[760A]; de Balleroy, 780 [782B]; de Chicago:
Blerancourt, 780; de Blois, 555, 770, 780, Auditorium Building, 1152 [1150E];
802 (ii) [558E, 763A, 771A-F]; de Bury, 773 Gage Building, 1155 [1153B]; Home In-
[771G, H]; de Challuau, 774; de Cham- surance Co. Office Building, 1152; Illinois
bord, 773 [763B, 772, 803C, F, H]; de Institute of Technology, 1159, 1160
Chateaudun, 347, 555; Chatelet, Chan- [1157B]; Lake Shore Drive, Nos. 845-60,
tilly, 774 [764A]; de Chenonceaux, 773 1159 [1158]; Marshall Field Wholesale
[760B, 803G]; des Comtes, 577; de Cou- Warehouse, 1152 [1170]; Monadnock
lommiers, 780; d’Ecouen, 774; Gaillard, Building, 1155 [1153c]; Montauk Build-
Les Andelys, 549; de Josselin (Brittany), ing, 1152; North Michigan Avenue, No.
555 [556A]; de la Muette, 774; de Mai- 333, 1156; Palmolive Building, 1156;
sons, 780 [781A-D]; d’O, Mortrée, 555 Promontory Apartments, 1159; Reliance
[558A]; de Pierrefonds, 549 [552c]; de Building, 1155 [1153D]; Robie House,
Richelieu, 780; de S. Germain-en-Laye, 1144 [1142E]; Schlesinger Mayer Store,
774; de Vaux-le-Vicomte, 780; de Ver- 1155 [1150D]; Second Leiter Building,
neuil-sur-Oise, 774; de Vitré, 791 [793C] 11§5 [1150C]; Tacoma Building, 1152;
Chateaudun (France), Chateau de, 347, 555 Tribune Tower, 1156; World’s Colum-
Chateaux, 533, 549, 555; Belgian and bian Exposition (1893), 1127
Dutch, 577; French, 766, 770-4, 780, Chichen Itza (Mexico), Ball Court and Ob-
785, 791, 801 (ii) [763, 781-2, 793C] servatory, 1128
ChAatelet, Chantilly, 774 [764A] Chichester (Sussex): Market Cross, 483
Chatri, 1242, 1245, 1246, 1260 [1243A, B] [486c]; S. Mary’s Hospital, 479 [478E-G];
Chatsworth House (Derbyshire), 872, 967; Swan (‘Dodo’) House, 937, 967 [940A];
Conservatory, 1041 [1040A] walls of, 489
Chaucer, Geoffrey, his tomb at West- Chichester Cathedral, 376, 390, 406 [926]
minster, 473 [472K] aisles, 406, 462 (ii) [412G]; Bell-tower,
Cheadle (Staffordshire), S. Giles, 1008 406 [412G]; Lady Chapel, 469 [412G];
[1009] model of [407F] ;plan of [412G]
Chedworth (Glos.), Roman remains at, 383 Chiddingstone (Kent), Tudor houses. at,
Chelmsford Cathedral (Essex), 402 469 [4648]
Chelsea (London): Crosby Hall, 394; Hans Chiericati, Palazzo, Vicenza, 738
Town, 949; Old Swan House, 999 Chih-li (China), Nan ta Pagoda, Fang
[998D]; S. Luke, 955 [954c] Shan, 1205; Pei t’a Pagoda, Fang Shan,
Chelsea Hospital, London, 914 [923B, C, 1205
9251] Chih] Duktaran, tomb of, Damghan, 1235
Choke College (Gloucestershire), 985 Chihil Sutun, Isfahan, 1237
Chenonceaux, Chateau de, 773 [760B, 803G] Chilham Castle (Kent), 438
Cheops, Great Pyramid of, Gizeh, 17, Chimney-pieces:
33-4 [12, 314, 32A-E] Belgian and Dutch, 578, 840 [58opD, E,
Chephren: Great Sphinx of, 18, 35 [12, 838F, K]; English Mediaeval, 510 [445G,
31A]; Pyramid of, Gizeh, 17, 34-5, 50 J, 461A]; English Renaissance, 882, 886,
[314]; Valley Building of, 26, 34-5, 50 973 bis, 974 [887, 892E, 904B, 975F;
[24L, 314] 980H, K]; French, 555, 773, 780, 785
Chepstow (Mon.), walls of, 489 Ee 771]; Italian, 752, 802 (i) [749H,
Chermayeff, Serge (archt.), 995, 1007, 1048 757
Chertsey Bridge (Surrey), 964 Chimney stacks: British, 996, 1000 ter; ~
Chester: gateways of, 225 [487A]; Roman French, 773 bis, 780, 801 (ii) [771D, 772B,
buildings at, 389; towers, 489 [487B, c]; E]; German, 807; Italian, 801 (i)
walls of, 489 [487A-C] Chimneys:
Chester Cathedral, 308, 376, 406, 653; Burghley House, 967 [969B]; English
Lady Chapel, 469 [413F] ; model of [409k]; Renaissance, 967 bis, 973 [891A]; Kirby
monastic foundation of, 402; plan of Hall, 967 [8884] ;Penshurst Place [449p] ;
[413F] S. Gilles, 347 [350B]; Stokesay Castle
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1293

Chimneys (cont.) Church of the Apostles: Athens, 290 [2878];

[442G]; Tattershall Castle, 510 [4456, J]; Cologne, 358, 363 bis [355]; Constan-
Tudor, 452, 459, 506 [460c, 461F]; tinople, 284, 289
Venetian, 667 Church of the Assumption, Montreal, 1144
Chinese architecture, 1197-1210 Church of the Cordeliers, ‘Toulouse,
analysis, 1208-9; bridges, 1206; 549
character of, 1201-2; columns, 1208-9; Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem,
Great Wall, 1207; houses, 1206; modern 262, 265, 308 [260E-G]
buildings, 1207; ornament, 1209; pago- Church of the Nativity, Bethlehem, 262
das, 1202-5; pai-lous, 1205; palaces, [260A-D]
1206; roofs, 1208; temples, 1202; tombs, Church of the Rosario, Recife, 1136
1205-6; walls, 1208 Church of Sao Francisco, Pampulha, 1160
Chinese People’s . . . Assembly Hall, 1207 [r161c]
Chippendale, Thomas (cabinet-maker), Church of the Sorbonne, Paris, 792
979 [7968]
Chipping Campden (Glos.): Hospital, 897; Church of the Theotokos, Constantinople,
Market Hall, 897; school at, 474 290
Chiswick House (Middlesex), 738, 938, 964 Church of the Val de Grace, Paris, 792
[9368] [7974]
Chitor (India), commemorative towers, Churches:
I188 abbey, see Abbey Church; apse at
Chocolate Factory, Noisiel-sur-Marne, both ends, 358 67s, 363; basilican, see
1064, 1103 [1105B] Basilican churches; Byzantine, 257, 272,
Choir stalls: English Mediaeval, 509, 519 673, 280-93; circular, 262, 265, 305,
[517D; F, G]; German, 594 [595E, 596F; 308, 381, 390; Classical, 878; collegiate,
H]; Italian, 633 [63 1D, F] 402; ‘Commissioner’, 878, 955, 984, 9873
Choirs, 309, 323 [255K] constructive principle of Mediaeval
Belgian and Dutch, 574 ter, 5783 [369c]; cruciform plan of, 258, 309, 319,
British, 1012; English cathedrals’, 402 375; East Anglian, 490, 493, 502, 510;
[404B, C]; French cathedrals’ [531A]; Early Christian, 8, 187, 254, 257-8, 258—
German cathedrals’, 594 [595E, J]; 259, 272 [252, 255-6]; English Mediae-
Gothic, 357, 358, 375 [2855]; Spanish, val, 275, 390, 489-90 [435, 491, 492];
640 bis, 643 bis, 644, 647; 851, 855 bis French Gothic, 530, 542; French
Cholula (Mexico), Great Pyramid, 1128 Romanesque, 188, 340
Choragic monument of Lysicrates, Athens, Georgian, 949-55 ; Gothic, 9, 878, 1144;
139-40, 152, 155, 156, 244 (i); 1152 ‘hall’, 358, 393, 394, 405, 587 bis, 588,
[138G, I4IA—E, I60E, = 53E, 165K] 593, 594, 1264 [482A]; Irish, 501, 525-7
Chorley Wood (Hertfordshire), The Or- [526]; iron, 877, 950; Italian Gothic, 603;
chard, 1000 [10024] Jesuit, 659, 792, 817; Lombard, 320;
Christ Church: parish, 376, 385, 402, 430, 509, 522, 5775
Cambridge (Mass.), 1138; Dublin 647 [435]; Portuguese, 644; Renaissance,
[413A]—see also Dublin Cathedral; New- 213; Rhenish, 501; Romanesque, 309,
gate St., London, 914 [916], 9258]; Phila- 324, 542; Rome’s, 673-4; Scottish, 522
ee 1139; Spitalfields, London, 949 [523c]; Spanish Mediaeval, 643-4;
951C Syrian, 262, 265 [260], M]; temples com-
Christ Church, Oxford, 473; Tom Tower, pared with, 307; triapsal, 358 bis, 363,
914 [9258]; vaulted staircase at, 394 593; two-storeyed, 363; Venice’s, 674,
[400A]; see also Oxford Cathedral 677; Wren’s, 871-2, 873, 913-14
Christ church (Old North), Boston, Mass., Churchill Gardens Development, Pimlico,
1136 1008
Chris? s College, Cambridge, 473 Churriguera, Alberto (archt.), 855
Christ’s Hospital: Abingdon, 479; London, Churriguera, José de (archt.), 845, 855
474, 885 Churrigueresque style, 845, 852, 855, 862,
Christchurch (Hants.), Norman manor 1126
house, 447 [446A] : igh Ciborium, see Baldachino
Christianity, events influencing British Cimabue (Giovanni Gualtiere) (painter),
architecture, ce introduction of, 8, 623, 752 ;
19, 2533 2545 336, 383 Cimborio, 640, 644 bis, 647, 648, 852, 855,
Church-—Brampton (Derbyshire), buttress 1260 [6378]
[4976] Circe, 371 [373E]
Charen Building Act (1818), 878, 955 Circular churches, 262, 265, 305, 308; Eng-
bis lish, 381, 390
Church of the Annunciation, Old Quebec Circular temples, Roman, 194-201, 293
Street, London, 1012 [10164] Circus, the, Bath, 874, 948 [9464]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1294 INDEX

Circus: of Flaminius, Rome, 215; of Max- Cloisters (cont.)

entius, Rome, 215 [216A]; Maximus, [328B, 332E, F]; monastic, 308; S. Gio-
Rome, 215 [216B-D]; of Nero, Rome, 215, vanni in Laterano, Rome, 320, 329; S.
261 Juan de los Reyes, Toledo, 644 [638c];
Circuses, Roman, 148, 170, 215 S. Paolo fuori le Mura, Rome, 320, 329
Cirencester (Glos.): Church, ‘Trinity [330H]; S. Trophime, Arles, 347 [350F];
Chapel roof [4358]; Guildhall, 483 Segovia Cathedral, 640 [650A]; Siguenza
[485D] Cathedral [860A]; Toledo Cathedral, 640
Cistercian monasteries, 304, 308, 336; Clonmacnoise (Co. Offaly), 7 churches at,
churches of, 308, 644; English, 382, 527
29 Close, cathedral, 376, 402
Citadel at: Cairo, 1230, 1238; Mycenae Cloth Hall: Bruges, 577 [579c]; Leyden,
[99a]; Sinjerli, 85 [72F, G]; Tiryns, 98, 8353; Ypres [576B]
ror [99c] Clubs, Georgian, 956
Citeaux (Burgundy), monastery at, 304 Cluniac monasteries, 304, 308, 336
City Art Gallery, Manchester, 877, 956 Cluny (France), Abbey of, 304, 343, 3713
[1022a] houses at, 347; 559
City Hall: Cardiff, 1026 [1031B]; Phila- Cluny, Hotel de, Paris, 559 [557B, 558H]
delphia, Pa., 1151 [1146B]; Stockholm, Clymping Church (Sussex) [491]]
1068, 1093 [1096]; Swansea, 1035 ‘Clytemnestra, Tomb of’, Mycenae, 102
[1032c]; Toronto, 1151 Cnidian treasury, Delphi, 131
City Library, Stockholm, 1094 [10994] Cnidos (Asia Minor): Lion Tomb, 148, 151
City of London School, 474 [150A-F] ; Sarcophagus, 151 [150]]
City Prison (The Tombs), New York, 1148 Cnossus (Crete), see Knossos
Ciudad Trujillo Cathedral (Dominican Coal Exchange, Lower Thames Street,
Republic), 1135 London, 1041 [1038B]
Civic Centre, Cardiff, 1026 [1031B] Coalpitheath (Glos.), S. Saviour’s Vicar-
Cividale (Italy), marble doors at, 265 age, 996 [994E]
Clam Gallas Palace, Prague, 812 Coates, Wells (archt.), 995
Clare church (Suffolk), door of [498c-E] Cobham (Kent): almshouses, 479 [480A-c];
Clare College, Cambridge, 473, 897 [475B] brasses in, 479, 509 [518M]; piscina at
Clarendon Building, Oxford, 963 [4754] [515H]; roof at, 434 [480c]
Claudian Aqueduct, see Aqueducts, Roman Coch, Castle, Cardiff, 999 [994D]
Claustra, 1080, 1260 Cockerell, Prof. C. R. (archt.), 878, 987,
Claverton Manor (Somerset), rain-water I0I9, 1020 bis, 1036; restorations by,
head, 974 [969E] 119 [149]; Wren’s buildings, panorama
Clayton, A. B. (archt.), 955
Clear-story, 1260 Giron
ockerell, S. Seen
P. (archt.),948, 11
Early Christian, 262, 266; Egyptian, 43 Coeberger, Wenzel aes 83 ml
[408]; English, 397, 398, 493 bis; Ger- Coemeteria, 217, 1260
man, 594; Gothic, 265, 375; Greek Coffee-houses, 956
[122]]; Italian, 607, 613, 614 bis; Roman, Coffers (see also Lacunaria), 121, 123, 155,
201, 205; Romanesque, 323, 340, 347; 243 (i), 1261 [165P, 224F]; Renaissance,
348, 363 261 [676D, 759G]; Roman, 179, 187, 194,
Cleopatra’s Needle, London, 50 198, 205 [19 1B]
Clermont-Ferrand (Auvergne), Notre Cogges Church (Oxon.), mouldings at [508Q]
Dame du Port, 340, 343 Coggeshall (Essex), ‘the Paycocke’s’, 469
Clermont Monastery (Auvergne), 305 [464D]
Cley (Norfolk), S. John’s, 506 [498F-L] Colchester (Essex): Castle, 438; gateways
Clifton College, near Bristol, 985 of, 225; Town Hall, 1026 [1029¢C]; walls
Cliveden (Buckinghamshire), 996 [993B] of, 383, 483
Cloaca Maxima, Rome, 180 [181A] Colchester Castle (Essex), 438
Clock Tower: King’s Cross Station, 1042; Colegio de San Ignacio (now Vizcainas),
Westminster New Palace, 1020 Mexico City, 1139
Cloisters, 309, 363, 1260 [410-13] Coleshill Church (Warwicks.), font at [515A]
Aschaffenburg [362P]; Avila Cathe- Coleshill House (Berks.), 905 bis, 937, 964
dral, 640; Barcelona Cathedral, 643 [903B, C, 966c]
[652A]; Belem Monastery, Portugal, 644; Collar-braced roofs, 434 [435D]
College of S. Gregorio, Valladolid [650H] ; “Collar-purlin’, 433 bis, 448
English Mediaeval, 376, 401, 402, 559 Collége des Quatre Nations, Paris, 785
(ii) [410A, C-F, 411, 412C, E-J]; French, College of: Matrons, Salisbury, 956 [958B]5
559 (i); German, 588 [597]; Italian, 614 S. Gregorio, Valladolid, 643, 647, 846
[621B, 698C, 700B, 753E]; Lerida, 640, [641B, 650H]; San Francisco Javier,
644; Monreale Cathedral, 324, 331 Sucre, 1136
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1295

Colleges, 866 Columns and piers (cont.)

Cambridge, 394, 473, 501, 881, 882, European Renaissance, 662 (ii); Euro-
897; 914, 9633; Elizabethan, 882; English pean Romanesque, 309 bis; French
Mediaeval, 394, 473; Jacobean, 886, 897; Gothic, 565 (i); French Renaissance, 779,
London, 877; Oxford, 394, 473, 501, 881, 780, 801-2 (ii); French Romanesque,
882, 897, 914, 963 347, 348; German Gothic, 594; German
Collegiate churches, 381, 402 bis Renaissance, 818, 823; German Roman-
Collegiate mosques, see Madrasa esque, 363-4 [362]; Greek, 94, 97-8, 152;
Collegio Romano, Rome, 687 155, 243 (i) [160A, C, E, J]; hexagonal, 218
Colleoni Chapel, Bergamo, 687 [689a] Indian, 1195; Ionic, 7, 85, 121, 125,
Colleoni Monument, Venice, 752 [606a, 128, 129, I3I, 133, 1375 149; 233, 7925
7576] 811, 835, 846, 851 [160C, D, 972D]; Italian
Cologne (Germany): Gothic, 627; Italian Renaissance, 751,
Church of the Apostles, 358, 363 bis 801-2 (i); Italian Romanesque, 319, 320,
[355]; Opera House, 1086 [10g90B]; S. 324, 329; Japanese, 1219-20; marble,
Columba [362Q]; S. Cunibert, 358; S. 279, 293; Muslim, 1249 [1231D, 1248];
Gereon, 265, 587 [360A, Cc, 585A]; S. octagonal, 39, 648; Osiris, 44 bis, 57
Maria im Capitol, 358; S. Martin, 358 [55H]; Persian, 66, 78, 86 [76B, D]; Re-
[359A,; B]; Steel Church, Presse, 1085 naissance, 662 (ii); Roman, 174, 213, 227,
[1084c]; Town Hall, 593 [813E] 243 (ii) [160B, D, F, 165L-T]; rostral, 227
Cologne Cathedral, 542, 587-8, 640 [228G]; Spanish, 644, 648, 856, 1230;
[586a, B] Tuscan, 174, 225, 812 [972B]
chevet at, 593; doorway, 593 [586a]; Comacine masters, the, 319
model of [374K]; nave, 587, 588 [586B]; Commercial and industrial buildings, r9th-
roof pinnacles, 5943 spire of, 593; vault- zoth centuries : America, 1160-3; British,
ing of, 594 989, 991 bis, 995, 1037-51, 1054 [982];
Colonial phase in America, 1126 Continental European, 1103-11, I112
Colonnade Row, New York, 1143 ‘Commissioner’ churches, 878, 955, 984,
Colonnades, 93, 107, I5I, 174, 1261 [200A]; 987
Greek and Roman compared, 243 Como (Italy), Casa del Popolo, 1094
Colosseum, Rome, 174, 210-13, 229, 243, [r101A]; S. Abbondio, 329 [330F]
751 [165L,; Q, R; S,; 166, 211, 212] Comparison of:
Colossi of Memnon, Thebes, 16, 18, 43 Byzantine and classical ornament, 301 ;
Colour: in French and English Gothic, 568; churches and temples, 307; Continental
in Greek architecture, 96, 123, 1583 in and English cathedrals, 375, 376, 402,
Italian architecture, 600, 603-4; in 405 [374]; domes [658]; Early Christian
Gothic and Renaissance, 664; in Roman and Byzantine churches, 297; English
architecture, 179 Mediaeval buttresses [497]; English
Colston’s House, Bristol, 469 [464] Mediaeval doorways [498]; Gothic and
Columbaria, 217 [220Q] Renaissance architecture, 660-4; Greek
Column of: Antoninus Pius, Rome, 227; and Egyptian temples, 7, 107, 1523
Marcus Aurelius, Rome, 227 [228H-N]; Greek and Roman, 94, 156, 175, 180, 240,
Trajan, Rome, 184, 201, 227, 719 [182B, 243-4, 247-8 [159, 160, 164, 165]; Greek
200B, 228A-F] and Roman building materials, 168;
Columns and piers: : Italian and French, 799-802 ;Roman and
Aegean, 93, 102, 243 (i) [99F] Gothic, 179, 367-8 [369A, B]; Roman and
American, 1167; Belgian and Dutch, 578, Mediaeval vaulting, 397; Roman and
835, 836 [838]]; British, 1054-5; Bud- Romanesque, 306-7; S. Paul’s and S.
dhist, 1195; Byzantine, 276, 279, 283, Peter’s building history, 913; types of
293, 297; 298 [277N]; cast iron, 1054-5, arch [1256]
1115; Chinese, 1208-9 [1204G, M, N]3 Compiégne (France), Hotel de Ville, 555
Composite, 221, 222 bis, 792, 811, 835 [554¢] |
[972F]; Continental European, 1115-16; Compluvium, 233
Corinthian, 7, 131, 137-9; 140, 187, 194 Composite order, 9, 96, 174, 175, 244, 1261
ter, 198, 218, 221, 222, 230, 262, 779, 792, [972]; capitals, 206 [207A]; columns, 221,
799, 811, 812, 817, 846 [160E, F, 972E]; 222 bis, 792, 811, 835; pilasters, 221, 774;
Doric, 7, III, 115, 140, 143, 148, I5I; 812 ter
155, 2135 7925 812, 851 bis [160A, B, 972A; Compton Wynyates (Warwicks.), 394, 459
c [455B, 458A—D]; Chapel, 459, 469 [458D];
Early Christian, 253, 257, 262, 265-6 gatehouse, 881 [458c]; roof of, 502; walls
297; Egyptian, 23, 53-7 [55]; English of, 497; windows of, 501
Mediaeval, 502-5, 565 (ii) [503]; English Comtes, Chateau des, Ghent, 577
Renaissance, 973 [970, 972]; Etruscan, Concord, Temple of: Agrigentum, 112;
174, 180; European Gothic, 375, 662 (i); Rome, 187 [182B]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1296 INDEX

Concrete: Roman use of, 168, 175, 176, Continental European architecture (cont.)
179, 187, 198, 235, 247 (ii), 276 [177]] commercial buildings, 1103-11; mould-
Confessio, 258, 261 bis ings, I116; openings, 1114; ornament,
Confucianism, 1198-9 1065, 1116; periods of, 1063-71; plans,
Confucius, Temple of, Peking, 1201, 1202 II1I-12; public buildings, 1085-1103;
[1204P] roofs, 1114-15; vaulting, 1115; walls,
Congleton (Cheshire), Town Hall, 1025 III2-14
[1029B] Convent of: S. Thomas, Avila [651c]; S.
Congregational (‘Friday’) mosque, 1235, Werburgh, Chester, 406
1241, 1245 Convocation Room, Oxford, throne and
Conique, José (archt.), 1139 stalls, 974 [976F]
Conisborough Castle (Yorks.), 438 67s; fire- Cook Street (No. 16), Liverpool
place in [519N] Cooley, Thomas (archt.), 876, 955
Conjeeveram (India), Hindu temple, 1191 Coombe Bisset (Wilts.), pack-horse bridge,
Connecticut Hall, Yale University, 1140 489 [488c] =
Connell, A. D. (archt.), 995, 1007 Coombe Down, Bath (Somerset), S. Wini-
Connelly’s Tavern, Nachez, Mississippi, fred’s Quarry, 1000
1132 Coonley House, Riverside (Ill.), 1144
Conoidal vaulting, 393, 398-401, 427-9, Copenhagen (Denmark): Grundvig
502, 565 (ii), 1261 [399D,
F, H, 426B-F, Church, 1080 [1082p]; Jespersen Office
428] see also Fan vaulting Block, «111 [1117]; Thorwaldsen
Conradsburg Abbey Church (Germany), Museum, 1085; Town Hall, 1086 [1091B]
capitals in [362A, B, D] Copings, 578, 1261
Conservatory: Carlton House, London, 989 Copland, A. (archt.), 956
[1022B]; Chatsworth, 1041 [1040A] Cora (Italy), Temple of Hercules at, 112,
Consiglio, Palazzo del, Verona, 664 (ii) 244 (ii) [160B]
Consoles, 187, 726, 751, 913, 996, I019, Corbel table, 348, 493, 1261 [332H, 351E]
1261 [165P, I91B, 804E]; French and Corbels, 1261; Aegean, 93; Early Christian,
Italian compared, 801, 802; Greek and 265; English Mediaeval, 509 bis [512N—
Roman compared, 247 Q]; French, 565 (i); Greek, 240 (i); Rom-
Constantia, tomb of, Rome, 297 anesque, 309; Spanish, 647, 856
Constantine: Corbett, H. W. (archt.), 1156
Arch of, Rome, 222 [224H]; Baptistery ‘Corbie’ gables, 525
of, Rome, 293, 323 [295E-G]; Basilica of, Cordova (Spain): bracket capital at [126c];
Rome, 178 bis, 201-2, 205, 209, 717 Foundling Hospital, 648 [646c]; Great
[177], 200C-F, 241A]; Forum of, Constan- Mosque, 1233 [1231C]
tinople, 275 Corfe Castle (Dorset), 438
Constantine (N. Africa), Roman workat, 183 Corinth (Greece), Temple of Apollo, 112;
Constantinople (Turkey), see also Istanbul: temenos at, 102 °
Augusteum, 275; capture of (1453), Corinthian Order, 7, 96, 97, 108, 137-41,
655, 656; Church of the Apostles, 284, 155, 174, 175) 244) 9555 1179, 1261 [160E,
289; Church of the Theotokos, 290; F, 972E]; capitals, 123, 125, 140 bis, 188,
Forum of Constantine, 275; Mosque of 198, 1020, 1036 [138, I4IB, J, L, P, 162A,
Sultan Mohammad II, 289; S. Irene, IQIA, D, 192F, H, 195B, E]; columns, 131,
284, 343 [282c, D]; S. Mary Pamma- 137-9, 140, 187, 194 ter, 198, 218, 221,
karistos, 290 [287]; S. Saviour in the 222, 230, 244, 262, 779, 792; 799 bis, 811,
Chora, 284 [299A]; SS. Sergius and 812, 817, 846 [141L, M, 192F]; entabla-
Bacchus, 280 bis, 290, 298 [277G, 278A-C, ture, 139, 140, 187, 188 [141E]; Etruscan
286c]; S. Sophia, see S. Sophia; version of, 183; first instances of, 125,
Theodore, 284, 298 [277F, 278D-G]; 137-9; Greek and Roman, 244 [160E, F];
smaller Byzantine churches in, 290 pilasters, 218, 221, 240, 717, 719, 725,
Constitution Hill Arch, London, 963 726, 7745 785 bis, 792; Renaissance, 656;
Constructive principles: Aegean, 93; Roman version of, 155, 244 (ii) [160F]
Gothic, 367-8, 371 [369]; Greek, 93-4; Corinthianesque capitals and columns, 324,
Roman, 175-9 327, 348; French, 537 75; Italian, 627
Contamin (engineer), 1103 Cormac’s Chapel, Cashel, 527 [528A-F, H]
Contarini-Fasan, Palazzo, Venice, 608 Cormont, Thomas and Regnault de
Continental European architecture (19th (archts.), 541
and 20th centuries), II, 991-2, 995 bis, Corn Exchanges, English Renaissance, 955
987, 1000, 1060-1118 [9574]
analysis, 1111-16; Art Nouveau, 1065; Cornaro, Palazzo, Venice [757F]
character, 1062-71; churches, 1079-85; Cornbury House (Oxfordshire), 906
columns, 1115-16; domestic buildings, Corner Spinelli, Palazzo, Venice, 731
1062, 1065, 1069, 1071-9; industrial and [7348]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1297

_ Corner della Ca’ Grande, Palazzo, Venice, Cranborne Manor House (Dorset), 881, 897
737s 747 bis [734C] ‘Crannogs’ (artificial islands), 521
Corneto-Tarquinia (Italy), Etruscan tomb Credence, 1261 [519K]
at, 180 [181F, G] Cremona (N. Italy): Baptistery, 323 [321¢];
Cornices, 96, 1261 [110A, 160] brick and terra-cotta churches, 607;
Corny, Emmanuel Héré de (archt.), 791 Palazzo Pubblico, 608; Torrazzo, 608
Coro, 1261; see also Choirs Crenellation, 438, 1261
Corona, 156, 1261 [164C] Crepidoma, 107, III, 115, 119 bis, 129, 131
Coronation chair, Westminster Abbey, 427 bis, 133, 140, 152, 1261 [110A]
[st9a]_ Cresting, 1261; Assyrian [74]; Egyptian,
Corps de logis, 773, 780, 801 (ii) 22; English, 506, 510 [511J, K]; Greek,
Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, 473 121; Italian, 608; Muslim, 608; Spanish,
Corpus Christi College, Oxford, 473 653, 812
Corsham Almshouses (Wilts.), 956 Crete, early work in, 92, 97; Palace at
Corsini, Palazzo, Rome, 748 Knossos, 98 [99B]
Corstopitum (Corbridge, Northumber- Crewe Hall (Cheshire), 882, 967
land), Roman buildings at, 383, 389 Crockets, 505, 506, 509, 510, 832, 1261
Cortili, 1261 [SIIN-S]; French, 565 (i) [566]]
Caprarola, 708 [711D]; Florence, 678, Cromlechs, 3
684 [681C, F]; Genoa, 688, 691 [690C, D]; Cronaca, II (Simone Pollaiuolo, archt.), 684
Milan, 684 [698F, H, 724D]; Rome, 673, Cronkhill (Salop), 948 [944D]
FOI, 702 bis, 708 [699B, D, 703G, H, Crosby Hall, London, 394
JO5E-G, 7IOA, C, F, 724F]; Urbino, 695 Cross-vaults, 176, 201 [373A-D]; English
[675B]; Venice, 608, 731 [733B, F] Mediaeval, 390, 397, 501; Gothic, 375
Cortili of S. Damaso and Belvedere, Vati- [373C]; Renaissance, 751 [373D]; Roman-
can, 701 [720A, 721] esque, 307, 309; 348, 363 [373B]
Cortona, Domenico da (archt.), 762, 773, Crosses, 653; Celtic or ‘Runic’, 525;
792 Eleanor, 393, 509 [486B, 508B]; gable,
Cortona, Pietro da (archt.), 729 509 bis, 510 [512A—D]; market, 483
Cosmato work, 627, 633 [486a—c]
Costa, Lucio (archt.), 1159, 1163 Crowland Bridge (Lincs.), 489 [487]]
Cothay Manor House (Somerset), 452 Crowmarsh (Oxfordshire), piscina at [515E]
[454Cc] | Crown-post, 433 61s, 448, 1261
Coulommiers, Chateau de, 780 Croy, Guillaume de, monument of [838G]
Council House, Salisbury, 955 Croydon (Surrey): Archbishop’s Palace,
Country houses, see Houses 452; Whitgift Hospital, 897
County Hall, London, 1026 [10314] Cruciform plan of churches, 258, 309, 319;
County Record Office, Charleston (S.C.), 3752 430
1148 Cruciform tombs, 375 [296G]
Cour du Cheval-Blanc, Fontainebleau Crucks, 469 [4678]
[7674] “f. Crunden, John (archt.), 956
Court (see also Cortili): Crypt, 258, 309, 397, 1261; Bayeux, 541;
of the Alberca, Alhambra, Granada, Canterbury Cathedral, 397, 501 [399A];
1234 [1232E]; of the Lions, Alhambra, cruciform, 297; Otranto, 324; S. Paul’s
Granada, 1234 [1231D, 1232E] Cathedral, 906
Courtauld Institute, London, 949 Crystal Palace, London, 989, 1041-2, 1064
Courtrai (Belgium): Guild Houses, 570; [1043]
Town Hall, 570, 582 [580D] Ctesiphon (Iraq), Palace at, 79 [80L-P]
Coutances Cathedral (France), 541 [548D] Cubicula (bedrooms), 233
Covarrubias, Alonso de (archt.), 846 bis Cubitt, Lewis (archt.), 1042
Covehithe (Suffolk), rood stair [516F] Cuenca Cathedral (Spain) [860c]
Covent Garden Market, London, 905 Cuijpers, P. H. J. (archt.), 1086
Covent Garden Theatre, London, 956 Culpepper Tomb, Goudhurst, 878, 974
Coventry (Warwicks.): Cathedral, 402, [976c] ;
1012, 101g [1018]; Ford’s Hospital, 479 Culzean Castle (Ayrshire), 948 [945B]
[478H-K]; S. John’s Hospital, 474; S. Cumberland, W. C. (archt.), 1148
Michael [492C]; school at, 474; Tile Hill Cumberland Terrace, Regent’s Park, Lon-
church, 101g [1017B] don, 949 [947B]
Cowane’s Hospital, Stirling, 525 [520], K] Cummings, G. P. (archt.), 1152
Cowdray (Sussex), fire back at [461L] Cupolas, 176, 357, 640, 691, 696 bis, 713,
Cowling (Suffolk), piscina at [515F] 717, 1059, 1262 [196]; see also Domes
Crabtree, William (archt.), 1048 Curtain, 1066, 1085, 1094, IIII, 1114,
Cram, Goodhue and Ferguson (archts.), 1127, 1128, 1163, 1262
1147, 1151 Curtoni, Domenico (archt.), 737
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1298 INDEX

Curvilinear style, 389, 3933 see also Decor- Decastyle temples, Greek, 107, 108, 131,
ated 1262 [109N]
Cushion (cubiform) capitals, 309 Decorated style, 9, 389, 393, 990, IOII
Cusps, 496, 501, 562, 578 bis, 1262 buttresses, 493 [497G-J, R]; castles,
Custom House: 443; columns, 505 [503P-S, 504G-J];
Dublin, 955 [957E]; King’s Lynn, 928 manor houses, 448, 451; mouldings, 506
[924c]; London, 955 [957D] ;Nuremberg, [507N-U, 508N-S]; openings, 486 [498F—-
593 [592E]; Rio de Janeiro, 1126; Venice, L, 499H-K]; ornament, 509, 565 (ii)
TAT [508N-s]; plans, 490; roofs and vault-
Cuzco (Peru), Mercedarian Monastery, ing, 393, 398, 502; walls, 493
11353 town walls of, 1131 Decoration, see Ornament
‘Cyclopean’ work, 93, 101 bis, 240 (i) [99G, Dedham (Mass.), Fairbanks House, 1132
142H]; Etruscan walls, 173 Deerhurst Church (Glos.), 390, 496 [387]]
Cylindrical piers, 348, 588, 607, 662 (i) Deering, J. P. (archt.), 956, 963
Cyma recta, 156 bis, 247 (i), 1262 [164G, Deinocrates (archt.), 131
165Q] Delavan Lake (Wis.), Ross House, 1144
Cyma reversa, 133, 156 [164H, 165N, Q] De la Warr Pavilion, Bexhill, 1048 [1049D]
Cymatium, I12, 128, 1262 [124G, 130D] Delhi (India):
Cyprus: bronze armour plates, 125 [126N]; Alai Darwaza, 1238; Jami Masjid,
Ionic capitals in, 125 [126A]; vase paint- 1242; Mosque of the Quwwat al-Islam,
ings from, 125 [126H] 1238; Moti Masjid, 1245; Palace, 1242;
Cyrenaica (N. Africa), rock-hewn tombs in, Qutb Minar, 1238; Sher Shah, Mosque
151,218 of, 1241; Tomb of Altamsh, 1238; Tomb
Cyrrhestes, Andronikos, Horologium of, of Humayin, 1242 [1240a]
140 [I41F-H] Della Porta, Giacomo (archt.), 713, 717;
Cyrus the Great, Palace and tomb of, Pasar- 726
gadae, 75 Della Quercia, Jacopo (sculptor), 607
Della Robbia, Luca (sculptor), 9, 664 (ii),
672, 752
Dado, 73, 94, 324, 967, 1262 [132C, E] Deller’s Café, Exeter, 1047 [1044Cc]
Dageraad Housing Estate, Amsterdam, Delos (Greek island):
1072-5 [1073D] house design in, 151, 1523 lonic capital
Dahshtir (Egypt), Pyramids at, 17, 26, 33 in [126J]; ‘Maison de la Colline’, 152
[24]] [153]; Sanctuary of the Bulls, 148 [157¢c,
Daily Express Offices, London and Man- E, F, H]; temenos in, 102; Temple of
chester, 1048 [1049C] Apollo, 112 [113G]; theatre in, 147
Dalmeny Church (West Lothian), 522 Delphi (Greece):
Damascus (Syria): Great Mosque, 1229 Ionic capital in, 125 [126L]; polygonal
[1227B]; Khan Asad Pasha, 1246; Roman masonry, 152 [161]; restoration of, 147
forum in, 184; Tekkiya, or Dervish, [106A]; stadium at, 148; stoas at, 1473
Mosque, 1238 temenos at, 102 [106A]; Temple of Apollo
Damghan (Iran), tombs at, 1235 at [106A]; Theatre at, 147 [106A]; tholos
Damme (Belgium): hall church at, 574; at, 139; treasuries, 131, [106A]
Town Hall, 577 Demeter, Temple of, Paestum, 111, 115
Dance, George (the elder, archt.), 948 [1138]
Dance, George (the younger, archt.), 876, Demetrius of Ephesus (archt.), 131
948, 950, 955 bis Demopolis (Alabama), Gaineswood, 1143
Danzig (Poland), Zeughaus, 812 [813A] Dendera (Egypt): Mammisi temples at, 49;
Daphnis of Miletus (archt.), 131 Temple of Hathor, 49 [483]
Darenth (Kent), Roman remains at, 383 Dentils, 128, 133, 137, 140, 244 (ii), 1262;
Darius I (Persian King): Palace of, Persepo- billet mouldings derived from, 301;
lis, 75, 78 [76c]; Palace of, Susa, 75 Greek and Roman compared, 247 [164]];
[76F, G]; Tomb of, Naksh-i-Rustam, 78, Roman [165P]
86 [77B]; ‘Treasury’ of, Persepolis, 78 Dér el-Bahari (Egypt): mortuary temples
David J. Wright House, nr. Phoenix (Ari- at, 17, 18, 20, 36, 39 bis [37A, 42A]; wall
zona), 1156 reliefs at, 20, 39 [56a]
Davis, A. J. (archt.), 1143 Derand, Francois (archt.), 769, 792
Davis House, Wayzata, 1159 Derngate, Northampton, 1007 [100 1F]
Day Nursery, Garston, 1035 [1034B] Dervish Mosque, Damascus, 1238
Deal Castle (Kent), 444 [441E] Deschinger and Ritter (archts.), 1104
Deane, Sir Thomas (archt.), 1020 Design and Industries Association, 1065
Deanery Garden, Sonning, 1007 [1004B] Dessau (Germany), Bauhaus, 1094 [1098a,
Debenham (Suffolk), buttress at [497H] c]
Deێani (Yugoslavia), church at, 290 De Stijl group, 1067, 1094
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1299

Devenish Is. (Co. Fermanagh), round Dolphin Inn, Norwich, 483 [484m]
tower on, 527 [528G] Dome of:
Deventer (Holland), weighhouse at, 677 Bale market hall, 1068; Centennial
Devey, George (archt.), 991, 992 Hall, Breslau, 1066, 1093; Church of the
Diagonal ribs, 307, 397; 401 [370H, 373C] Sorbonne, Paris, 792; Church of the Val
Diamond Workers’ Union Building, Am- de Grace, 792; Florence Cathedral, 613,
_ Sterdam, 1093 [1118] 624, 677 [615A, 616A-D]; Frauenkirche,
Diana: Casa di, Ostia [241c]; Temple of, Dresden, 818; Granada Cathedral, 8523
Nimes, 188, 240 (ii) [r92F-L]; see also the Invalides, Paris, 799 [797D, 800A-C] ;
Artemis Jena Planetarium, 1104; Karlskirche,
Diaper pattern, 352, 509 [566H] Vienna, 818; Market Hall, Leipzig, 1104;
Didyma (Asia Minor), Temple of Apollo at, Melk Monastery, 817
107, 108, 128, 131, 139 [IO9QN, I41J-P, Palazzetto dello Sport, Rome, 1103;
I65B Palazzo dello Sport, Rome, 1103; Pan-
Dientzenhofer, Christopher (archt.), 811, théon, Paris, 799; Pantheon, Rome, 178-9,
818 bis 197-8; Public Library, Melbourne,
Dientzenhofer, Kilian Ignaz (archt.), 811 1059; S. Ivo della Sapienza, Rome, 726
Dieppe (France), S. Jacques, 354, 542 [727D]; S. Paul’s Cathedral, 677, 719 bis,
Dijon (France): Hétel Chambellan, 559; 799 bis, 906 [908C, 909, 9I0C, D, 9IID, E,
Maison Milsand, 780 [778B] 912]; S. Peter’s, Rome, 677, 717 719;
Dillingen (Germany), Jesuit church at, 817 747 [722A-D, 723B-E]; SS. Paul an
Dilwarra temple, Mount Abu, 1183 [11848] Louis, Paris, 792; Salamanca Old
Dinan (France), S. Mary [563D] Cathedral, 640; Theatine Church, Mu-
Dingle (Co. Kerry), Oratory at, 527 [526A] nich, 817
Dinsmoor, W. B., on Temple of Apollo ‘Dome of the Rock’, Jerusalem, 1224, 1229,
Epicurius, Bassae, 125 1246 [12274]
Diocletian: Mausoleum of, Spalato, 201, Domes, 1235, 1240-1, 1262
218, 229 [231D]; Palace of, Spalato, 194, Aegean, 101; Australian, 1059; British,
229-30, 875 [231]; Thermae of, Rome, IOII, 1025; Byzantine, 272, 276 bis, 280
176, 178 bis, 202, 205, 206, 714 [207] ter, 289, 290 quater, 293 quater, 297, 298
Diomede, House of, Pompeii, 233 [277A; B, E-K, M, 278C, 281F, 288B, 291A];
Dionysos: Temple of, Teos, 128; Theatre comparative [658]; concrete, 1048, 1093;
of, Athens, 147, 148, 210 [104C, 144A] Continental European, 1115; elliptical,
Dipteral temples, 108 67s, 129, 131, 140, 319 [313D]; English, 938 bis, 963 [936a,
1262 [109H, N] B]; French, 340, 343, 770, 773, 780, 792
Dirleton Castle (E. Lothian), 522 ter, 799, 801 (ii), 1086 [797D, 800A, C]
Dissolution of the Monasteries, 382, 385, German, 812, 818, 1104; glass, 1041,
402 1066; Greek, 151 [150B]; Indian, 1026;
Distyle temples, 107, 108 [109A] Italian, 607, 613, 624, 713, 732, 748, 751,
Ditchley House (Oxfordshire), 932 1103 bis [616A—D]; Moorish, 1232-3;
Ditmars House, Brooklyn (N.Y.), 1132 Muslim, 1249; octagonal, 309; penden-
Divinity School, Oxford [400c, 475A]; but- tived, 657, 691, 713, 719, 726 [658A-F];
tress at [497M]; vaulting in, 401, 502 reinforced concrete, 1059; Renaissance,
[400c] 657, 661 (ii), 662 (ii), 677 [658A-E];
Diwan-i-Am, Agra, 1245 [1240B] Roman, 176, 178-9, 197-8, 205, 209, 221,
Diw4an-i-Khass, Agra, 1245; Fatehpur- 240 (ii) [I77H-N, 199A, 207D]; Roman-
Sikri, 1242 [1240C] esque, 309, 320, 357 [314F, G]; saucer,
Dobson, John (archt.), 878, 987, 1036 bis 662 (ii) [658F-J]; shell, 1068, 1103, 11043
Doddington Park (Glos.), 948 Spanish, 640, 852, 855, 856; types of,
Dodecastyle temples, Greek, 107, 1262 298; West Asiatic, 69, 79, 86 [80c, G]
Dodo House, Chichester, see Swan House Domestic buildings, see Dwellings and
Dog-tooth ornament, 390, 506, 509, 565 (ii), Houses
1262 [508L,M Dominican Church, Maastricht, 574
Dogana, the, Venice, 747 Dominican Order of Friars, 305, 382, 614
Doge’s Palace, Venice, 289, 603, 607-8, 624, Dominion Parliament Buildings, Ottawa,
73% [611, 733] II§1 [1275]
architects of, 607, 608, 731; capital in Domitian, Palace of, Rome, 227, 229
[631J]; chimney-piece [757]]; Cortile of, [232A, E]
674, 731 [733B; F]; Scala dei Giganti, 731, Domus, Roman, 169, 230, 233
[733A4, F]; windows, 608 [6288] Donatello (Donato di Niccolo, sculptor), 9,
Dol Cathedral, 541-2, 559 (i) 657, 668, 672
ee ones Giovanni Giacomo Donjon, 438, 773; see Keep
(archt.),
604 Doors, comparative Greek and Roman, 243
Dolmens, 3, 382, 389 [2F] [159]; see also Openings
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1300 INDEX

Dorchester (Dorset), amphitheatre, 213 Durham, school at, 474

Dordrecht, Great Church of, 574; bench- Durham Cathedral, 375, 376 bis, 390, 406
ends [838A, B] [391]
Doric Order, 7, 96, 97, 108-25, 244 [160A, B, Chapel of Nine Altars, 406, 469, 559
972A; C] } (ii) [411E]; Chapter House, 405, 421
bird’s beak moulding, 156 [162K, 163A, [411E]; East end of, 405; Galilee Chapel
E]; capitals, 93, 111, 125, 792; columns, [504c]; model of [408c]; monastic
III, 115, 140, 143, 148, I51, 155, 213, foundation of, 402; piers, 505 bis; plan
812, 851 [1I0A, B, G]; entablature, r11- of [411]; roof of, 501; sanctuary knocker
112, 128 [110B, E, F, 120M]; Etruscan [518N]; tower of, 405, 562 (ii) [408c];
imitation of, 1835; evolution of [110]; ex- vaulting of, 371, 397 bis, 501, 502 [392B];
amples of, 112 [113]; Greek and Roman, windows, 562 (ii); Wyatt’s ‘improve-
244 [160A, B, 972]; influence of, 131; ments’ to, 876
pilasters, 688; Renaissance, 656; Roman, Durrow (Eire), cross at, 525
174, 213; Temples of, 112-25 Diisseldorf (Germany), S. Matthew, 1085
Dormer windows, 1262 Dutch Church, Austin Friars, London, 393
Dosseret blocks, 262, 280, 283, 298, 324, ‘Dutch gables’, 870
1262 [300B-E] Dutert, F. (archt.), 1103
Dotti, Carlo (archt.), 729 Dwellings (see also Houses):
Double cone moulding, 505 [508E] Aegean, 92-3 [99c]; American, 16th-
Dougga (N. Africa), tomb at, 151 [220R] 19th centuries, 1131-5; American, roth—
Doune Castle (Perthshire), 525 [520E, F] 20th centuries, 1140-4; Babylonian, 70;
Dover (Kent), Roman remains at, 183, Belgian and Dutch, 835, 836, 840; British,
383 983, 986, 989, 991-4, 995-1008, 1051;
Dover Castle (Kent), Church in, 390 Continental European, 1002, 1065, 1067,
Dover House, Whitehall, London, 949 1071-9; Egyptian, 50 [52B]; English
Downing College, Cambridge, 963 Mediaeval, 386, 444, 510; Etruscan, 174,
Downton (Wilts.), the Moot House, 937 230; French, 347, 555; 559 779 785 bis
[941A [778]; German, 593, 823 [595A, C];
Downton Castle (Salop), 948 Greek, 151-2, 155 [153]; Italian, 623,
Drake and Lasdun (archts.), 1035 672-3 [612G]; Roman, 169, 230, 233-6,
Dravidian Hindu Temples, 1179, 1187 bis, ee 265 [237A]; Spanish, 855; Turkish,
1188-91, 1195 12 3
Drayton Hall, S.C., 1132 [1133D] Dyckman House, New York, 1132
Dresden (Germany): Frauenkirche, 818
[815c]; Zwinger, 817 [814B]
Dreux (France), Hotel de Ville, 555 Eagle & Child Inn, Alderley Edge, 483
[554D] 8
484E]
Drijfhout, Frans (archt.), 836 Eagle House, Mitcham, 937 [941B]
Dromore Castle (N. Ireland), 437 [441A] Eagle Insurance Building, Birmingham,
‘Drop’ arches, 4o1 [1256, No. 13] 1047 [1046c]
Drum Castle (Aberdeenshire), 525 [520C, Earls Barton Church (Northants.), tower of,
D 390, 489 [387A-—C]; walls of, 490; windows
Dryburgh Abbey (Roxburghshire), 522 in, 496
Dublin (Eire): Casino at Marino near, 938, Early Christian architecture, 253-70
979 [970E]; Custom House, 955 [957E]; Byzantine influence upon, 257, 262;
‘Four Courts’, 955 [957B]; Theatre cathedrals, 262 [2671]; character of, 257—
Royal, 956; Trinity College, 963 258; churches, 8, 187, 257-8, 258-65,
Dublin Cathedral, 527 [4134] 272, 297, 308 [252, 255, 256]; columns,
Ducal Palace: Guadalajara, 647, 846 [646A, 253, 257, 262, 265-6, 297; comparative
843A]; Gubbio, 695; Urbino, 695 [6758]; analysis, 265-6; duration of, 257; mould-
Venice, see Doge’s Palace ings, 266; openings, 265; ornament, 266;
Duccio, Agostino di (archt.), 683 plans, 265; Roman architecture’s influ-
Du Cerceau, Baptiste (archt.), 780 ence On, 253, 257, 258, 265-6; roofs, 261,
Du Cerceau, Jacques Androuet I (archt.), 265, 297; walls, 265
766, 774 bis, 791 [767C, 7778] Early English style, 9, 389, 390, 393
Du Cerceau, J. A. II (archt.), 779 buttresses, 493 [497C-F, Q, T]; castles, —
Du Cerceau, Jean (archt.), 785 438-43; churches, 380, 490 [491H-N];
Dudok, W. M. (archt.), 1067, 1094 columns, 505 [503K-N, 504D-F]; manor
Dulwich College, London, 885 houses, 447 [446E-N]; mouldings, 505-6
Dunblane Cathedral (Perthshire), 522 [507H-M, 508J-M]; openings, 496 [498c-
Dunfermline Abbey (Fife), 522 E,- 499B-E]; ornament, 509, 565 (ii)
‘Duns’ (Scottish forts), 521 [508J-M]; plans, 490 [491H-N]; vaulting,
Dunstable Priory (Beds.) [508M] 390, 397-8, 502; walls, 493
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1301
Early Renaissance architecture, 660, 664 (ii), Eiffel, Gustave (archt.), 1064, 1103
671; English, see Elizabethan and Jaco- Eiffel Tower, Paris, 1064, 1103
bean; Florence, 672, 677-87; Milan, Einstein Tower, Potsdam, 1093-4 [1099B]
673; Rome, 673, 695-6; Venice, 731-2 El Djem (Tunisia), amphitheatre at, 213
Easby Abbey (Yorks.), 304 El Khasne, Tomb of, Petra, 221 [220N]
East Barsham Manor House (Norfolk), 451 Elder Lady Chapel, Bristol, 393, 405, 469
East Church, Middelburg, 836 [413K]
East Farleigh Bridge (Kent), 489 [488D] Eleanor, Queen, tomb of, Westminster
East Grinstead (Sussex), Sackville College [518A-C]
Hospital, 897 Eleanor crosses, 393, 509 [486B, 508R]
Eastern State Penitentiary, Philadelphia, Elephanta (India), rock-cut temples, 1175,
1148 IIQI, 1195 [1185B]
Easton, J. Murray (archt.), 1047 Elephantine, Island of (Egypt), Mammisi
Eaton Bray Church (Beds.), ironwork in temple on, 43, 49 [384-D]
[5186] Eleusis (Greece): Hall of the Mysteries,
Eaton Hall (Cheshire), 948 147; Ionic capital in [126s]; propylaea at,
Eaves, 1000, 1263 1433; temenos at, 102
Eaves galleries, 363 Elgin Cathedral (Moray), 522
Ecala Palace, Querétaro, 1135 [1134A] Elgin Marbles in British Museum, 123
Ecclesiasterion, at Priene, 147 Elizabeth I, Queen, monument to, West-
Echillais (France), wall arcading at, 347 minster, 974 [424D]
[350C] . Elizabethan architecture, 660, 866, 868-9
Echinus of capital, 93, 108, 111, 128, 244 character of, 868-9; colleges, 882;
(4i), 1263 [100D]; sections of Doric [113, columns, 873; Flemish influence upon,
124G 10, 869; galleries, 229, 882; openings,
Echo Colonnade, Olympia, 147 968; Huguenot influence on, 10; man-
Ecole des Beaux-Arts, 1062, 1064, 1143, sions, 865, 866, 869, 881-2 [879-80, 883-
1156, 1163 884]; openings, 968; ornament, 974;
Ecole Militaire, Paris, 791 plans, 964 [965]; roofs, 968; schools,
Ecouen, Chateau d’ (France), 774 885; town houses, 885; walls, 967
Edfu (Egypt), temples at, 19, 49, [376, Ellis, Peter (archt.), 991, 1047
51 bis, 52a] Ellis and Clarke (archts.), 1048
Edificio Polar, Caracas, 1163 Ellora (India): Raths (rock temples), 1175,
Edinburgh: 1188 [11854]; rock-cut chaitya, 1180
Charlotte Square, 949; George Elmes, Harvey L. (archt.), 987, 988, 1020
Heriot’s Hospital, 525 [520L-N]; Holy- Eltham (Kent), S. Saviour, 1012 [1016D]
rood Abbey, 522; National Gallery of Eltham House (Kent), 835, 906, 964
Scotland, 1020 [1023A]; Register House, [903D, 966E]
956; Royal College of Physicians, 1020 Eltham Palace (Kent), 437, 502 [500G]
[1021F]; Royal Institution, 1020 [10238]; Ely (Cambs.), Trinity Church, 401
S. Giles, 421, 522 [523A]; University, 963 Ely Cathedral, 376, 390, 393, 402, 406, 421,
Edinburgh Cathedral, see S. Giles 906
Edward the Confessor, tomb of, 427 [424D, ceiling, 501; choir, 493, 50I, 502
4253] [495K]; crockets [511Q, R]; ‘Galilee
Egg and dart (egg and tongue) ornament, porch’, 393, 406 [504D]; Lady Chapel,
128, 156 [164F] 366, 376, 406 [410A, 504J]; model of
Eginhardt (archt.), 358 [408A]; parapet [511A]; plan of [410A];
Eglise des Capucins, Enghien [838«, J] presbytery [494E, F]; Prior’s doorway
Egypt, basilican churches in, 265; Muslim corbel, 506 [512N]; tower of, 405, 627;
architecture, 1229-30 vaulting of, 393 bis, 398, 502
Egyptian architecture, 5, 13-59 Ely House, London, 948 [947C]
analysis of, 50-8; capitals, 23 [55J-R, Embattled moulding, 505 [508F]
138A]; character of, 22-3; columns, 23, Emberton, Joseph (archt.), 1035
53, 57 [55]; dwellings, 50; Greek archi- Emmanuel College, Cambridge, 882, 914
tecture influenced by, 151; influences Empire State Building, New York, 1156
upon, 13-22; mastabas, 5, 23-6 [24]; Endell, August (archt.), 1065
mouldings, 57 [55J]; obelisks, 49-50; Energhe, Mosque of, Konia, 1237
openings, 53 [54J, K]; ornament, 57-8 Engelbrekt Church, Stockholm, 1080
[54A, B, E, G, 56]; plans, 50; pylons, 36, [1082B]
39, 50; pyramids, see Pyramid and Pyra- Enghien (Belgium), Eglise des Capucins
mids; roofs, 22, 53; sculpture, 57 [54N, [8386, J]
56]; temples, see Temple and Temples; England:
tombs, 17, 18; vaulting, 23; walls, 22-3, pre-Roman remains, 382, 389; Roman
53 [56] architecture in, 184, 202, 206, 383, 389
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1302 INDEX

Englewood (N.J.), Vreeland House, 1132 English Renaissance architecture (cont.)

English Mediaeval architecture, 379-519, roofs, 662 (ii), 968, 973 [880A-C, 883A,
987, 999 é 888A, 892A, 893B, 903E, 907B; 940A, 9414]
almshouses, 479 [480A, C]; analysis of, Stuart period, see Stuart architecture;
489-513; Anglo-Saxon, see Anglo-Saxon; walls, 967
bede houses, 479 [480H, K]; bridges, 489 Enkhuizen (Netherlands), Town Hall, 835
[487H-M]; building materials, 380 [379]; [8264]
castles, 384, 393 bis, 394, 437-44, 5103 Enneastyle temples, Greek, 107, 108, I15,
cathedrals, 176, 308, 375-6, 393, 401-23 129, 1263 [109K, I14H]
[403-4, 407-20, 494-5]; chapels, 469-73 Enriquez del Castillo, Nicholas (archt.),
[468, 470-1]; character of, 386-401; 1139
churches, 375, 390, 489-90 [435,491; Entablatures, 7, 94, 152, 243 (i), 1263 [160]
492]; colleges, 394, 473 [475-6]; columns, Corinthian, 139, 140, 187, 188 bis, 194,
502-5, 565 (ii); Decorated style, see 198 [141E, I91ID]; Doric, 111-12, 128
Decorated; Early English style, see Early [IIOB, E, F, 120M]; Early Christian, 257,
English; French Gothic compared with, 297; French, 799 bis, 802 (ii); Ionic, 125
559, 562, 565, 568; guildhalls, 483 [482Cc, bis, 128, 129, 131 bis, 133, 137, 148, 151
485D,E, G]; hospitals, 479 [478] ;influences [127, 132J]; Italian, 674, 701, 717, 7375
upon, 379-86; inns, 479-83 [484]; Lady 802 (i) [740B, D]; Renaissance, 659, 6773
Chapels, 366, 376 Roman, 187, 213, 217, 230 [224G]; Tus-
manor houses, 384, 390, 393 bis, 394, can, 174, 180
444-63, 510 [449-50, 453-8]; market Entasis, columnar, 57, 94, III, II5, 1263
halls, 483 [485F, 486A, C]; monasteries, [95D]
423-30; mouldings, 155, 310, 505-6, 565 Entrance Gateway, Euston Station, 1036
(ii) [461A, 507-8]; Norman period of, see [1038c]
Norman ;openings, 390, 394, 451-2, 496— Ephesus (Asia Minor):
501, 562 (il) [387], 450A, 498-9]; orna- agora at, 102; Archaic Temple of Ar-
ment, 506-13, 565 (ii) [508]; parish temis, 128, 129 [127A, 130C]; gymnasium
churches, 430 [431]; periods (or styles) at, 148; Later Temple of Artemis, 86, 128,
of, 386, 389; Perpendicular style, see Per- 129-31, 244 (i), 283 [127E, 130A, B, D, E];
pendicular; plans, 375, 489-90, 559 (ii); Stadium, 148; theatre at, 147
roofs, 430, 433-4) 437, 447; 448, 501-2, Epidauros (Greece):
565 (ii) [435, 500]; schools, 474 [477]; Hieron [106B]; restoration of, 147
smaller homes, 463, 469 [464-7]; timber [106B]; Stadium at, 148 [1068]; Stoas at
roofs, 430-7, 447, 479 [435, 478F, 500]; [106B]; temenos at, 102; Temple of Arte-
tithe barns, 483 [486D-J, 488A, B]; Tudor mis [106B]; Temple of Asclepius [1068];
period, 389, 394, 401; vaulting, 306, 307, theatre at, 143 [144C, 145A, B]; tholos
390, 394-401 [399, 400, 426B-E]; walls, at, 108, 139 [I06B, IOQE, 138H]
490-6, 562 (ii); woodwork, 648 Episcopal Cathedral of S. John the Divine,
English Renaissance architecture, 10, 386, New York, 1147 [1145B]
863-081 Erechtheion, Athens, 133-7, 240 (i), 877
‘Antiquarian’ phase, 872, 875-7, 928, ae IO4A, C, IOSA, 134, 135A;
932, 938, 949; Baroque, 872-3, 928, 931, I
932, 949, 950; character of, 868-78; Caryatid Porch in, 131, 133, 137 [134G,
columns, 973; comparative analysis, 964— 135A; 136, 157J]; doorway of, 155, 247 (i)
979; domes, 906, 913, 914, 928, 931, 963, [159D]; east portico, 187 [127D]; London
973; Dutch influence on, 868, 870, 871, imitation of, 950 [954B]; mouldings in,
906, 928; Early, see Elizabethan and Jaco- 156 [165A, L]; North Porch of, 94, 133;
bean; Elizabethan, see Elizabethan archi- 137, 243 (i), 247 (@) [134A, E, I59D, E,
tecture; French influence on, 10, 870, 165C]; ornament in [163A, L]; planning of,
871, 974; Georgian period, see Georgian 108, 133 [134F]
architecture; Gothic Revival, 875, 876, Erfurt (Germany), [8246]; Cathedral, 593,
877, 878, 928, 938, 948, 950, 955, 967; 594 [595G, J, 596F]; half-timbered house,
968, 973; Greek Revival, 877-8, 928, 940, 593 [5954] ;window at [8246]
948, 950; 955, 956, 963 bis, 964; houses, Erith Church (Kent), hinge in [5184]
868, 885, 897, 928-49, 979 Erlach, Johann B. Fischer von (archt.), 811,
influences upon, 654, 655, 863-8; Jaco- 812, 818
bean, see Jacobean architecture; Late, see Esarhaddon, palaces of, 64, 73 [71]
Stuart and Georgian; mouldings, 973-4; Escomb Church (Co. Durham), 390, 496
openings, 968 [969-71]; ornament, 905, [4918]
974-9 [980]; Palladian phase of, 872, Escorial, The, near Madrid, 851-2, 855,
873-5, 928, 932, 937, 938, 948, 950, 956, 956 [853, 598A, B, 861A]
968, 973; phases of, 660, 868; plans, Eski-Djouma (Bulgaria), Byzantine capi-
964-7; Queen Anne _ style, 868; tals at [300B]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1303
Eton College (Bucks.), 385, 474[471E, 477A] 5 Fagades (cont.)
ae view [477A]; Chapel, 469 [471D-F, 674, 688, 701, 702, 708, 737; Spanish,
77A 643, 647, 846, 851 ter, 852 ter, 855-6;
Etruscan architecture, 173-4, 180-3 [181] stylar, 673
arches, 173 bis, 176, 180 [181B] ; charac- Fagus Factory, Alfeld-an-der-Leine, 1066,
ter of, 173-4; dwellings, 174, 230; Greek 1104 [II I0B]
influence upon, 180; sarcophagi, 183 Faience, 983, 1104, I112, 1116, 1263
[181c]; temples, 174, 180 [181H-L]; Fairbanks House, Dedham, Mass., 1132
tombs, 174, 180, 183, 217 [181F, G]; Tus- Fairbarn, Sir William (engineer), 989, 1000
can Order, see Tuscan Fairford Church (Glos.), 510
Etton Church (Yorks.) [491K]; doorway at, . Falaise (France), La Trinité, 791
496 [498A] Falkland Castle (Fife), 525
Eumenes, Stoa of, Athens, 147 [103B, Falling Water, Pa., 1156 [1119]
104c] Falstaff Inn, Canterbury, 483 [4841]
European Mediaeval architecture, 9, 303- Fan and pendant vaults, 393, 502
310, 365-78 Fan vaults, 393, 398, 427, 502 bis, 565 (ii),
European roth-2oth century architecture, 1263 [399H, 426B-E]
see Continental European Fancelli, Luca (archt.), 678
Euston Station, London, 1036 [1038C, D] Fanlights, Belgian and Dutch, 836
Evesham (Worcs.): All Saints [512R]; Bell Fano (Italy), Vitruvius’s basilica at, 176
Tower, 490; S. Laurence [497L] Farmers’ and Mechanics’ Bank, Pottsville,
Evreux Cathedral, 541 [374D, 561B] (Pa.) 1152
Ewelme (Oxfordshire): grammar school, Farmington, Connecticut, Whitman House,
474, 479 [480D-G]; hospital, 474, 479 1132
[480D-G] Farms: English Mediaeval, 469 [465, 466B];
Exchanges, Georgian, 955 French Gothic, 559
Exedrae, 1263: Byzantine, 280, 283 [281G, Farnese, Palazzo: Caprarola, 708, 748 [711];
282B]; Greek, 102, 148 [105B]; Roman, Rome, 217, 702, 725; 748 [705, 753A; B]
176, 194, 197, 205 bis, 209 [193D, 231D] Farnesina, Villa, Rome, 701 [710H]
Exeter (Devon), Deller’s Café, 1047 Farnham (Surrey), Pierrepont, 999
[1044c]; Guildhall, 483 Farnsworth House, nr. Plano, 1156 [11574]
Exeter Cathedral, 390, 402, 406, 643 Farsetti, Palazzo, Venice, 324
bishop’s throne, 509 [517E]; Lady Fascia, 133 bis, 1263
Chapel, 376, 469 [412E]; model of [407D]; Fatehpur-Sikri (India): Buland Darwaza,
mouldings in, 506; piers at [503P, Q]; 1242; Diwan-i-Khass, 1242 [1240c];
plan of [412E]; sculpture, 565 (ii); taber- Jami Masjid, 1242 [1243A, 1247c]; Tomb
nacle [515L]; vaulting of, 398, 501 [399E]; of Salim Chishti, 1242 [1243B, 1247D-F]
west front, 405, 406 Faun, House of the, Pompeii, 233
Exeter College, Oxford, 473 [4754] Feathers Inn, Ludlow, 483 [484Nn]
Exhibition Hall, Turin, 1111 [1110c] Fenton House, Hampstead, 937 [966D]
Exmouth (Devonshire), The Barn, 1000 Ferrara (Italy): the Duomo [629F]; Palazzo
[10034] Sacrati [7536]
Extradoses, 990, 1263 Ferrey, Benjamin (archt.), 988, 1008
‘Eye’, 179 [165D, 199A] Ferstel, H. von (archt.), 1079
Eyre’s Hospital, Salisbury, 897 Feruz-abad (Persia): fire-temple at, 79;
Ezra (Syria), church at, 290 palace at, 79 [80A-F]
Fiesole (Italy), theatre at, 210
Fiesole, Mino da (sculptor), 672
Fabricius, Pons, in Rome, 176, 239 [238C¢, Fifehead-Neville (Dorset), Roman remains
241E] at, 383
Facades:
Fighting Cocks Inn, S. Albans, 483 [484a]
Aegean, 102; astylar, 672, 702, 748, Filarete, Antonio (archt.), 613, 684
1258; Belgian and Dutch, 836; British, Fillets, moulding, 128, 129, 156, 506, 1263
988, 1019, 1026, 1035, 1036 bis; Byzantine, [164]
Finchingfield (Essex), house at, 469
276, 290, 297;
964, 967; French Gothic, 537 bis,
English

541, 542; French Renaissance, 769-70,

Renaissance,
[4648]
Finials, 156; Belgian and Dutch [8398];
English, 452, 509 bis, 510 [450C, 461D,
774, 779s 791, 792 ter, 80x (ii), 10863 512E-H]; French, 343; Spanish, 1080
French Romanesque, 340 bis, 343, 344,
5 352 Finsbury Health Centre (London), 1035
Bee nari Renaissance, 811, 812, 818; [1034¢]
German Romanesque, 358; Greek, 123,
Fire back, Tudor [4611]
1553 Italian Gothic, 603, 607-8, 608, 614 Fire Temples: Bishapur, 79; Feruz-abad,
ter, 627; Italian Renaissance, 672, 673, 79; Naksh-i-Rustam, 78 [77C]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1304 INDEX

Fireplaces: Elizabethan, 881; English Florence (cont.)

Mediaeval, 401, 438, 447, 451, 452, 469 684 [622A, 631H, 749G, 750A, E]; S.
[442F, K, 464D, 519L, N Lorenzo, 672, 677 [676G—L]; S. Maria del
First pss Meeting House, Providence, Fiore, see Florence Cathedral; S. Maria
.L., 1136 Novella, 614, 633, 683, 713 [630B, 631B,
First Church of Christ Scientist, Berkeley 632A, 750D, F]; S. Michele in Orto [609Cc];
(Calif.) [1255] S. Miniato, 265, 309, 320, 323, 677
Fischer, Johann Michael (archt.), 811, [321A, B]; S. Reparata, 613; S. Spirito,
818 678, 684 [679A-E, 749C]; Uffizi Gallery,
Fishmongers’ Almshouses, Yarmouth, 956 717; villas, 672-3
Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, 1019 Florence Cathedral, 607, 613 [6I15A, B,
[1022c] 616]
Flamboyant period: Belgian and Dutch, Baptistery, 613 [615A]; Campanile,
574, 578, 832; French Gothic, 401, 522, 613 [615A, 616A]; colour scheme, 664 (i);
sake bis, 565 (1) bis; tracery, 522, 559, dome, 613, 624, 677 [615A, 616A-D];
562 (i marble panels, 613, 627; nave, 613, 627
Flaminius, Circus of, Rome, 215 [615B]; tower, 624 [615A]; vaulting, 624;
Flat blocks, 1008, 1051, 1062, 1071, 1072, walls, 748
1075, IL1I [1006A, 1069B] Floris, Cornelius (archt.), 831, 832, 836
Flavian Amphitheatre, Rome, see Colos- Fluting of columns, 243, 1263; Corinthian,
seum 140, 244 [165K, M]; Doric, III, I15, 244
Fleac (France), capitals at [351A] [165J]; French, 799; Ionic, 128, 129
Fléche, 578, 662 (i), 1263; Amiens Cathe- [165F]; Romanesque, 309
dral, 541, 562 (i) [564c, H]; Milan Cathe- Flying buttresses, 1259
dral [598c]; Notre Dame, Paris, 562 (i) Belgian and Dutch, 578 ; English Medi-
[532C] ’ aeval, 405, 490, 493 ter, 496, 562 (ii)
Flemish bond, for brickwork, 937, 1263 [492B, 497N-T]; English Renaissance,
Flemish influence, in Britain, 991, 1054; in 913, 955 [911B]; French, 405, 537; 538
S. Africa, 1057-8 bis, 541, 562 (i), 766, 792 [564A, BJ];
Flint, knapped, 380, 490, 493 Gothic, 368, 371 [369c-E]; Gothic Re-
Flint Cottage, Box Hill, Surrey, 938 [934c] vival, torr; Italian, 627, 1103; Roman,
Flitcroft, Henry (archt.), 874, 932 178 [185E, F]; Romanesque, 309, 344,
Florence: 347
Baptistery, 613, 672 [615A, 631E]; Ba- Folded slab principle, 1066
roque, 672; Bigallo, the, 623 [612A]; Bo- Foliage ornament, 505 bis, 509 [504D, E, FJ];
boli Gardens, 673, 678 [680B, 712a]; ‘stiff-leaf’, 509 [512P]
bronze Baptistery doors, 613, 672, 677; Fondaco dei Turchi, Venice, 324 [326]
Certosa near, 305; columns, 751; Early Fontaine, Pierre, F. L. (archt.), 770, 779;
Renaissance, 657, 672, 677-87; Found- 791, 1071
ling Hospital, 672, 677, 732 [675A]; High Fontainebleau, Palais de, 774, 802 (ii), 869
Renaissance and Proto-Baroque, 672, [764B, 767-8, 803D, E]
673, 687-8; Laurentian Library, 672, 714 Fontana, Carlo (archt.), 695, 726, 811, 873;
[716B]; Loggia dei Lanzi, 623 [615c]; 9
Medici Chapel, see New Sacristy; New Fontana, Domenico (archt.), 701, 717, 719;
Sacristy, 672, 677, 713-14 [716A]; Old 725
Sacristy, 677, 678 bis, 713; openings (Re- Fontana: Paola, Rome, 725 [753H]; delle
naissance), 748; Or San Michele, 614 Tartarughe, Rome [754F]; di Trevi,
[609c] ; ornament (Renaissance), 752 Rome, 729, 752 [730B, 754D]; del Tri-
Palazzo Gondi, 748 [749A]; Palazzo tone, Rome [754H
Guadagni, 685 [680F]; Palazzo Pandol- Fonte Gatteschi, Viterbo, 633 [629A]
fini, 707, 748, 1019 [756]; Palazzo Pitti, Fontevrault Abbey (Anjou), 343 [346a];
673, 678, 748 [680A—-D, 749F]; Palazzo del Monastic Kitchen at, 347 [350D]
Podesta or Bargello, 623; Palazzo Quara- Fonthill Abbey (Wilts), 948 [945A]
tesi, 678, 748 [680E, 749D]; Palazzo Ric- Fonts:
cardi, 657, 672, 678, 748 [681]; Palazzo Belgian and Dutch, 582 [5818]; Eng-
Rucellai, 657, 683, 684 [680G]; Palazzo lish Mediaeval, 506, 509 bis, 510 [515A—
Strozzi, 657, 684, 707, 748 [685]; Palazzo D]; English Renaissance, 974; French,
Vecchio, 623 [610C, 750A]; Pazzi Chapel, 565 (i) [566]; Italian, 752 [754A, B]3
678, 683, 696 [676A-F]; Ponte S. Trinita, Romanesque [332L]
687 [682c]; Ponte Vecchio, 624 [6258]; Foochow (China), Bridge of 10,000 Ages,
plans (Renaissance), 747-8 1207; White Pagoda, 1205
Renaissance at, 657, 666, 668, 677-84, Ford’s Hospital, Coventry, 479 [478H-
766 [685]; reredos at, 633 [63IH]; roofs K
(Renaissance), 7513; S. Croce, 614, 678, Foreign Office, London, 1025 [10274]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1305
Formal gardens, 785 bis, 1051; English Re- Franeker church, Holland, 577
naissance, 869, 874, 875, 876, 881, 931, Frari Church, Venice, see S. Maria Gloriosa
937, 964, 967, 979; Italian, 708 bis, 713 dei Frari
bis [709B, C] Frauenkirche: Dresden, 818 [815c]; Nu-
Formerets, 398, 1264; see also Wall ribs remberg, 588, 593 [589C, D]
Forster House, Bedford Park, 1000 Freiburg Cathedral (W. Germany), 588,
[1001B] 593 bis [585B]; capitals in [596D, E];
Fort Macquarie, Sydney, 1058 Fountain of S. Jean [824D]; Fountain of
Fort of Sacsahuaman, 1131 the Samaritan [824F]; vaulting of, 594
‘Fortalice’ (minor fortification), 522, 525 French Gothic architecture, 10, 365, 529-
Fortified towns, French, 347, 549 568, 573, 574 bis, 773
Fortuna Virilis, Temple of, Rome, 187 castles, 549; cathedrals, 402, 405, 530
[160D, 172A, 189A-C] bis, 533 bis, 534-49 [547-8]; character of,
Forum: 533-4; chateaux, 533, 549, 555; columns,
of Augustus, Rome, 184, 187 [182B, 565 (i); English Gothic compared with,
190A, C]; Boarium, in Rome, 184, 197, 559, 562, 565, 568; Flamboyant period of,
225 [172A]; of Constantine, Constantin- 401, 522, 534, 542 bis, 565 (i) bis; fortified
ople, 275; of Nerva, Rome, 184 [165P, towns, 5493 hospitals, 555; hotels de ville,
182B, 246B]; Pompeii, 184, 225 [226B]; 533, 5553; mouldings, 565 (i); open-
Romanum, at Rome, 184, 289 [171, 1824, ings, 562 (i) [563D, E, H]; ornament,
B]; of Trajan, Rome, 178, 184, 201 565 (i) [566, 567]; palais de justice, 5555
[182B, I85A-C, 186B, 246M]; of Vespasian, periods of, 534; plans, 375, 559 (i);
Rome, 184 roofs, 565 (i); town houses, 559; walls,
Forum Baths, Pompeii, 206 562 (i)
Forums, 170, 183-4, 1264 [182]; Byzantine, French influence, in Britain, 999, 1011,
275; Imperial, at Rome, 184, 187 [182B, 1026, 1052, 1054; in Europe, 1063; in
190A] Italy, 1086; in Spain, 644, 648
Foscari, Palazzo, Venice, 608 French Renaissance architecture, 760-805
Foster, John (archt.), 955 analysis, 799-802; Baroque, 766, 769
Fotheringay Church (Northants), pulpit bis, 785,792; character, 765-70; chateaux,
[517L] 766, 770-4, 780, 785, 791, 801 (ii) [760,
Foulston, John (archt.), 877 763, 781-2, 793C]; Classical period of,
Founders’ Hall, Girard College, Philadel- 660, 766-9, 780, 785, 792; columns, 779,
phia, 1148 780, 791, 799 ter, 80x (ii); domes, 770,
Foundling Hospital: Cordova, 648 [646c]; 773, 780, 792 ter, 799, 801 (ii) [797D,
Florence, 672, 677, 732 [675A]; London, 800A-C] ;Early period of, 660, 765-6, 773
885 bis, 774, 7793 ecclesiastical, 791-9; Em-
Fountain of the Four Rivers, Rome, 726 pire phase, 769, 770, 791, 1063, II51;
Fountain of S. Jean, Freiburg [824D] hétels, 769, 779, 780, 785 bis, 791 [778,
Fountain of the Samaritan, Freiburg 788]; Late period of, 660, 769-70, 785,
[824F] 791
Fountains [804], 824D, F]; church, 258 mouldings, 801 (ii); openings, 801 (ii);
[255K]; Pompeii’s, 239; Rome’s, 239, ornament, 766, 769 bis, 785, 792, 802 (ii)
725, 726, 729, 752 [728A, 730B, 753H; [804G]; periods of, 660, 765-70; plans,
754D, F, H]; Viterbo’s, 633 [629A] 799 (1i)-800 (ii), 769, 780, 785, 792
Fountains Abbey (Yorks), 304, 308, 382, [764B, 77IE-G, 772C, 775E, 781B, C, E,
429-30 [432]; buttress [497B]; Chapel of 800B, D]; Rococo, 769; roofs, 801 (ii);
the Nine Altars, 429, 469; Huby’s sculpture, 774, 792, 802 (ii); secular,
Tower, 429 [432C] 770-91 ;stucco, 769, 774, 802 (ii); towers,
Fountains Hall (Yorks), 430, 897 [432B, 773. bis, 779, 792, 80x (ii) [771A, C];
8948] vaulting, 785; walls, 80x (ii), 1080, 1085
Four-centred arches, 401, 501 bis, 1246 [802 (ii)]
[1256,No.17] French Romanesque architecture, 334-52
‘Four Courts’, Dublin, 955 [9578] analysis, 347-52; character of, 340;
Fox, Sir Charles (archt.), 1042 churches, 188, 340, 542; columns, 309,
Fox & Hounds, Barley, 483 [484k] 347, 348; ecclesiastical examples of, 340-
Framed structure, 1052-4, II12-14; see 347; mouldings, 348 [351Cc, E, H]; Nor-
also Steel-framed and Iron-framed build- thern, 340, 344-7, 3525; openings, 347-8;
ings ornament, 347, 348, 352 [351]; plans,
Framlingham Castle (Suffolk), 438 ; 347; roofs, 348; secular examples of,
Frampton (Lincs.), window mouldings 347; Southern, 340-4; vaulting, 307;
[5077] ; walls, 347
Franciscan Order of Friars, 305, 382, 527, Fréres-pontifes (guild of bridge builders),
600, 623, 668 347 549
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 1306 INDEX

Frescoes, 1264 Galerie:

British, 1011, 1055; Byzantine, 279, d’Apollon, Palais du Louvre, 780
297, 301; German, 818, 1055; Greek, [7774]; de Francois I, Fontainebleau, 774
247 (i); Italian Gothic, 603, 633; Italian [768A]; des Glaces, Palais de Versailles,
Renaissance, 662 (ii), 664 (ii), 701, 707 780 [783B]; de Henri II, Fontainebleau
bis, 752 bis, 802 (i); Roman, 218, 233 bis, [768B]
247 (ii) [249B]; Romanesque, 310; Span- ‘Galilee Chapel’, Durham [504c]
ish, 851 ‘Galilee Porch’: Ely, 393, 406 [410A, 504D];
Fret ornament, 156, 230, 1264 [163F] Lincoln, 406 [410F, 508K]
Freyssinet, E. (engineer), 1066, 1068, 1104 Galilei, Alessandro (archt.), 729
Friars, Orders of, 305, 308 Galla Placidia, Tomb of, Ravenna, 258,
Friday Mosque, Veramin, 1235 297; 298 [277B, 296F-J] ;
Friedman House, Pleasantville (N.Y.), 1156 Galleria Vittorio Emanuele, Milan, 1103
Friedrichsbau, Heidelberg, 811 [809D, [11054]
824B] Galleries, 1264
Frieze, 108, III-12, II9, 123, 156, 812, arcaded, 229, 316, 357, 363; Belgian
996, IOIQ, IO4I, 1264 [120E, N] and Dutch, 644, 856 [650G]; bridge, 773
Corinthian entablature’s, 140; Eng- [760B]; British, 1042; church, 258 [264D,
lish, 974 [977¢, E]; Ionic entablature’s, 281G]; eaves, 363; French [768A, 777A,
125, 128, 131, 133, 148 [132H]; Italian, 783B, 790C]; ‘long’, 525, 882, 886 bis, 965
613, 674, 684 [750A]; Panathenaic, 121, [880B, E]
123 [163H]; Persian, 87 [75F, G]; pulvin- Gallerus, Oratory of, Dingle, 527 [526A]
ated, 1270; Roman, 188, 197, 217, 235; Gamberaia, Villa, Settignano, 673 [712B]
247 (ii) [246J]; Romanesque, 352 [351J]5 Gamble House, Pasadena, 1144
sculptured marble, 125, 752 [750] Gandon, James (archt.), 876, 955 bis
Frigidarium, 202, 205 bis, 206, 1264 [203, Garage, Rue de Ponthieu, Paris, II04
204C, 207B, D] [r101c]
Frijoles Canyon (New Mexico), cliff dwell- Garbhagriha (unlit shrine), 1179
ings, II3I Garches (France), Villa les Terraces, 1075
Frinton (Essex), The Homestead, 1000 [1074A]
Frocester (Glos.), tithe barn, 483 Garden City Movement, 1007
Fry, E. Maxwell (archt.), 995, 1007, 1035 Garden house, Poundisford Park, 937
Fuga, Ferdinando (archt.), 729 [927c]
Fuller, Thomas (archt.), 1151 Garden Pavilion, Caprarola, 713 [706c]
Fullstone (Kent), Old Barn, 483 [486G—]] Garden temple, Chinese [1204M]
Funfhaus Parish Church, Vienna, 1079 Gardens: Florentine, 673 [712A] ; formal, see
Furness, Frank (archt.), 1148 Formal gardens; hanging, 70; landscape,
Furness Abbey (Lancs.), 304 874; Picturesque, 876; roof, 10753
Furniture, English Renaissance, 974, 979 Tudor, 459
[976D; 977F-N; 978] Gargoyles, 1264; English Mediaeval, 509
Furstenburg Palace, Innsbruck, 594 [592F] bis [511G, H, L, M]; French, 565 (i) [566B]
Fustat (Egypt), Mosque of Amr, 1229 Garnier, Charles (archt.), 1086
Fyfield Church (Berks.), credence in [519k] Garnier, Tony (archt.), 1066
Garston (Herts), Day Nursery, 1035 [1034B]
Gaspari, Antonio (archt.), 747
Gable crosses, English Mediaeval, 509 ter, Gate of Herculaneum, Pompeii, 217
510 [512A, B, C, D] Gate of Honour, Caius College, 882 [895B]
Gables: Gatehouse: Burton Agnes, 881; Hampton
Belgian and Dutch, 832 [824D, 838c, Court Palace, 459 [378]; Oxburgh Hall
839C]; British, 996, 1000, 1054; ‘corbie’, [450], L]; Warkworth Castle [445c];
525; ‘Dutch’, 870; English Mediaeval, Xerxes’, at Persepolis, 75, 87 [76c]
394, 452 [450C]; English Renaissance, Gates: Hittite, 81 [83a]; Tudor, 463 [460D]
967, 968, 973; French, 538, 792, 801 (ii); Gateway:
Gothic, 661 (i); Italian, 627 bis; Roman- Alai Darwaza, 1238; Blenheim Palace,
esque, 323, 329, 357, 358, 363 [332H]; 931 [934A]; Euston Station, London,
stepped, 573, 811, 812, 817, 823, 836, 1036 [1038c]; Genoa, Porta Pila, 691
1080 [693c]; Khorsabad, 73 [72D, E, 74B];
Gabriel, Jacques Jules (archt.), 770, 780, Olympia [105B]; Queen’s College, Ox-
7855 791 ford, 963 [959B]; S. Maria, Burgos, 644;
Gaddi, Taddeo (archt.), 624 of the Sun, Tia- huanaco, 1131 [1129c]
Gage Building, Chicago, 1155 [1153B] Gateways:
Gagnati, Palazzo, Montepulciano [753D] Belgian and Dutch, 577; British, 1036;
Gaineswood, Demopolis, Alabama, 1143 Chinese, 1201, 1205; Doric, 1036; Eng-
Galan, J. M. (archt.), 1163 lish Mediaeval, 438, 459, 489 bis [460D,
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1307
Gateways (cont.) German Renaissance architecture (cont.)
461B]; English Renaissance, 968, 974 818, 823; domes, 817, 818; Early period,
[902A, 940A, 970A, 980G]; Italian, 691; 808, 811 bis, 823; ecclesiastical, 808,
Japanese, 1217, 1219; Roman, 225, 229; 817-23; frescoes, 818, 823; Greek Re-
Spanish, 636, 647 vival, 808, 817; Hermes pilasters, 811,
Gatteschi, Fonte, Viterbo [619a] 812; late Baroque, 695; mouldings, 823;
Siete Antoni (archt.), 1065 bis, 1071, 1072, openings, 823; ornament, 808, 812, 823,
1080 825; periods of, 808; plans, 817, 818,
Gaur (India), Adina Mosque, 1238 823 [8098]; Proto-Baroque, 808, 812,
Gawhar Shad, Mosque of, Mashhad, 1235 817, 823; Rococo, 808, 812, 818, 823;
[1236] roofs, 662 (ii), 806, 811, 812, 823; sculp-
Geddington Church (Northants), parclose ture, 812, 823; secular, 811-17; vaulting,
screen [516A] 812, 818 bis; walls, 823
General Motors Technical Institute, War- German Romanesque architecture, 353-64,
ren (Michigan), 1160 [1162B] 584, 587.
General Post Office, London, 963, 995 analysis of, 363; character of, 357;
Genoa (Italy), 666 bis columns, 363 [362J, L]; influences upon,
Antiquarian phase in, 695; Baroque, 353-4; mouldings, 364; openings, 363;
673, 688, 691; High Renaissance and ornament, 364 [362F, G]; plans, 357, 363;
Proto-Baroque, 672, 673, 688; Old Con- roofs, 358, 363; vaulting, 307, 357, 363;
vent [759]]; Palazzo Carega [759E]; Pa- walls, 363
lazzo Durazzo-Pallavicini, 691 [689D]; Gernrode Abbey (Germany), 358 [362H]
Palazzo Gambaro [759D]; Palazzo Muni- Gerona Cathedral (Spain), 639, 643, 648
cipale, 688, 691 [690]; Palazzo Sauli, 688, [649c]; vaulting in, 648
691 [6868]; Palazzo dell’ Universita, 691, Gest Church, Rome, 673, 713, 748 [704D-
725 [692B, D]; Porta Pila, 691 [693¢]; S. H]; altar in, 752 [704G]
Maria in Carignano, 688, 851 [682D]; SS. Gewandhaus, Brunswick, 811 [813B]
Annunziata, 695 [692E] Ghent (Belgium):
Gens Cornelia, tomb of, Rome, 217 Béguinage, 577; Byloke (hospital), 577;
Geometrical style, 389, 393, 1008; see also Chateau des Comtes, 577; Guild Houses,
Decorated 570, 577; Rabot Fort, 577; S. Bavon,
George Heriot’s Hospital, Edinburgh, 525, 574; S. Pierre, 835; Skipper’s House, 577
867 [520L-N] [5798] ;Town Hall, 570, 577 [576a]
George Inn, Glastonbury, 483 [484]] Ghibelline battlements, 323, 608 [325A]
George Inn, Norton S. Philip, 483 [484B] Ghiberti, Lorenzo (archt.), 9, 613, 657, 672,
Georgian architecture, 10, 660, 928—79, 999 677; metalwork by, 664 (ii)
character of, 872-8; churches, 949-55 Giacopo, Giovanni Battista di (archt.), see
[951-4]; columns, 973; country houses, Tl Rosso
868, 928, 931-2, 937-8, 973 [929-30, Giardino della Pigna, Vatican, 227, 7o1
933-6, 939-45]; doorways, 968 [940D, [692C¢]
971G]; mouldings, 974; openings, 968; Gibberd, Frederick (archt.), 1008
plans, 964 [966]; public buildings, 955- Gibbons, Grinling (1648-1720, mood-
964]; roofs, 973; town houses, 948-9; carver), 905, 906, 913; 914
U.S.A., 1126, 11403 walls, 967-8 Gibbs, James (archt.), 873, 914, 932; 9375
Gerasa (Syria), four-sided arch in, 225 949, 955, 963; books on architecture,
Gerbier, Sir Nicholas (archt.), 898 873, 1139; chimney pieces by, 979
Gerf-Hosein (Egypt), rock temple at, 44 [980H, K]; circular window by, 974
[37¢] [980E]
German Gothic architecture, 583-97, 811, ‘Gigantomachy’, sculpture of, Pantheon,
812, 817 Rome, 198; Pergamon, 156
analysis of, 593-4; character of, 584, Gilbert, Cass (archt.), 1155
587; columns, 594; ecclesiastical, 587-8; Ginkaku-ji, Kiéto, garden pavilion, 1217
examples of, 587-93 [585-6, 595-6]; Giocondo, Fra (archt.), 717, 7325 762
French influence on, 584, 593, 5943 Giotto di Bondone (artist and archt.), 297,
mouldings, 594; openings, 593-4; orna- 613 bis, 623, 633, 752
ment, 594 [596]; plans, 375, 593; Roman- Giralda Minaret, Seville, 644, 1233
esque derivation of, 587, 593 bis; roofs, Girard College, Philadelphia, 1148
593, 594; secular, 588, 593 [592]; walls, Girault, Charles (archt.), 1086
Gizeh (Egypt): Great Sphinx at, 18 [12];
Se Renaissance architecture, 10, 806-— mastabas at, 26 [24c, D]; Pyramids at,
825 17, 26, 35 [24K, M, 31A]
analysis, 823-5; Antiquarian phase, Glamis Castle (Angus), 525 [520G, H]
808, 817; Baroque, 808, 811, 812, 817, Glasgow:
818, 823; character, 808-11; columns, Caledonia Road Free Church, 1011
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1308 INDEX

Glasgow (cont.) Gothic architecture in Europe (cont.)

[1013A]; Hous’Hill, Nitshill, 1007[1002B] ; [369]; parish churches, 376; secular, 376
Ingram Street Tearooms, 1047; Queen’s vaulting, 368-71 [370]
Park, r1o11; S. Vincent Street, 1011; Gothic Revival, 877, 878, 928, 948, 950
School of Art, 1026 [1031A-C]; Ware- 955, 1264
house, Jamaica Street, 1042 [1044A]; in America, 1144; in Britain, 878
Willow Tearooms, 1047 987-9, 992, 996, 999, 1000, 1008, 1012
Glasgow Cathedral, 522 Goat crypt of, 1020, 1025, 1026, 1144; in Continenta
522 [523B] Europe, 1079; in France, 770, 1063
Glass-and-metal: Horace Walpole and, 875, 938 [944A]
buildings, 1041, 1103, 1104 bis; cano- ‘Gothique 4 Lancettes’, 534
pies, 1003; domes, 1041, 1066; facades, Gouda (Netherlands): Guild Houses, 570
III2, 1114; roofs, 983, 989, 1103, 1093 Town Hall, 570
bis; vaults, 1042, 1064; walls, 1007, 1035, Goudhurst (Kent), Culpepper Tomb, 878,
1036; windows, 1007, 1036 974 [976c]
Glass windows: Byzantine, 298; English Goujon, Jean (archt.), 766, 774
Mediaeval, 451, 510; painted, see Stained Government Buildings: Bloemfontein
glass; Roman, 233; Romanesque, 309 1058; Delhi, 1026 [1031c]; Georgian,
Glastonbury (Somerset): Abbot’s Barn, 483 956; Pretoria, 1058
[486D-F]; George Inn, 483 [484J]; ‘Lake Government House, Cape Town, 1058
Village’, 3 Government House, Sydney, 1058
Glazing, ridge-and-furrow, 1041, 1042 Governmental Palace, Guadalajara, 1139
Gledstone Hall, Skipton, 1007 Governor’s Palace: Nancy, 791; San An-
Glen Andred, Groombridge, 999 [997B] tonio, 1139; Santa Fé, 1139 [1138]:
Glendalough (Co. Wicklow), S. Kevin’s Williamsburg, 1140
Kitchen, 527 [526B] Graéanica (Yugoslavia), church at, 290
Gloucester, walls of, 489 Grace Church, New York, 1144
Gloucester Cathedral, 308, 376, 390, 394, Grado Cathedral (Italy) [267L]
406,
421 [404C] Graeco-Roman style, 876, 878, 987 bis.
Choir, 394, 406 [411Cc]; doorway, 562 1020 bis, 1036 bis
(ii) [408D]; Lady Chapel, 376, 406, 469 Grainger, Richard (archt.), 1036
[411c]; model of [408D]; monastic Grammar schools, 474, 866 [480D, G]
foundation of, 402; panelling, 510; piers, Gran Guardia Vecchia, Verona, 737
505; plan of [411c]; tower of, 394, 405, [744D-F]_
562 (ii); transepts of, 382, 394; vaulting Granada (Spain): Alhambra, 324, 624,
of, 397, 398, 401, 502 [399H]; windows 1233-4, 1246 [1231D, 1232E-F]; Cathe-
of, 501 dral, 648, 852, 856 [638D, 858c]; Palace
Glyptotek, Munich, 817 of Charles V, 851 [847A, C]; Sacristy of la
Godwin, E. W. (archt.), 991, 992, 1000, Cartuja, 855 [858A]
1025 Grand ndels (France), doorway at, 562 @
Goes (Netherlands), church, 574 [567
Gol Gombaz, Bijapur, 1241 Gea Con Station, New York, 1156
Golden House of Nero, Rome, 206, 229, Grand Palais, Paris, 1086
797 Grande Chartreuse Monastery, near Gre-
Golden Temple of the Sikhs, Amritsar, noble, 305
1187 Grandjean de Montigny, A. S. V. (archt.),
Goldsmiths, Arch (of the; Rome, 222 1126
[223H-K] Grantham (Lincs), Belton House, 905
Gollins, Melvin, Ward and Partners [903E, 904C, 966B]
(archts.), 1051 Gray’s Inn Hall, 881, 885 [888B]
Gondi, Palazzo, Florence, 748 [749A] Great Altar of Heaven, Peking, 1202, 1205
Gonville and Caius, see Caius College Great Bedwin Church (Wilts.), piscina in
Goodwin, Francis (archt.), 877, 955 [515G]; tile paving [5 19G]
Gopurams (gateway towers), 1180 Great Bromley (Essex), pier at [503v]
‘Gorge’ cornice, Egyptian, 22, 53, 86 [55]]; Great Chalfield Manor House (Wilts), 451-
Persian, 86 bis 452, 501 [450A-F]
Gorilla House, Regent’s Park Zoo, 1048 Great Malvern Priory (Worcs.), roof of, 502
Goslar (Germany), Kaiserworth, 593, 594 [500B] :
[592c] Great Mosque: Ajmer, 1238; Baghdad,
Gothic, the term, 8-9, 367 1235; Brusa, 1237; Cordova, 1233
Gothic architecture in Europe, 8-9, 365—78 [1231c]; Damascus, 1229 [1227B]; Qay-
analysis, 363-4; cathedrals, 368, 372-6 rawan, nr. Tunis, 1233
[374]; character of, 367-72; churches, Great Pagoda, Soochow, 1205
376; constructive principles, 367-71 Great Pyramid, Cholula, 1128
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1309
Great Stupa, Sanchi, 1180 [1182A, 1194E] Groined vaulting, 397 [3994]
Great Temple, Abu-Simbel, 44 [378]; Bel- Groins, 176, 209, 657, 1264 [373A, B]
lur, 1188 [1189B, 1194J]; of the Sun, Pal- Groningen (Netherlands): church, 577,
myra, 194; Tanjore, 1191 [1193B] 582; Town Hall, 835
Great Wall of China, 1201, 1207 Groombridge (Sussex): Glen Andred, 999
Great Western Hotel, Paddington Station, [997B]; Leys Wood, 999
1042 Groombridge Place (Kent), 905, 967 [907B,
Greek architecture, 5, 7-8, 89-165 966F]
agora, 102, 147, 183 [105A]; character Groot Constantia (S. Africa), 1058
of, 93-7; colour in, 96, 123, 158; columns, Groot Schuur (S. Africa), 1058
94, 97-8, 152, 155, 243 (i) [95D]; com- _Gropius, Walter (archt.), 995, 1035, 1066
parative analysis, 152-8, 240-8; domes- bis, 1067, 1075, 1094, I104, 1127, 1156,
tic buildings, 151-2 [153]; Hellenic TIS9
period of, 7, 89, 92; Hellenistic period of, Grundvig Church, Copenhagen, 1080
7-8, 89, 96-7, 108, 247 (i); houses, 151-2, [1082p|
1555 233 [153, 234C, E] ‘Gruppo 7’, Italy, 1068, 1094
mouldings, 129, 155-6, 247 (i) [124G, Guadagni, Palazzo, Florence, 685 [680F]
164, 165A-K]; openings, 107, 133, 155; Guadalajara (Mexico), Governmental
ornament, 156, 156-8; plans, 152, 240 (i) Palace, 1139
[109]; public buildings, 147-8; Roman Guadalajara (Spain), Ducal Palace, 647, 846
compared with, 94, 156, 175, 240, 243-4, [646A, 8434]
247-8 [159, 160, 164, 165]; roofs, 94, 107, Guaranty (now Prudential) Building, Buf-
108, 155 [I141D]; sculpture, 119 ter, 121, falo, N.Y., 1155
129, 148 bis, 156 [I120N, I122H, 162B, C]; Guarini, Guarino (archt.), 691, 695
temples, see Greek temples; theatres, Gubbio (Italy), Ducal Palace, 695
143-7, 1523 walls, 66, 94, 133, 140, 152, Guesten Hall, Worcester, 479 [4854-C]
240 (1) [76c] Guild Chapel, Coventry Cathedral,
Greek Church, Moscow Road, London, 1019
279 Guild Houses, 570, 577, 832 bis [829A, B]
Greek Revival, 1143, 1264; in the Ameri- Guildford (Surrey): Cathedral, 402, 1012
cas, 1126-7, 1143 bis, 1144, 1147, 1148 [1017A]; Sutton Place, 380, 386, 394;
bis, 1151 bis, 1152, 1164, 1167, 1168, Town Hall, 928 [971C¢]
1169; in Britain, 877-8, 928, 948, 950, Guildhall:
9552 963 bis, 973, 987, IOII, 1020, 10363 Cirencester, 483 [485D]; Cowane’s,
in Continental Europe, 1062; in France, Stirling, 525 [520], K]; Exeter, 483; Here-
770; in Germany, 808, 817, 1085; in ford, 483 [485—]; High Wycombe, 964;
Netherlands, 831 Lavenham, 483 [485G]; London, 394,
Greek temples, 7, 23, 93, 107-41 483, 555 [482c]; Worcester, 964 [962c];
coloured exteriors of, 247 (i); com- York, 483
parative plans of, 107 [109]; construction Guildhalls, Eng. Mediaeval, 483 [485D, G]
of, 94, 107; Doric, 112-25; Gothic Guilds, masons’, 372, 584
cathedrals compared with, 368; inscrip- Guillaume de Croy Monument, 838
tions on, 96 [95A]; Ionic, 128-37, 243 (i); Guilloche moulding, 156, 1264 [164L]
methods of lighting, 107, 121, 125, 155; Guimard, Barnabé (archt.), 832
240 (i), 243 (i) [122J, K]; naos in, see Gulbarga (India), Jami Masjid, 1241
Naos; optical refinements, 94, 121; Gur Amir, Samarkand, 1235 [1236B]
orientation of, 107, 129, 240 (i); plans of, Guttae, 111 bis, 1264
152; Roman compared with, 175, 184, Gwalior (India): Sas Bahu Temple, 1187
240; types of, 107-8 [109]; walls of, 152 [1189A]; Tomb of Muhammad Ghaus,
Green, Curtis (archt.), 1047 1242
Green Mosque, Brusa, 1237 Gymnasia, 1264; Greek, 148; Roman
Greene, C. S. (archt.), 1144 thermae derived from, 202
Greene, G. T. (archt.), 1047 Gynaeceum, 283, 284 [231D]
Greene, H. M. (archt.), 1144
Greenstead Church (Essex), 390
Greenway, Francis (archt.), 1058 Haarlem (Netherlands): Butchers Hall,
Greenwich (London): Queen’s House, 898, 835; finial at [839B]; Great Church, 574;
928, 937, 964 [896A, 900, 901]; Royal New Church, 836 [8378, 839E]; pinnacle
Hospital, 871, 873, 898, 928, 973 [900-1, at [8394]
925E]; S. Alphege, 949; Trinity Hospital, Hackensack (N.J.): Abraham Ackerman
8 97 House, 1132; Terheun House, 1132
Grilles, 846, 856, 862, 1071 Haddon Hall (Derbyshire), 452, 881, 964,
Grimani, Palazzo, Venice, 737 [745] 967 [449F-J]; Long Gallery, 452, 882 bis
Grim’s Dyke, Harrow, 999 [884A]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1310 INDEX

Hadleigh Church (Essex) [491E] Hamburg (Germany): Nikolaikirche, 990.

Hadrian (Roman Emperor): Mausoleum of, 1079 [1081A]; Petrikirche, 1079; S.
217-18 [220E-G, 237C]; sarcophagus of, Nicholas’s Church, 990
218; Villa of, Tivoli, 235 [241D] Hameel, Alard van (artist), 574
Hadrian V (Pope), monument to, Viterbo Hamilton, David (archt.), 877
[631C] Hamilton, Thomas (archt.), 877, 987.
Hadrian’s Wall, 389 1020
Hague, The (Holland): Binnenhof, 577 Hammer-beam roofs, 430, 434, 437, 451.
[826B]; Lange Vijverberg (No. 8), 835 502 ter, 885, 1264 [435F, H, K, L]; double,
[840]; Mauritshuis, the, 835 [833F]; 437 [435L]; evolution of, 433 [435K] _
New Church, 836 [837D]; Royal Library, Hammond-Harwood House, Annapolis.
835 [826B] 1135
Haileybury College (Herts.), 985 Hampton Court Palace (Middx.), 380, 394.
Hal (Belgium), Notre Dame, 582 [5818] 459, 463 [460, 925U] .
Halberstadt (Germany): Cathedral Choir, aerial view [923A]; bas-reliefs at, 380;
594 [595E]; Town Hall, 593 ceiling, 510, 974 [461c]; Clock Court,
Half-timber houses, 380, 469, 479, 885 463 [460A, G] ; formal gardens, 967 [923A];
[558J]; British 19th cent., 999, 1052 Fountain Court, 463, 914 [460G]; Great
‘Halfpenny, William’ (Michael Hoare), 874 Hall, 459, 463 [460£, 461E]; roof, 437.
Halicarnassos (Asia Minor), Mausoleum at, §02; turrets, 510; walls of, 496; Watch-
148, 151, 1151 [149] ing Chamber ceiling, 463, 510 [461C];
Halifax (Nova Scotia), Province House, West Gatehouse, 459 [378]; Wren’s
II40 work on, 871, 872, 914 [925U]
‘Hall’ churches, 358, 393, 394, 1019, 1264 Handborough Church (Oxon.) screen,
[482A]; Belgian and Dutch, 574; Ger- [5163] as
man, 405, 587 bis, 588, 593, 594 Hangars (aircraft), French, 1066, 1104
Hall-keeps, 438 [1106A]; Italian, 1111 [1060]
Hall of: Hanging Gardens of Babylon, 70
the Abencerrajes, Alhambra, Granada, Hanover (Germany), Opera House, 1085
1234 [1232E]; the Ambassadors, Al- Hans Town, Chelsea, London, 949
hambra, Granada, 1234; the Butchers’ Hardwick, P. C. (archt.), 1036, 1042
Guild, Hereford, 483 [485]; Castle Hardwick, Philip (archt.), 987, 1036
Coch, Cardiff [994D]; Central Peace, Hardwick, Thomas (archt.), 876, 905, 950
Peking, 1202; Euston Station, London, Hardwick Hall (Derbyshire), 870, 882, 964
1036 [1038D]; the Hundred Columns, [880a, B, 8848]; windows, 968 [8804]
Persepolis, 78 [76A]; Judgment, Al- Harewood House (Yorks.), 932, 938, 967
hambra, Granada, 1234 [1232F]; Middle [936E]
Temple, London, 437, 502, 881, 885 Harewood village (Yorks.), 932
[500H]; the Monoliths, Mitla, 1128 Harlaxton Hall (Lincs.), 996 [1004a]
[1129E]; the Mysteries, Eleusis, 147; Harlech Castle (Merionethshire), 438
Royal Courts of Justice, London, 643; [441D]
Royal Horticultural Hall, London, 1047; Harlow New Town (Essex), 1008
S. George’s Hall, Liverpool, 1020; Two Harper Bros. Printing Works, New York,
Sisters, Alhambra, Granada, 1234; West- II52
minster Palace, see Westminster Hall Harrison, Peter (archt.), 1136
Hallabid (India), Hoysaleswara Temple, Harrison, Wallace (archt.), 1163
1188, 1196 [1193A] Harrow (Middlesex), Grim’s Dyke, 999
Halland (Sussex), house at, 1007 [1005B] Harrow School (Middx.), 885
Halle des Machines, Paris, 1064, 1103 Harun ar-Rashid, 1224, 1235
[I105F] Harvard University, Cambridge (Mass.),
Hallet, E. S. (archt.), 1147 1139; Graduate Centre, 1139 [1161B];
Hallfield Primary School, Paddington, 1035 Harvard Hall, 1139; Holden Hall, 1139;
[1037A] Hollis Hall, 1139; Massachusetts Hall,
Hallidie Building, San Francisco, 1066, 1139
1156 [1171] Hasan: Minaret of, Rabat, 1233; Mosque
Halls: and Mausoleum of Sultan, Cairo, 1230,
aisled, 444; English Early Renaissance, 1246 [1232C-pD]
881-2, 885-6, 964 [880D, 887B, 965]; Haslingfield (Cambs.), gable cross at [512C]
English Mediaeval, 444, 447, 448, 449, Hastings, Thomas (archt.), 1151
451 bis, 452; 459, 463, 483 [442A, B, E, J, L, Hatfield House (Herts.), 881, 885-6 [89on.
445D, E, F, G, L, 449B, J, 450F, 453A; 482C}; C, 891A, B]; arcades, 968 [891A]; hall of.
Georgian, 931, 932, 937 [936D, 939C, 886 [891B]; newel at [975E]; plan of, 964
944B]; market, 483 [485F]; Scottish, 522 bis [965F]; walls, 967 bis [891A, B]
Halnaker (Sussex), chimneys at [461F] Hathor, Temple of, Dendera, 49 [48B]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1311
Hatshepsut, Queen of Egypt, her temple at Hephaestus, Temple of, see Theseion
Dér el-Bahari, 18, 20, 36, 39 [37A, 424] Hepplewhite, George (furniture maker), 979
Haviland, John (archt.), 1148, 1152 Heptastyle temples, Greek, 107, 108, I15,
Hawksmoor, Nicholas (archt.), 427, 872, 1265 [109G, L]
873; 914, 931 bis, 949, 963 quater [424D] Hera Lacinia, Temple of, Agrigentum, 112
Health Centre, Finsbury, London, 1035 Heraeum, Samos, 107, 128
{1034c] Heraion, Olympia, 112 [105B, I14C, F]
Heathcote, Ilkley, 1007 Heraldic ornament, 510 ter, 647, 773, 802
Heaton Hall (Lancs.), 937 [935c] (ii), 846 ter, 852, 856, 1116
Heaven, Temple of, Peking, 1201, 1202 Herculaneum, Gate of, Pompeii, 217
Hecatompedon, 119, 1265 Herculaneum (Italy): excavations at, 230;
Heckington (Lincs.), S. Andrew, 430, 502 wrestler figures from [249A, C]
[431, 503P]; parapet [511C]; steeple, 562 Hercules, Temple of, Cora, 112, 244 (ii)
(ii) [431A,D] [160B]
Hecklingen (Germany), column at [362]] Hereford, Hall of the Butchers’ Guild, 483
Hedingham Castle (Essex), 438 [440A, 507B] [485E
Heidelberg Castle, 811 [809, 824A, Cc]; Hereford Cathedral, 390, 402, 406
Friedrichsbau, 811 [8o09D, 8248]; Hein- central tower, 406, 562 (ii) [409F];
richsbau, 808, 8r1 [809c]; Saulbau, 811 ‘Mappa Mundi’, 406; model of [409F];
Heilbronn (Germany): gable at [824D, H]; piers in, 505; plan of [413H]; Shrine of S.
Rathaus, 811 [8104] Thomas de Cantelupe, 473, 509 [472]];
Heinrichsbau, Heidelberg, 808, 811 [809c, Wyatt’s ‘improvements’ to, 87
824A,C] Herland, Hugh (archt.-craftsman), 372; 437>
Heins and Lafarge (archts.), 1147 502
Helensburgh (Dumbartonshire), Hill Hermes, statue of, Olympia, 247 (i)
House, 1007 [1oo1c] Hermes figures, 811, 812, 886, 973, 1265
Helices, 139, 1265 [8874,975F]
Heliopolis (Egypt), obelisks at, 17, 49, 215 Hermitage, Nashville (Tennessee), 1143
Hellenic period of Greek architecture, 7, Herne (Kent), piers at [503V]
89, 92, 93-6, 97; Doric column in, 111; Herodes Atticus, Odeion of, Athens, 148,
Ionic capital in, 128; Ionic entablature 210 [103B, 104C]
in, 128; theatres of, 143 Herrera, Juan de (archt.), 845 bis, 851 bis,
Hellenistic period of Greek architecture, 852, 855, 856, 1136
7-8; 89, 96-7, 108, 112, 140, 155 Herstmonceux Castle (Sussex), 443
Doric column in, 111; Indian archi- Hertford, Blue Coat School, 885
tecture influenced by, 1179, 1180; Ionic ‘Het Lammetje’, Veere, 577
capital in, 128, 187; in Italy, 112; temples Heveningham Hall (Suffolk), 948 [943B]
in, 131 bis, 1553 theatres in, 147 Hever Castle (Kent), 452 [4544]
‘Helm’ (bulbous roofs), 817 bis, 818, 1265 Hexastyle temples, 1265; Greek, 107, 108,
[816B, 819B, 822A, C] 115, 123, 131, 140 [109], 120L, 377B];
‘Helm’ (Rhenish) roofs, 358, 363, 1265 Roman, 187, 188
[355C, 362K, 387E] Hexham (Northumberland), church at, 381
Hemicycle buttress, 178, 184 [185A, B, Heysham Church (Lancs.) [4914]
I85A-C] Hieron, Epidauros [106B]
Henegouwen, Jan van (archt.), 574 High Renaissance architecture, 659, 660,
Hengrave Hall (Suffolk), 459 [454B, 461D] 671, 673, 687-8, 701, 707, 732-47
Hennebique, Francois (archt.), 1064 High Wycombe (Bucks.), Guildhall, 964
Henostyle columned temples, 107 Higham Ferrers (Northants.), buttress at
Henriette Ronnerplein, Amsterdam, 1075 [497D] ‘
Henry V’s Chantry Chapel, Westminster, Highclere Castle (Hampshire), 996 [9934]
427 [4256] / Highgate School, London, 885
Henry VII’s Chapel, Westminster, 393, Highland Park (Illinois), Willitts House,
394, 398, 401, 427, 469, 490, 644 [377H, 1144
424D, 426, 428] . Highpoint 1, Highgate, 1008 [10064]
buttresses, 496 [497P]; cresting [511J]; Hilandar (Yugoslavia), church at, 290
misericord [517K]: mouldings [508w]; Hildebrandt, Lukas von (archt.), 811, 812,
niches for statuary, 493 [426E, 428]; 817
panelling in, 493; screen, 510; stalls Hildesheim (Germany): Cathedral, 364;
[517F]; tomb of Henry, 490, 868, 881 half-timbered house, 593 [595c]; S.
[424D, 428, 879A]; vaulting of, 398, 401, Godehard, 358; S. Lambert, 588; S
427 [426B-E]; walls of, 496; windows of, Michael, 358; Town Hall, 593
501 Hill House, Helensburgh, 1007 [1001C]
Henry of Westminster (master-mason), 423, Hilversum (Holland): Town Hall, 1094
429 [10988]; Vondelschool, 1094 [1098D]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1312 INDEX

Hindu architecture: H6riuji (Japan): Buddhist temple, 12145

character of, 1179-80; columns, 1195; Pagoda, 1214
examples, 1187-91; openings, I192; Horse Guards, London, 874; 932, 956
ornament, 1195; plans, 1191; roofs, 1195 [958A]; window of [980B]
[1190D]; walls, 1192 Horse-shoe: arches, 640, 647 [1256, No. 9];
Hindu temples, 1179; Central Indian, 1188 staircases, 812
[1186c, 1193A]; Northern Indian, 1187-8 Horta, Victor (archt.), 1065, 1071
[1186B, 1189A, I190D]; South Indian, Horus, Temple of, Edfu, 49, 51 bis [37G]
1188-91 [1185A, 1193B] Hospicio Provincial, Madrid, 852 [857A]
Hinges, English Mediaeval [5 18D, H, J] Hospital:
Hiorne, Francis (archt.), 876, 950 Abbot’s, Guildford, 897; Beaune, 5555
Hippodromes, Greek, 148 Berkeley, Worcester, 897; Byloke, the,
Hitchingbrooke Hall (Hunts.), 881, 968 Ghent, 577; Chelsea, 914 [923B, C, 925J]5
[969c] Chipping Campden, 897; Christ’s,
Hittite architecture, 81-2 Abingdon, 479; Cowane’s, Stirling, 525
Hoare, Michael (archt.), 874 [520J, K]; Ewelme, 474, 479 [480D-G];
Hoban, James (archt.), 1140 Eyre’s, Salisbury, 897; Ford’s, Coventry,
Hoffman, Josef (archt.), 1065, 1072 479 [478H-K]; Foundling, see Foundling;
Hofmeister, Henry (archt.), 1156 George Heriot’s, Edinburgh, 525, 867
Hogalid Church, Stockholm, 1080 [1082c] [520L-N] ;Greenwich, London, 871, 873,
Hokiji (Japan), Pagoda, 1214 898, 928 [900-1, 925E]; Leycester’s,
Holabird, W. (archt.), 1152, 1155, 1156 Warwick, 479 [481]; Milan, see Ospedale
Holbeach Church (Lincs.) [499]] Maggiore
Holbein, Hans (painter), 385 Norwich Great, 479; of Qalawiin,
Holden, Charles (archt.), 1035, 1048 Cairo, 1230; Sackville College, E. Grin-
Holden Hall, Harvard University, 1139 stead, 897; S. Bartholomew’s, London,
Holkham Hall (Norfolk), 932, 937, 967 955; S. Cross, Winchester, 479 [478A—
[934E, 966] D]; S. John’s, ae 582 [581D]; S
Holland, Henry (archt.), 876, 948, 949, 956 John’s, Coventry, 474; S. John’s, North-
ter ampton, 479; S. John’s, Sherborne, 4793
Holland House, London, 886, 964, 967 uke’s, Finsbury, 955; S. Mary’s,
[892]; openings, 968 bis [892A]; White Chichester, 479 bis [478E-G]; Somerset,
Parlour, 886 [892E] Petworth, 956; Tavera, Toledo, 851
Hollingbourne (Kent), Six Bells Inn, 483 [849A, B]; Trinity, Castle Rising, 897;
[484F aaa Trinity, Greenwich, 897; Weekley
Hollis Hall, Harvard University, 1139 (Northants.), 897; Whitgift, Croydon,
Holt, Thomas (archt.), 885, 886, 897 97
Holy Apostles, Church of the, Salonica, 290 Hospitals, British, 1035; Continental Euro-
Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem, 262, 265, 308 pean, 1094; English Mediaeval, 479
[260E-G] [478]; French Gothic, 555; Jacobean,
Holy Trinity, Bessborough Gardens, Lon- 897; Stuart and Georgian, 956
don, 1008 Hotel: “
Holy Trinity, Bordesley, Birmingham, 955 d’Ansembourg,Liége, 832[833B]; d’As-
Holyrood Abbey, Edinburgh, 522 sezat, Toulouse, 779, 780 [778c]; du
Home House, London, 949 [9434] Bourgtheroulde, Rouen, 559, 779 [554A]3
Home Insurance Co. Office Building, de Brunoy, Paris, 785; ambellan,
Chicago, 1152 Dijon, 559; de Cluny, Paris, 559 [557B,
Home Place, Kelling, 1000 [1003B] 558H]; Dieu, Beaune, 555; des Invalides,
Homestead, The, Frinton, 1000 Paris, see Invalides; Lambert, Paris, 785
Hommonji, Temple of, Tokyo, 1214 [7868]; Lamoignon, Paris, 780 [778D];
Honan, Temple of, Canton, 1202 [1204N] des Monnaies, Paris, 770, 791 [790B]; de
Honeysuckle ornament, 156 bis, 247 (i) Salm, Paris, 785; de Sully, Paris, 785
Honington Hall (Warwicks.), 905 [907A] Kall Rue du Cherche-Midi, Paris
Honnecourt, Villard de (archt.-craftsman), [788E]
372 Hotel de Ville: Arras, 555 [554B]; Beau-
Honorius, Tomb of, Rome [259c gency, 779 [778A] ;Bourges, 555 [558C, F];
Hontanon, Rodrigo Gil de (archt.), 846 oo 555 [554c]; Dreux, 555
Hood, Raymond (archt.), 1156 bis [554D]; Orleans, 779
Hood-moulding, 501 Hotels (town houses), 769, 779, 780; 785 bis,
Hook of Holland, workers’ Hadses: 1075 791 (778, 788]
[1069E] Hotels de Ville, 533, 555
Hoop-tie principle, 671, 677, 1265 Houghton Hall (Norfolk), 932 [9358]
Hopper, Thomas (archt.), 989 Houghton-le-Dale (Norfolk), the Pilgrim’s
Horham Hall (Essex), 463 Chapel, 469 [471A-C]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1313
House of Agnés Sorel, Orleans, 779 Ibn Taliin Mosque, Cairo, 1226, 1229-30,
“House No. 33’, Priene, 151-2 [234¢, E] 1235 [1228A, 1232A-B]
House of: Ibrahim Rauza, Bijapur, 1241
Diomede, Pompeii, 233; the Dwarf, Iconostas (screen), 280, 297, 1265
Uxmal, 1128; the Faun, Pompeii, 233; Ictinus (archt.), 119, 123
Livia, Rome, 230; Nero, Rome, 206, 229, Ieyasu, tomb of, Nikk6, 1214
“707; Pansa, Pompeii, 233 [234, 238A]:5 Iffey Church, Oxford, 390 [497A, 503F];
Sallust, Pompeii, 233; the Seven Gables, ornamented moulding [508D]
Salem (Mass.), 1132; the Surgeon, Pom- Igel Monument, Tréves, 221 [2201]
peii, 233 [249F]; Tell el-Amarna (Egypt), Ightham Mote (Kent), 451 [453]
50 [52B]; the Tragic Poet, Pompeii, 233; - Ilissus, Temple on the (Athens), 108, 129,
the Vestal Virgins, Rome, 230; the 131-3 [109D, 127B, 132A-F, 160C]
Vettii, Pompeii, 233 [234D, F] Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago,
Houses (see also Dwellings): 1159, 1160[1157B]
in the Americas, I13I-5, 1140-4, Ilkley (Yorkshire), Heathcote, 1007
1156-9; British, 995-1007; Chinese, Ilsenburg (Germany), capital and column
1206, 1208 [1208A-c]; Continental Eu- at [362¢, L]
rope, I07I-9; country, see Country Imperial Palace: Nara, 1217; Peking,
houses; Egyptian, 50 [52B, 1228c-pD]; 1206
English Mediaeval, 463, 469 [464-7]; Impington Village College (Cambs.), 1035
English Renaissance, 868, 979; French, [1034a]
347, 559 [558]; Georgian, 868, 928-49; Impluvium, 1265 [234B]
Greek, 151-2, 155, 233 [153, 234C, E]; Impost, 1265 [387F, 745A, B, H]
half-timber, 380, 469, 479, 999, 1052 ‘In antis’ temples, 1265; Greek, 107, 108
[558]]; iron-framed, 999; Italian, 623 [109A]; Roman, 194
[612G]; Japanese, 1217-18, 1218, 1219 Ince Minar, Konia, 1237
[1216C—D]; manor, see Manor houses; Independence Hall, Philadelphia, 1140
Muslim, 1224, 1245 [1248]; prefabri- [11388]
cated cast-iron, 983; Queen Anne, 868; Indian and Pakistani architecture, 1174-96
Roman, 230, 233-6 [237A]; timber- Buddhist monasteries, 1183; building
framed, 577, 983; town, see Town houses; materials, 1175; character of, 1178-80;
Turkish, 1238 comparative analysis, 1191-6; English
Houses of Parliament: Melbourne, 1059; imitation of, 876, 948; examples of, 1180—
Westminster, 1019-20 1191; Greek influence on, 7, 1179, 1180;
Hous’Hill, Nitshill, Glasgow, 1007 [1002B] - Muslim, 1238-45; New Delhi, 1026
Hove (Sussex), Brunswick Chapel (now S. [1031c]; Persian influence, 1238, 1241,
Andrew’s), 987 1242
Howard, Sir Ebenezer (archt.), 1007 Indian Institute, Oxford [4754]
Howden (Yorks.), gargoyle at [51IH]; Industrial buildings, see Commercial and
vaulting rib [507u] industrial
Howells, J. M. (archt.), 1155, 1156 Infante’s Tomb, Miraflores, 653 [651E]
Hoysaleswara Temple, Hallabid, 1188 Ingram Street Tearooms, Glasgow, 1047
[1193A] Inigo Jones, see Jones, Inigo
Huby, Abbot (archt.), 429 Ink Pagoda, Soochow, 1205
Huguenot craftsmen, 866 Inns: English Mediaeval, 479, 483 [484];
Hull (Yorks.), school at, 474 Japanese, 1218
Hulst church (Zealand), 574 Innsbruck (Austria): church, 817; Fursten-
Humayun, Tomb of, Delhi, 1242 [1240a] burg Palace, 594 [592F]
Hungarian Guard, Palace of the, Vienna, 812 Institute of Iron and Steel Technology,
Hunt, R. M. (archt.), 1143, 1168 Peking, 1207
Hurley, William (master-carpenter), 406 Insula (tenement), 230, 235
Husley,J. O. (archt.), 835 Intercolumniation, 112, 129, 137, 1265
Huts, 3 [2A]; beehive, 521 [2D, E]; Doric [113A]; Japanese, 1220; Roman, 184,
[110¢c, D] 188, 230
Huttoft Church (Lincs.), oak chest [519H] Interiors, Baroque, 659; church, Gothic
Huyssens, Pieter (archt.), 835 and Renaissance, 661
Hyde Park Barracks, Sydney, 1058 International Building, Rockefeller Centre,
Hyde Park Corner, London, archway, 222, New York, 1156 [11544]
877 [962E] International Exhibitions, Paris (1855),
Hypaethral, 107, 115, 125, 131, 140, 1265 1064; Paris (1878), 1103 [1105D]; Paris
Hypocausts, 205 [203B] (1889), 1133; Paris (1900), 1086; Paris
Hypostyle Halls, Egyptian, 18, 23, 36 bis, (1937), 1094; Vienna (1873), 1064 f
43> 44, 49, 1265 [40B, E, F, G, 41 bis] Interpenetration of mouldings, 594 7s,
Hypotrachelion, 111, 1265 823
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1314 INDEX

Invalides, Hotel des, Paris, 769, 799, 801 Italian Gothic Architecture (cont.)
(ii) [788B, c]; dome of, 799 [797D, Byzantine influence on, 657, 6715
800A-C] Central Italy, 613-24; character of, 603-
Inwood, W. and H. W. (archts.), 877, 950 604; columns, 627; comparative analysis,
Ionic Order, 7, 85, 96, 125-37, 155, 174 624-33; mouldings, 633; North Italy,
[160c, D, 972D] 604-13; Openings, 627; ornament, 633;
Buddhist use of, 1179; capitals, 125 plans, 624 [616F, 617D]; roofs, 627; South
[126K-—M, R, S, 127]; columns, 7, 85, I21, Italy and Sicily, 624; walls, 627
125, 129, 131, 133, 137, 149) 233, 792; Italian Renaissance architecture, 9-10, 657;
811, 835, 846, 851 [126, 127]; entabla- 665-756, 1164
ture, 125, 128, 129, 131 bis, 133, 137, 148, analysis, 747-52; Antiquarian, 660 dis,
151, 244 (i) [130A, 132], 159E]; Etruscan 671, 672, 673; Baroque, 659 ter, 660 ter,
versions of, 183; giant, 1020; Greek and 671, 672, 673, 674, 688-95, 725-9, 7473
Roman compared, 244 [160C, D]; Renais- Byzantine influence upon, 671, 674, 678,
sance, 656; Roman use of, 187, 213, 7323; character of, 671-7; columns, 751;
244 (ii); temples of, 128-37; volute, 125, Early Renaissance, 657, 660, 671, 672,
128 [126] 673, 674, 677-87, 695-6, 731-2; French
Ipswich (Mass.), Whipple House, 1132 Renaissance compared with, 799-802;
Ipswich (Suffolk), S. Margaret, 437 ‘grotesque’, 707; High Baroque, 672;
Iran, Muslim architecture, 1234-7 High Renaissance and Proto-Baroque,
Iraq, Muslim architecture, 1234-7 659, 660, 671 bis, 672, 673, 674, 687-8,
‘rimoya’ gable, 1219 [1216] 696-725, 732-47; Mannerist, 659, 671
Irish architecture, 525-7 [526, 528]; bee- bis; mouldings, 751-2; openings, 748-51;
hive huts, 527 [2E]; Celtic, 525; Medi- ornament, 674 bis, 687, 696, 752; phases
aeval, 527 of, 660, 671; plans, 747-8; Rococo, 660;
Tron-and-glass see Glass-and-metal roofs, 751; walls, 748
Tron bridges, 983, 989, 1063, 1064 Italian Romanesque architecture, 293, 31I-
Iron churches, 877, 950, 1079
Iron-framed buildings, 983, 1041, 1047, Byzantine influence upon, 312, 315,
1064, 1079, 1085, 1086, 1103 324; campanili, 323; Central Italy, 312,
Ironwork (decorative): 315, 316, 319-20, 329; character of, 3163
Australian, 1059; Belgian and Dutch, columns, 319, 320, 324, 329; compara-
582, 1072; British, 1020; Continental tive analysis, 329, 3313; influences upon,
European, 1116; English Gothic [518G]; 311-12, 315-16; mouldings, 331; Mus-
French, 862, 1104; German, 594; Span- lim influence on, 315, 324 bis, 3293
ish, 846 bis, 856 bis [860C, E]; see also North Italy, 312, 315-16, 320, 323-4,
Cast-iron, Wrought-iron and Metalwork 3293; Openings, 320, 329; ornament, 319,
Ironwork (structural), 983, 989, 991, 1062, 330 [331]; plans, 329; roofs, 312, 329;
1063, 1064, 1116; see also Cast-iron and Southern Italy and Sicily, 312 bis, 315
Wrought-iron bis, 316, 319, 324, 329, 331; walls, 312,
Isé (Japan), Shinto shrine at, 1214 [1220] 329
Isesi Ankh, Mastaba of [24E] Italy, Greek temples in, 112
Isfahan (Iran): Chihil Sutun, 1237; Itamarati Palace, Rio de Janeiro, 1126
Masjid-i-Juma Mosque, 1235; Masjid-i- Ivory work, English Mediaeval, 509 [519B]
Shah, 1237; Mosque of Lutfullah, 1237 Ixworth Church (Suffolk), roof [435]]
Ishchali (Mesopotamia), Temple complex
at, 70 [678]
Ishtar Gate, Babylon, 70 [71c] Jackson, John (mason), 872
Isis, Temple of, Philae, 44 [46, 47] Jacobean architecture, 660, 1265
Isleworth (Middx.), Syon House, 938 character of, 869-70; columns, 973;
[942A, B] manor houses, 897; mansions, 866, 881,
Islip, Abbot, his Chapel, Westminster, 473 885-6; market halls, 897; openings, 968;
[472C] : we 974; plans, 964 [965]; walls,
Isodorus of Miletus (archt.), 280 907
Issoire (Auvergne), S. Austremoine, 343 ‘Jacobethan’ style, 988, 996 quater, 1052,
Istanbul (Turkey) (see also Constantinople): 1054
Mosque of Bayazid, 1237; Mosque of Jacobs House, Middleton, Wisconsin, 1156
Muhammad II, the Conqueror, 289, Jacobsen, Arne (archt.), 1111
1237; Mosque of Sultan Ahmed, 1237; Jacome, Ferreira (archt.), 1136
Museum at, 151; S. Sophia, see S. Jacopo, Mastro (archt.), 732
Sophia; Selimiye, 1237; Suleymaniye, Jacques Coeur, House of, Bourges, 559
1237 [1239A]; Yeni Valide, 1237 [552A, 557A]
Italian Gothic Architecture, 320, 599-633, Jaen (Spain), Cathedral, 855, 856 [859Cc]
990 Jagannath Temple, Puri, 1187
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1315
Jahan, Shah: palace of, Delhi, 1242; tomb Jubé (rood screen), 792, 1266
of, 1245 Jugendstil architecture, 1065
Jain architecture, 1183-7 [1174A]; charac- Julia, Basilica, in Rome, 202
teristics, 1179; examples, 1183-7; roofs, Julii, Tomb of the, S. Rémy, 221 [220H]
1192; temples, 1177, 1179, 1183 [1184A, Julius Caesar, Forum of, Rome, 184 [182B]
BJ; viharas, 1187 Julius III, Pope, his Villa in Rome, 180,
Jaipur (India), 1188 183, 708 [181L, 710A-G]
Jambs, 309, 329, 496 bis, 1265 [356H, 498, Jumiéges (Normandy), church at [346B]
5678] ;recessed, 343, 348, 496, 505 Juno, Temple of, Rome, 225
James, C. H. (archt.), 1035 Juno Sospita, Temple of, Lanuvium, 180
James, John (archt.), 427, 949 [424D] [181H, J]
Jami Masjid: Jupiter, Temple of, Baalbek: 194, 283
Ahmadabad, 1241; Bijapur, 1241-2 [193A,; B, F]; Pompeii [2268]; Rome, 225
[1247G-H]; Champanir, 1241; Delhi, [232E]; Spalato, 194, 229 [231D]
1242; Fatehpur-Sikri, 1242 [1243a, Jupiter Capitolinus, Temple of, Rome, 140,
1247¢C]; Jaunpur, 1241; Kulbarga, 1241; 180 [172B, 182A]; see also Capitol
Mandu, 1241 Jupiter Stator, Temple of, Rome [232E]
Jan Ditmars House, Brooklyn, N.Y., 1132 Jupiter Victor, Temple of, Rome [232E]
Janus Quadrifrons, Arch of, Rome, 225 Jura (Scotland), shielings at [2c]
[172A, 223L, M] Juvarra, Filippo (archt.), 683, 695, 852
Japanese architecture, 1211-21
analysis, 1218-213; character of, 1213,
I219 [1216K]; columns, 1219; European K. 1, Mastaba, at Beit Khallaf, 26 [248]
influence, 1218; houses, 1217-18; open- Kaaba, Mecca, 1229
ings, 1219; ornament, 1220-1 [1216G— Kahun (Egypt), pyramid site at, 50
MJ]; pagodas, 12143 roofs, 1219; temples, Kaiserworth, the, Goslar, 593, 594 [592C]
1213-14 [1216A];tombs, 12143 walls, 1219 Kampen (Netherlands), gateways, 577
Jaunpur (India), Jami Masjid, 1241 Kanarak (India), Black Pagoda, 1187
Java, Buddhist remains, 1183 [1194c-D]
Jeanneret, C-E. see Le Corbusier Kandarya Mahadev Temple, Khajuraho,
Jeanneret, Pierre (archt.), 1075 1187 bis [1190D]
Jefferson, President Thomas, as architect, Kapnikarea Church, Athens, 290
1132, 1143, 1147 Karatay Mosque, Konia, 1237
Jena (Germany), Planetarium, 1104 Karli (India): rock-cut chaitya, 1180; rock-
Jenney, W. le B. (archt.), 995, 1152, 1155 cut temple, 1175, 1180 [1181A]
Jerusalem: Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Karlskirche, Vienna, 818 [820B]
262, 265, 308 [260E-G]; ‘Dome of the Karlsruhe (Germany), Schloss, 817 [814c]
Rock’, 1224, 1229, 1246 [1227A]; Mosque Karnak (Egypt): Great Temple of Ammon
of al-Aqsa, 1229; Temple at, 222; at, 17 bis, 18, 39, 50 [6, 40, 41A]; Hall of
temple-shaped tombs around, 218 Columns at, 20; Hypostyle Hall at, 18, 36
Jespersen Office Block, Copenhagen, I1I1I [41A]; obelisk from, 50 [664]; Temple of
[1117] Khons, 36, 39 [38E-H, 40A]
Jesuit churches, 659, 792, 817 Keble College, Oxford, ro11 [1010C]
Jesuits, the, 305, 668, 762, 769, 807, 835, 842 Kedleston Hall (Derbyshire), 932, 937
Jesus College, Cambridge, 473 [936c, D, 939]
Jesus College, Oxford, 473, 882, 897 Keel moulding, 506, 1266 [507], K]
Jewel Belt bridge, Soochow, 1207 Keene, Henry (archt.), 963, 964
Jews’ House, the, Lincoln, 469 [4644] Keeps, castle, 437, 438, 443, 1266 [442L,
Jhaulian (Pakistan), Zoroastrian temple, 445B, D, E, 458D]_
I179; 1195 : Keldermans, Andries (archt.), 574, 577
Johannesburg (S. Africa), Art Gallery, 1058 Keldermans, R. (archt.), §745 5775 582
John Ward House, Salem, Mass., 1132 Keller Mansion, S. Charles Parish (La.),
Johnson, Bernard (archt.), 886 1132
Johnson, P. C. (archt.), 1067, 1159, 1163 Kelling (Norfolk), Home Place, 1000
Johnson Wax Co. Buildings, Racine (Wis.), [1003B]
1160 [1162A] Kellum, John (archt.), 1152
Jones, Inigo (archt.), 10, 870-1, 874, 897 Kelso Abbey (Roxburghshire), 522
buildings attributed to, 882, 9053 Kenilworth Castle, 443 [442H-M, 507Y]
buildings by, 898-905, 928, 9313; gate Kenn Church (Devon), rood in [5 16L]
piers by, 974 [980G]; Palladio’s influence Kensington Palace, London, 914
on, 738, 867, 870, 898, 973 Kent, William (archt.), 874, 875, 932, 9375
Jones, Owen (archt.), 1042 938, 948, 956
Josselin, Chateau de (Brittany), 555 [556A] Kenton Church (Devon) [504M]
Jourdain, F. (archt.), 1104 Kerr, Peter (archt.), 1059
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
2F. H.O.A.
1316 INDEX

Kettering (Northants.), S. Peter, 490 [492K] Kirkwall Cathedral (Orkney), 522

Kew Bridge (Surrey), 964 Kitchens, English Mediaeval, 451 bis
Kew Gardens (Surrey): Pagoda, 12053 [449H
Palm House, 1041 [1040B] Klenze, Leopold von (archt.), 817
Key, Lieven de (archt.), 831 bis, 832, 835; Klerk, Michael de (archt.), 1026, 1067, 1075
836 Klingentor, Rothenburg [592B]
Keyser, Hendrik de (archt.), 831, 835 bis, Klint, P. W. Jensen (archt.), 1080
836 Klosterneuburg SpE (Germany), 817
Keystones, arch, 222, 398, 627, 802 (ii), Knapped flint, 380, 490,4
1266 [223A, 224E, 804A, H Knapton Church ‘Notfolla, roof of, 437
Khafaje (Mesopotamia), temple oval at, 69 [4351] |
[674 ate J.C. (archt.), 1059
Khajuraho (India), Kandarya Mahadev Knight, Richard Payne (landscape archt.),
Temple, 1187 bis [1190D] 94
Khan Asad Pasha, Damascus, 1246 Knight, Thomas (master-mason), 928
Khans, 1246 Knights Hospitallers, or Knights of S.
‘Kheker’ cresting, Egyptian, 22, 57 [29B] John, 305, 381
Khnemhetep, tomb of, Beni Hasan, 35 Knights Templars, 305, 308, 381
Khons, Temple of, Karnak, 36, 39 [38E—-H] Knole House (Kent), 881, 886, 964, 967
Khorsabad, City of (Iraq), 73-5 [74C]; gate- [879C, 890A] , :
way, 73 [72D, E, 74B]; Palace of Sargon Knossos (Crete), Palace of King Minos at,
at, 64, 73-5 [71B, 72C-E, 74]; Temple to 98 [998]
Nabu at, 73, 753 temples at, 75 zs [74D, Knott, Ralph (archt.), 1026
F, H, J] é Kém Ombo (Egypt), temple at, 49 [37F]
Khudabanda Khan, Tomb of, Sultaniya, Konia (Turkey): Ince Minar, 1237; Kara-
1235 tay Mosque, 1237; Mausoleum of Mey-
Khyber Pass (Pakistan), Stupa in, 1180 lama, 1237; Mosque of Ala ad-Din,
Kiddington (Oxon.), mouldings at [508P] 1237; Mosque of Energhe, 1237; Mosque
Kiev (Russia), S. Sophia, 293 of Sirceli, 1237
Kilconnel (Co. Galway), monastery at, 527 Koopman de Wet House, Cape Town, 1058
Kilpeck (Herefordshire), boss at [512J] Kouyunjik, see Nineveh
Kilree Tower (Co. Kilkenny), 527 [528]] Kramer, Piet L. (archt.), 1026, 1067, 1072
King Charles’s Tower, Chester, 489 [487B] Krusevac (Yugoslavia), Lazarica church at,
King John’s House, Warnford, 448 290
King-post, 433, 448, 1266 Kufa (Iran), mosque at, 1234
King’s Chapel, Boston (Mass.), 1136 Kulbarga (India), Jami Masjid, 1241
[1137D] Kuo Tzu Chien, Peking, 1202
King’s College, Aberdeen, 421 Kurodani Temple, Kidéto, 1214 [12154]
King’s College, Cambridge, 473, 510, 878 Kutabiyya Minaret, the, Marrakesh, 1233
[4753] , Kuttenberg (Germany), S. Barbara, 588
King’s College Chapel, Cambridge, 394,
469, 549 [377L, 468, 470A]; heraldic
ornament in, 510; stalls in, 878 [977M]; Laach Abbey (Germany), 358, 363 [361B,
vaulting of, 398, 401, 421; windows of, 362M]
501 Labrouste, Henri (archt.), 1063, 1085 bis
King’s Cross Station, London, 1042 [1040c] Lac Bouchette, Quebec, Marial Chapel,
King’s Gate, Boghazkéy, 81 [834] 1160
King’s Head, Sissinghurst, 483 [484] La Charité-sur-Loire, tympanum at [351B]
King’s Lynn (Norfolk): Custom House, 928 Lackford Church (Suffolk), font at [515B]
[924C]; S. Nicholas [491v] Lacock Abbey (Wilts.), hall at, 938
King’s Room, Oxburgh, 452 [450], L] Laconicum, 202, 1266
Kingston House, Bradford-on-Avon, bal- Lacunaria, 121, 155 [120K]
ustrade [969F] Lady chapels, 366, 376, 393, 469, 1012,
Kinkaku-ji, Kidto, 1217 1019 [413, 419A, C, D]
Kinsky Palace, Vienna, 812 [813F] ter
Granja (Spain), Royal Palace, 852
Kiosk (or ‘Pharaoh’s Bed’), Philae, 49 [47A]
Kiéto (Japan): Ginkaku-ji, 1217; Kinkaku- Gee (N.M.), San José Church, 1136
ji, 1217; Kurodani Temple, 1214 Laing, David (archt.), 955
[12154]; Mikado’s Palace, 1217 Laing Stores, New York, 1152
Kirby Hall (Northants.), 870, 905, 967, 968 Lake Shore Drive (Nos. 845-60), Chicaee
[888a] 1159 [1158]
Kirkby Lonsdale Bridge (Lancs.), 489 ‘Lake Villages’, 3, 521
[487K] Lambeth Palace: Chapel, 393; Great Hall,
Kirkstall Abbey (Yorks.), 304, 382 394; Morton’s Tower, 394
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1317
La Muette Chateau (France), 774 Leadwork: English Mediaeval, 510; French,
Lancet
English
style, 389, 390; see also Early 799 [804c]
Leaf and tongue ornament, 156 [162H]
Lancet arch, 390, 401, 496, 522, 1266 [1256, Leamington (Warwicks.), Royal Music Hall,
No. 11] 956
“‘Lancettes, Gothique a’, 534 Leaning towers: Bologna, 323 [317C]; Pisa,
Lanchester, H. V. (archt.), 992, 1026 319 [313A, 314A, D]
Lancing College (Sussex), 985; chapel, rorr Le Brun, Charles (archt.), 769, 785 [7774]
[10roB] Le Corbusier (archt.), 1066, 1067, 1071,
Landgrave Henri, tomb of, Marburg, 597 1075, 1079 bis, 1085, 1160, 1163 bis
[596K] Lecterns, 509, 653 [518E, F]
Landsberg (Germany), two-storeyed Ledbury (Herefordshire), 483 [485F]
church, 363 Ledoux, Claude Nicholas (archt.), 770, 785
Landshut (Germany), roofs at, 593; S. Lee Priory (Kent), 948
Martin, 588 Leicester: S. Martin, 434; S. Mary [515K]
Langhans, C. G. (archt.), 817 Leicester’s Buildings, Kenilworth, 443
Langley, Batty, books by, 874, 1132 [4421]
Lansdowne House, London, 949 Leipzig (Germany), Market Hall, 1104
Lanterns, 1266 [1108B
Belgian and Dutch, 574; British, 1020; Le Mans Cathedral (France), 530, 537-8,
English Mediaeval, 444; French, 541, [536c]
773 [772F]; Gothic, 375; Italian, 324, Lemercier, Jacques (archt.), 769, 774; 780,
329, 613, 687 [616C]; Renaissance, 657; 792 bis
Spanish, 643 [650D, F]; Swedish, 1093; Lennox, E. J. (archt.), 1151
see also Cimborio Le Notre, André (archt.), 769, 785
Lanuvium (Italy), shemple) at, 180 Leon (Spain): Casa de los Guzmanes,
[181H,J] 852 [848B]; Cathedral, 639, 644, 648
Laon Cathedral (France), 530, 537 [536A, B] ; [652c]; S. Isidoro, 640 [650c]; S. Marcos,
chapel [563G]; square east end, 537, 856
5
559 (i); towers, 537, 562 (i) [536B]; west Leoni, Giacomo (archt.), 873, 937
facade, 537 [536B] Leptis Magna (N. Africa), 183
Larder, 451 Le Puy Cathedral (Auvergne), 340
Larissa (Greece), Ionic capitals in, 125 Le Raincy (S. et O.), Notre Dame, 1080
Larkin Soap Co. Building, Buffalo, N.Y., [1083A, B]
1155 [1150B] Lerida (Spain), Cathedral, 640, 644 [649E]
Lasdun, Denys (archt.), 1007, 1035 Les Andelys (France), Chateau Gaillard,
Laterano, Palazzo del, Rome, 725 [664, 706F] $49
Laths, 1180 67s, 1195; Allahabad, 1180; Lesbos (Greek island), Ionic capitals in, 125
Lauriya Nandangarh [1186aA]; Sarnath, Lescot, Pierre (archt.), 766, 774, 779
I180 Lessay (France), nave piers at, 348 [350H]
Latin America: Colonial architecture, 1126; Letchworth Garden City (Herts.), 1007
European influence, 1126 Lethaby, W. R. (archt.), 992, 1047
Latrobe, B. H. (archt.), 1143, 1144, 1147, Leuchars church (Fife), 522 [523c]
1148 Le Vau, Louis (archt.), 769, 774, 779 bis,
Lattices, Muslim wooden, 1246 [1248c] 780 bis, 785 bis, 792 bis, 871
Launceston Castle (Cornwall), 438 Levens Hall (Westmorland), ceiling at, 510
Laurana, Luciano (archt.), 695, 696 Lever House, New York, 1163 [1165C]
Laurentian Library, Florence, 672, 714 Leverington (Cambs.), arch at [507G]
[7168] Lewes (Sussex): monastery at, 304; motte
Lauriya Nandangarh (Nepal), stambha at, at, 437
1180 [1186a] Lewis, H. J. Whitfield (archt.), 1008
Lavabos,
752 [750D, 759F] Lewis (Scotland), beehive huts at, 521 [2p]
Lavenham (Suffolk): buttress at [497k]; Leycester’s Hospital, Warwick, 479 [481]
church screen [516K]; Guildhall, 483 Leyden (Netherlands): Marekerk, 836;
[485G]; house and shop at, 469 [4674]; Town Hall, 832, 835 [839D, G]
pier at [503T] Leys Wood, Groombridge, 999
Laves, G. F. L. (archt.), 1085 Libraries, Roman, 184, 201 [200B, 203B]
Law Courts, Cardiff, 1026 [1031B]; Dublin, Library:
9553 Georgian, 955; London, 643, 955; Bodleian, Oxford, 886 [475A, 895A];
991, 1025 [1028B] Boston (Mass.), 1085; Cambridge, old
Layens, Mathieu de (archt.), 577 University, 963 [962B]; Laurentian,
Layer Marney Towers (Essex), 380, 394, Florence, 672, 714 [716B]; National,
463 [4624] Paris, 1064, 1085-6 [1088]; Queen’s
Lazarica church at KruSevac, 290 College, Oxford, 914, 963 [922C, 959C];
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1318 INDEX

Library (cont.) Lisieux (Normandy): S. Pierre, 542; timber

Radcliffe, Oxford, 963 [475A, 959A]; houses, 559
Royal, The Hague, 835 [826B]; Rylands, Little Maplestead (Essex), circular church
Deansgate, Manchester, 1026 [1029A]; at, 265, 305, 390
S. Geneviéve, Paris, 1063, 1085, I151 Little Metropole Cathedral, Athens, 290
[1087]; S. Mark, Venice, 702, 737 [740]; [278H-L]
School of Art, Glasgow, 1026 [1030C]; Little Moreton Hall (Cheshire), 463 [462C]
Stockholm City, 1094; Trinity College, Little Welnetham Church (Suffolk), roof,
Cambridge, 714, 914 [921F, 922A, 925Z] 434
Lichfield Cathedral, 376 b7s, 393 bis, 398, Little Wenham Hall (Suffolk), 380, 448
402 bis, 406 [419] [446H-N]
Choir, 501; Lady Chapel, 469 [413]]; Liverpool (Australia), S. Luke’s Church,
model of [407]; piers at [503P]; plan of, 1058
490 [413]]; sculpture, 565 (ii); spires of, Liverpool (England):
405, 406, 562 (ii) [407E]; tower of, 490, Bank of England branch, 1036 [10398];
562 (ii) [407E]; Wyatt’s ‘improvements’ Belem Tower, Sefton Park, 1008 [1006c];
to, 876 Cathedral, 402, ror1-12 [1014A, B] ;Cook
Liebfrauenkirche, Trier, 363, 587 [364, Street, No. 16, 1047s Exchange935+ 4
589A, B] churches, 877, 950; Oriel Chambers,
Liége (Belgium): Hétel d’Ansembourg, 832 1047 [10448]; S. George’s Church, 877,
[833B]; Maison Havart, 577; S. Barthé- 950; S. George’s Hall, 987, 1020 [1023C];
lémy, 573; S. Denis, 573; S. Jacques, Town Hall, 955
574s 582 [580C] : Livia, House of, Rome, 230
Lierne ribs, 393, 398 bis, 502 bis, 1266 Llandaff Cathedral, Cardiff, 402, 406 [413C]
_[399F,G] _ Locmariaker (Brittany), monolith at, 3 [2B]
Lierre (Belgium): church [581D]; Town Loculi (recesses for corpses), 217
Hall, 832 [833D] Lodges of mediaeval masons, 372
Light-wells, 92, 98 bis, 836, 1051, II1I5 Loggetta, the, Venice, 737 [757H]
Ligorio, Pirro (archt.), 713 Loggia, 1266
Lima (Peru): Cathedral, 1135; Quinta de Foundling Hospital, Florence, 677; dei
Presa, 1135; Torre Tagle Palace, 1135 Lanzi, Florence, 623 [615c]; dei Mer-
Limburg Cathedral (Germany), 587 [362E- canti, Bologna, see Mercanzia; Palazzo
G, K] Guadagni, Florence, 684; Palazzo Mas-
Lincoln (Lincs.): Jews’ House, the, 469 simi, Rome, 702 [703F]; Pazzi Chapel,
[4644]; Roman gateways in, 225; S. Florence [676A]; Waldstein Palace,
eee Guild, 447 [4468]; walls of, 383, Prague, 812 [810B]
483 Lombardo, Martino (archt.), 732
Lincoln (Mass.), houses at, 1159 Lombardo, Pietro (archt.), 674, 731; build-
Lincoln Cathedral, 308, 376, 393, 406 ings by, 731-2
[416-17] ‘ Lombardo, Sante (archt.), 732
‘Angel Choir’, 393, 406, 496 [416D, E, Lombardo, Tullio (archt.), 732
G]; Chapter House, 405, 406 [396B, 4I0OF, London:
416A, 497Q]; crocket [511P]; east end of, Adelphi, 949; Admiralty, Old, White-
405; finial at [512E]; Galilee Porch, 408 hall, 956; Albert Memorial, 1025, 1055
[410F, 508K]; model of [408H]; mould- [1024c]; Alford House, 999 [998a]; All
ings in, 506 [508], K, L]; nave, 493 Hallows, Barking, 878, 974 [976G]; All
[416B, Cc]; plan of [410F]; rose window, Hallows-on-the-wall, 950; All Saints,
509; tower of, 405, 406, 562 (ii) [4174]; Camden Town, 950; All Saints, Margaret
transepts of, 405, 559 (ii); vaulting of, St, 990, 1008-11 [1109C, D]; All Souls,
398, 502; windows, 562 (ii) [408H] Langham Place, 955; Almack’s Club, S.
Lincoln College, Oxford, 473 James’s, 956; Alton Estate, Wandsworth,
Lincoln Memorial, Washington, D.C., 1008 [1006p]; Apsley House, Piccadilly,
I151 [1149A] 949; Ashburnham House, Westminster,
Lindsay House, Lincoln’s Inn Fields, 905, 967 [904A, 971J]; Athenaeum Club,
London, 905 956
Ling Kuang Ssii Pagoda, Peking, 1205 Bank of England, 955, 1035 [10324];
Link-holder, 684, 752 [685c] Banking House, the, Lombard St, 955; °
Lintel, 661 (ii), 1266 [332]] Banqueting House, Whitehall, 867, 898,
Lion Gate, Mycenae, 101 [99A, I00H] 973 [896B, 899]; Barber-Surgeons’ Hall,
Lion Tomb, Cnidos, 148, 151 [150A-F] 905; Berkeley House, Piccadilly, 906;
Lippi, Annibale (archt.), 713 Berkeley Square, 948, 949; Boodle’s
Lippi, Fra Filippo (painter), 668 Club, S. James’s Street, 956 [957C];
pr (Portugal), Guarini’s church in, Bridgewater House, 996 [994A]; Britan-
OI nic House, Finsbury Circus, 10473
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1319
London (cont.) London (cont.)
British Museum, 877, 956, 989, 1041 [940D]; Law Courts, 955, 991, 1025
[962D];_ Bromley-by-Bow Old Palace, [1028B]; Lindsay House, Lincoln’s Inn
885, 974 [977B]; Brooks’s Club, 956; Fields, 905; London Passenger Trans-
Buckingham Palace, 963, 988 port Building, Westminster, 1035, 1048
Carlton House, Pall Mall, 949, 989 [1049A] |
. [1022B]; Cenotaph, Whitehall, 1026 Mansion House, 948 [946B]; Marble
[1032c]; Charterhouse, 305, 878, 885 bis, Arch, 963; Marlborough Chapel, 905;
974 [889B, 976B]; Chelsea Hospital, 914 Marlborough House, Pall Mall, 914;
[923B, C, 9251]; Chesterfield House, S. Middle Temple, 437, 502, 881 bis, 928
Audley Street, 948; Christ Church, New- [500H, 888c, 889A]; Midland Bank,
gate Street, 914 [916], 925B]; Christ Piccadilly, 1047; Monument, the, 914
Church, Spitalfields, 949 [951C]; Christ’s [9251]
Hospital, 474, 885 ;Church of the Annun- National Gallery, Trafalgar Sq., 877,
ciation, Old Quebec Street, 10123; City 963 [961A]; Natural History Museum, S.
Churches of, 913-14 [915C, D, 916, 917; Kensington, 1025; New Cavendish St
QI8E-H, 919, 920B, D, 92IA—C, E, 924A, (Nos 93-7), 1051 [1050B]; New Scotland
925-6]; City of London School, 474; Yard, 1025 [1027B]; Newgate Prison, 955
Churchill Gardens Development, Pim- [958D]; house in Newton Road, Padding-
lico, 1008; Cleopatra’s Needle, 50; Coal ton, 1007 [1006B]
Exchange, Lower Thames Street, 1041 d Swan House, Chelsea, 999 [998D];
[1038B]; Constitution Hill arch, 222, 963; Orangery, the, Kensington Gardens, 928,
County Hall, 1026 [1031A]; Covent 968 [92 1D, 971K]
Garden Market, 905; Covent Garden Paddington Station, 1042; ‘Pantheon,
Theatre, 956; Crosby Hall, 394; Crystal the’, Oxford St, 956; Penguin Pool,
Palace, Sydenham, 989, ro41-2, 1064 Regent’s Park Zoo, 1048 [1050C]; Peter
[1043]; Cumberland Terrace, Regent’s Jones Store, Sloane Square, 1048
Park, 949 [947B]; Custom House, 955 [1050A]; Piccadilly Hotel [1046]; Pin-
[957D] dar’s (Sir Paul) House, 885
Daily Express Office, Fleet Street, Quadrant, Regent Street, 949; Queen’s
1048 [1049c]; Dover House, Whitehall, Gate, 999-1000 [998B, C, F]; Queen’s
949; Drury Lane Theatre, 956; Dulwich House, Greenwich, 898, 928, 937, 964
College, 885; Dutch Church, Austin [896A, 900, 90TA, C, E, F]
Friars, 393 aE Building, Portland Place,
Ely House, Dover Street, 948 [947C]; 1035 [1032B]; Reform Club, Pall Mall,
Euston Station, 1036 [1038c] 707, 1019 [1021C, D]; Ritz Hotel, Picca-
Fenton House, Hampstead, 937 dilly, 995; Rolls Chapel, 380; Roman
[966D]; Finsbury Health Centre, 1035 gateways, 225; Royal Courts of Justice,
[1034c]; Foreign Office, 1025 [1027A]; 643; Royal Festival Hall, 1036, 1051
Forster House, Bedford Park, 1000 [1037B]; Royal Horticultural Hall, 1047
[1001B]; Foundling Hospital, 885 [1046B] ;Royal Society of Arts, 956
General Post Office (new), 9953 S. Alban, Wood St, 914; S. Alphege,
General Post Office (old), 963; Gray’s Greenwich, 949; S. Anne, Limehouse,
Inn Hall, 881, 885 [8888]; Great Fire of, 949 [951D]; S. Anne and S. Agnes, 914
865, 867, 871, 913, 914; Greek Church, [916F]; S. Bartholomew the Great, 304,
Moscow Road, London, 279; Greenwich 390, 496 bis [391A]; S. Bartholomew’s
Hospital, 871, 873, 898, 928 [900, 901, Hospital, 955; S. Benet, Paul’s Wharf,
925E]; Guildhall, 394, 483, 555 [482c] 872; S. Benetfink, Threadneedle St, 914
Hallfield Primary School, Paddington, [916c]; S. Bride, Fleet St, 661 (ii), 913-
1035 [1037A]; Hans Town, Chelsea, 949; 914 [915D, 9I8E-H, 919C, D, F, 920B,
Highpoint 1, Highgate, 1008 [1006]; 925c; S. Clement Danes, Strand, 914,
Holland House, Kensington, 886 [892]; 950 [920C, 924B]; S. Dunstan-in-the-
Holy Trinity, Bessborough Gardens, East, 421, 914 [925N]; S. Dunstan-in-
1008; Home House, Portman Square, the-West, Fleet Street, 877, 955 [954D]5
949 [9434]; Horse Guards, Whitehall, S. Etheldreda, Holborn, 393, 502; S
874, 932, 956 [958A]; Houses of Parlia- -George, Bloomsbury, 949 [951B]; S.
ment, 1019-20; Hyde Park Corner arch- George, Camberwell, 955; S. George,
way, 222, 877 [962E] Hanover Square, 949-50 [952c]; S.
Inns of Court, 881, 885; Kensington George-in-the-East, 949; S. Giles, Cam-
Palace, 914; King’s Cross Station, 1042 berwell Church Street, 1008 [10098];
[1040c] S. Giles-in-the-Fields, 874, 950; S.
Lambeth Palace, 393, 394 bis; Lans- Helen, Bishopsgate, 393 bis [3918]
downe House, Berkeley Square, 949; S. James, Piccadilly, 914 [918A-D,
Laurence Pountney Hill, doorways 920A]; S. James’s Palace, 394, 905 [4614,
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1320 INDEX

London (cont.) London (cont.)

462B]; S. James’s Square, 949; S. John, Westminster School, 474; Whitechapel
Clerkenwell, 390; S. John’s Chapel Art Gallery, 1026 [1030D]; Wolseley
(Tower of London), 309; S. Jude, Buildings, Piccadilly, 1047
Hampstead, 1012 [1014c]; S. Katherine’s York Water-Gate, 898 [902A—C]; Zoo-
Docks, 964 [982]; S. Lawrence Jewry, logical Society Gardens, 1048 [1050C]
914, 968 [916B, 921C]; S. Luke, Chelsea, London Passenger Transport Building,
877, 955 [954C]; S. Luke’s Hospital, Westminster, 1035, 1048 [1049A]
Finsbury, 955; S. Magnus-the-Martyr, ‘Long and short’ courses, 490, 496
London Bridge, 914 [916K, 920D]; S ‘Long gallery’, 525, 886 bis [880B, E]
Martin, Ludgate, 836, 914 [916D, 924A, Long Stanton Church (Cambs.) [491M] :
925D]; S. Martin-in-the-Fields, 950, 974 Longford Castle (Wilts.), 881, 964 bis
[952D, 980E]; S. Mary, Wyndham Place, [965E]
955; S. Mary Abchurch, 914 [916A, Longhena, ashe (archt.), 677, 7473
921B]; S. Mary Aldermary, 914 [925G]; buildings by,74
S. Mary-at-Hill, Love Lane, 914 [916E, ree House Wilts. ), 870, 881, 964, 968
921A]; S. Mary-le-Bow, 390, 913 [915C, [965D
9I16G, 9I9A, B, E, 925R]; S. Mary-le- Lonja de la Seda, la, Valencia, 647 [646D]
Strand, 873, 949 [952B]; S. Mary Wool- Loos, Adolf (archt.), 1065, 1072, 1116
noth, 949 [951A]; S. Marylebone Parish Loredan, Palazzo, Venice, 324
Church, 950 [954A]; S. Michael, Corn- Lorenzkirche, the, Nuremberg, 594 bis
hill, 914 [925J]; S. Mildred, Bread Street, Lorimer, Sir Robert (archt.), 995
14 Loseley Park (Surrey), 881; ceilings, 510;
S. Pancras Church, 877, 950 [954B]; drawing-room, 882 [887A]
S. Pancras Station, 1025, 1042 [1039D]; Lotus, Egyptian, 23, 125 [55F, G, 126B]
S. Paul, Covent Garden, 898 [902G-]J]; Louis, J.-V. (archt.), 1063
S. Paul, Deptford, 949; S. Paul’s Louth (Lincs.), grammar school at, 474
Cathedral, see S. Paul’s Cathedral; S. Louvain (Belgium): Guild Houses, 570; S.
Paul’s School, 474; S. Sepulchre, Hol- Peter, 574, 582 [581A]; S. Michel, 835
born, 394; S. Stephen, Walbrook, 913 [837A]; Town Hall, 570, 577 [5796,
[917, 921E, 925M]; S. Stephen, Rochester 580A]
Row, 1008; S. Swithin, Cannon Street, Louviers (France), Notre Dame [5644]
914 [916H] Louvre, Palais du, Paris, 762, 769, 774, 791
Savoy Chapel, Strand, 394; Senate [775-75 790C; 793B] ;court of, 898 [776A];
House, London University, 1035 [103 34];3 extension of, 779, 871; Galerie d’Apollon,
Smyth’s Almshouses, Lewisham, 956; 780
Soane Museum, 869, 897, 949 [9474]; Louvre Museum, antiquities in, 87, 123
Somerset House, 956 [960A]; South Bank [76F, G]
Exhibition, 1051 [1053B]; Southwark Louvres, 1266 [431E]
Cathedral [373c]; Spa Green Estate, Low Countries in the 17th Century, map
1008; Spencer House, 938; Staple Inn, of [827]
885; Sun Fire Office, Threadneedle Lower Walterstone (Dorset), 881
Street, 1036; Sun House, Hampstead, Lowther Castle (Westmorland), 948
1007 [1005A] Liibeck (Germany): brick architecture at,
Temple, The, 885 [889A]; Temple Bar, 358, 588; Cathedral, 358, 588, 593;
928 [924D, 925w]; Temple Church, 265, Marienkirche, 588, 594 [596H]; Town
305, 390, 393, 496, 505, an [388, 5071]; Hall, 593
Tower of, 380, 390, 438 [436]; Travel- Lubetkin, B. (archt.), 995, 1048
lers’ Club, Pall Mall, 707, 956, 987, 996, Lucarne (dormer window) [788B, C]
101g [1021A, B]; Treasury Buildings, Lucas, C. A. (archt.), 995, 1007
956; Trinity Almshouses, Mile End, Lucca (Italy):
95 6 Palazzo Micheletti, 687 [689c]; S.
United Service Club, 956; United Alessandro [749]]; S. Cristoforo [330B,
University Club, 956; University Col- c]; S. Giusto [332J]; S. Martino, 320;
lege, 877, 963-4 [961B] S. Michele, 320; tower at, 624
Walls of, 383, 483; War Memorial Ludlow (Salop): Butter Market, 956; circu-
Chapel, Charterhouse, 1012 [10168]; lar church at, 390; Feathers Inn, 483
Waterloo Bridge, 964; Wesleyan Central [484N
Hall, Westminster, 1026; Westminster Ludlow Castle Chapel, 265
Abbey, see Westminster Abbey; West- Luna marble, 187, 666
minster Cathedral, 279, 992, 1011 Lunettes, 201, 657, 696 bis, 713, 1051, 1103,
[1013B, Cc]; Westminster Hall, 394, 437, 1266 [658F]
451, 502, 662 (i) [500E]; Westminster Lunghi, Martino (archt.), 725
New Palace, 987, 1o01g-20 [1022p]; Lurago, Rocco (archt.), 688, 691
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX T3920
Luscombe Castle (Devon), 948 Maison Carrée, Nimes, 188, 1147 [190E-G]
Lutfullah, Mosque of, Isfahan, 1237 ‘Maison de la Colline’, Delos, 152 [153]
Lutheran Parsonage, Cape Town, 1058 Maison: Havart, Liége, 577; Milsand,
Luton Hoo (Beds.), 938 Dijon, 780 [7788]
Lutyens, Sir Edwin (archt.), 995, 1007, Maisons, Chateau de, 780 [781]
1012, 1026 bis, 1047, 1058 Maisons-Dieu, 555
Luxembourg, Palais du, Paris, 769, 780 Majano, Benedetto da (sculptor-archt.), 672,
(781, F] 4,
Luxor (Egypt), Temple of Ammon, 18, Majano, Giovanni da (sculptor), 380, 459
39, 43 [428] Majolica House, Vienna, 1072 [1070A]
Luzarches, Robert de (archt.), 541 Malaga (Spain), Cathedral, 855, 856
Lycée Napoleon, Paris [804D] Malines (Belgium): Cathedral, 574; houses,
Lyming, Robert (archt.), 886 bis old [579D]; Parma Palace, 831
Lympenhoe Church (Norfolk), 433 Malvern College (Worcs.), 985
Lyons (France), cattle market, 1066 Malwiyya Mosque, Samarra, 1235
Lysicrates Monument, Athens, 139-40, ee (India), rock temple, 1175,
152, 155, 156, 1036, 1152 [138G, I41A-E, II
I60E, 163E, 165K]; Corinthian Order in, Mammisi temples, Egyptian, 43, 49 bis, 107
244 (i) [38A-D, 46A, 524]
Manchester, 1036
Albert Memorial, 1025 [1028A]; Assize
Maastricht (Netherlands): Dominican Courts, 1025; Athenaeum, 1019; City
Church, 574; Notre Dame, 573; S. Art Gallery (Royal Manchester Institu-
Servaas, 573 tion), 877, 956, 987 [1022A]; Daily Ex-
McArthur, John (archt.), 1151 press Building, 1048; Old Town Hall,
Macclesfield (Cheshire), school at, 474 - 877; Owens College, 1025; Rylands
Machicolations, 438, 549 bis, 623, 696, Library, Deansgate, 1026 [1029a]; S.
1266 Mary [492G]; S. Nicholas, Burnage, 1012
Machu Picchu (Peru), 1131 [1130B] [1016c]; S. Wilfred, Hulme, 1008; Town
Machuca, Luis (archt.), 851 Hall, 1025; Williams Deacons Bank, S.
Machuca, Pedro (archt.), 851 Ann’s Square, 1041 [1039c]
McKim, Mead and White (archts.), 1148, Manchester Cathedral, 402 bis, 406 [412B];
II51, 1156, 1168 aisles, 406, 562 (ii) [412G]
Mackintosh, Charles Rennie (archt.), 991, Mandapas (porch-like halls), 1179
992, 1007 bis, 1026, 1047, 1055, 1065 Mandu (India), Jami Masjid, 1241
Mackmurdo, A. H. (archt.), 992 Manetti, Antonio (archt.), 677
Macon (Ga.), Ralph Small House, 1143 Mankiala (India), stupa at, 1180
Madama, Villa, Rome, 707 [710]] ‘Mannerist’ architecture, 659, 671, 673, 687,
Madeleine church, Paris, 770, 799 [798B] 688, 702; French, 762, 766
Maderna, Carlo (archt.), 673, 691, 725, 726 Manor houses: English Mediaeval, 384,
Madonna di S. Biagio, Montepulciano, 702 390, 393 bis, 394, 444, 447-63, 502, 510
[706A] [446]; fortified, 443, 444; Jacobean, 897;
Madonna di S. Luca, Bologna, 729 [724c] Tudor, 866
Madrasa mosque, 1246; of Bibi Khanum, Mansard roof, 769, 801 (ii), 999, 1054,
Samarkand, 1235; of Sultan Hasan, 1086, II15, 1266
Cairo, 1246 [1232Cc-D] Mansart, Francois (archt.), 769, 770, 7735
Madrid (Spain): Escorial, 851-2, 855, 856 780, 792, 871
[853, 859A, B, 861A]; Hospicio Provincial, Mansart, Jules Hardouin (archt.), 769, 780,
852 [857A]; Royal Palace, 852; S. Fran- 785,799
cisco el Grande, 855 Mansion House, London, 948 [946B]
Madura (India), Gopura Hindu temple, Mansions: Elizabethan, 866, 869, 881-2
I1gI [1190A] [879-80]; Jacobean, 866, 881, 885-6;
Magdalen College, Oxford, 473 [4754, Scottish, 522-3; simple-block plan, 937—
492J]; boss in [512M]; doorway mould- 948; wing-block, 931-7
ings [507w]; pulpit [517M] Mantua (Italy): Giulio Romano’s house,
Magdalene College, Cambridge, 473 [475B] 708 [706B]; Palazzo del Te, 707-8
Magdeburg Cathedral (Germany), chevet [7o9a];_ S. Andrea, 683, 713, 732
at, 593 [679F-K]; S. Sebastiano, 683; tower at,
Mica: Giuliano da (archt.), 613, 678 62
Maiden Newton Farm (Dorset), 469 [4668] Macrae Manor House (Dorset) [416D]
Maillart, Robert (archt.), 1066, 1104 Marble, 801 (i), 990, IOII, 1020, 1025, 1052,
Mainz (Germany): Cathedral, 307, 358 1055, 1093 [788D, F] d
[360B]; S. Quentin, 588, 593; S. Stephen, black Tournai, 574; Byzantine, 272,
588, 593 276, 279, 289, 297, 298 [277L]; Carrara,
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1322 INDEX

Marble (cont.) Martorana, Church of La, Palermo, 319,

666; Early Christian, 265; English, 380; 324
facings of [177G]; Greek, 90, 94, 123 1s, Mary, Queen of Scots, monument to,
158, 168, 222, 240 (i), 2473 green, 785; Westminster, 974 [424D]
Hymettian, 90, 139, 261 bis; Italian Masaccio (Tommaso Guidi, painter), 688
Gothic, 600, 608, 613 bis, 614, 6273 Mashhad (Iran): Mosque of Gawhar Shad,
Italian Renaissance, 666-7, 687; Italian 1235 [1236A]; Tomb of the Imam Riza,
Romanesque, 312, 315, 316, 319; Luna, 1235
187, 666; Mogul buildings, 1175; Parian, Masjid-i-Juma Mosque, Isfahan, 1235
217; Pennsylvanian, 1121; Pentelic, 137; Masjid-i-Shah, Isfahan, 1237
Roman, 168, 179, 205, 210, 261; Sicilian, Mason craftsmen, 372, 869
600; Siena, 614, 627, 666 ‘Mason’s mitre’, 967
Marble Arch, London, 963 Masonry: cyclopean, 93, 101 bis, 173 [99G,
Marble columns, 279, 293 142H]; Etruscan, 173, 1753; polygonal, 93,
Marble sheathing, 674 152, 173, 240 (i), 276 [161]; rusticated,
Marble windows, 320, 329 657, 683, 684, 898; see also Rustication
Marburg (Germany): S. Elizabeth, 587, Masons, Gothic: and vaulting ribs, 371;
593 ter [590, 595H, 596B]; tomb of Land- guilds of, 372, 584
grave Henri, 597 [596K] Massachusetts Hall, Harvard University,
Marcellus, Theatre of, Rome, 209, 213, 914 1139
[165N, 208A] Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Marchand, J. O. (archt.), 1151 Cambridge, Mass.: Auditorium Building,
Marcian aqueduct, 205, 236 [203B, 204A] 1160 [1253]; Baker House, 1159; Chapel,
Marcus Aurelius: Column of, Rome, 227 I160
[228H-N]; statue of, Rome, 714 [718c] Massari, Giorgio (archt.), 747
Marduk, Temple of, Babylon, 70 Massimi, Palazzo, Rome, 673
Marekerk, Leyden, 836 Mastabas, Egyptian, 5, 23-6, 1266 [24]
Margaret Roding church (Essex) [518] Master-masons, 371-2, 869, 870
Marial Chapel, Lac Bouchette, Quebec, Mastino II of the Scaligers, tomb of,
1160 Verona, 633 [629B]
Marienburg Castle (Poland), 588 ‘Mathematical tiles’, 938
Marienkirche, Liibeck, 588, 594 [596H] Mathey, J. B. (archt.), 812
Marienkirche, Wolfenbiittel, 817 Matsys, Quinten (archt.), 582 [581F]
Marino, Palazzo, Milan, 688, 691 Matthew, R. H. (archt.), 1008, 1036
Marino (Co. Dublin), Casino, 938, 979 Maufe, Sir Edward (archt.), 1012
[970E] Maumbury Rings (Dorset), amphitheatre,
Markelius, Sven (archt.), 1068 213
Market crosses, 483 [486A, C] Mauritshuis, The, The Hague, 835 [833F]
Market Hall: Chipping Campden, 897; Led- Mausoleum of (see also Tomb of):
bury, 483 [485F]; Leipzig, 1104 [11088]; Augustus, at Rome, 217, 218 [2378];
Shrewsbury, 897 [893B]; Wymondham, Castle Howard (Yorks.), 931; Diocletian,
897 at Spalato, 201, 218, 229, 293 [231D];
Market halls: English Mediaeval, 483 Hadrian (Castle of S. Angelo), Rome,
[485F]; French Gothic, 559; Jacobean, 217-18 [220E-G, 237C]; Mausolos, at
8 97 Halicarnassos, 148, 151, 1151 [149]
Markets of Trajan, Rome, 184 [185D-F]; Maxentius, Basilica of, see Basilica of Con-
Great Hall of, 184 [185E, F, 186] stantine
Marlborough Chapel, S. James’s Palace, Maxstoke Castle (Warwicks.), 443
London, 905 May, Hugh (archt.), 835, 906, 971
Marlborough College (Wiltshire), 985 Maybeck, Bernard R. (archt.) [1255]
Marlborough House, Pall Mall, London, 914 Mayence (Germany), see Mainz
Marot, Daniel (archt.), 831, 835 Mayfield (Sussex), Middle House, 469
Marrakesh (Morocco), Kutubiyya Minaret, [464]]
1233 Meander fret, 276, 1266 [163F]
Mars Ultor, Temple of, Rome, 187 [182B, Mecca (Saudi Arabia), Kaaba, 1229
I190A-D]; capitals of [246c, D] Mediaeval architecture, 8-9 (see also Rom-
Marseilles (France), Unité d’Habitation, anesque and Gothic)
1079 [1078] designers of, 371-2; English, see Eng-
Marsh Court, Stockbridge, 1007 lish Mediaeval; French, 773, 776, 779
Marshall, Joshua (master-mason), 928 8or (i); German, 811, 812; Irish, 527;
Marshall Field Wholesale Warehouse, Italian, 990; monasteries, 308; Spanish,
Chicago, 1152 [1170] see Spanish Mediaeval
Martham (Norfolk), mouldings at [508s] Mediaeval house, Viterbo, 623 [612G]
Martin, Sir J. L. (archt.), 1008, 1036 Medici, Villa, Rome, 713 [246G, 706E]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1323
Medici Chapel, Florence, 713-14 [726A] Mexico City: Cathedral, 1135 [1134E]3
Medina (Saudi Arabia), Mosque, 1229 Colegio de San Ignacio (now Vizcainas),
Medina del Campo (Spain), castle, 647 1139; Mercedarian Monastery, 1135
[6465] Meydim (Egypt), Pyramid at, 17, 26, 30
Medinet-Habu (Egypt), temple at, 36, 53 [24H]
[48A,
54K, 55K, L] Meyer, Adolf (archt.), 1066, 1104
Meersen Church (Belgium), 574; Sacra- Meylama, Mausoleum of, Konia, 1237
ment House, 582 Mezquita, La, Cordova, 1233 [1231C]
Megalithic building-remains, 3, 382 Mezzanine floors, 801 (ii)
Megalopolis (Arcadia), Thersilion at, 147 Michaud, Joseph (archt.), 1144
Megaron, the, 92-3, 108, 151 bis, 1267 [99C] . Michelangelo (sculptor and archt.), 9, 613;
Meissen (Saxony), castle at, 588 633, 659, 708, 713
Meissonnier, Juste Auréle (archt.), 770, buildings by, 677, 713-14 [716]; build-
769 ings converted by, 206, 702, 714, 898;
Melbourne (Australia): Cathedrals, 1059; frescoes by, 752; Proto-Baroque move-
public buildings, 1059 ment led by, 672, 673, 687; S. Peter’s, his
a. Horsey (Dorset), panelling at work on, 714, 717, 719 ter; windows de-
461)] signed by, 683 [681E]
Melk monastery (Austria), 811, 817 [819B, Micheletti, Palazzo, Lucca, 687 [689c]
c Michelozzi, Michelozzo (archt.), 668, 678,
Melrose Abbey (Roxburghshire), 522 [524c] 684
Memlinc, Hans (painter), 582 Micklegate Bar, York, 489 [487E]
Memnon, Colossi of, Thebes, 16, 18 Middelburg (Netherlands): church, 574;
Memorials, sculptured, 217, 221 East Church, 836; Guild Houses, 570;
Memphis (Egypt), palace at, 50 S. Peter’s House, 577; Town Hall, 570,
Mendelsohn, Erich (archt.), 995, 1048, 577
1068, 1075, 1093, 1127 Middle House, Mayfield, 469 [464]]
Meneptah, palace of, Memphis, 50 Middle Temple, London, 928 [889a];
Mengoni, G. (archt.), 1103 cloisters in Pump Court, 928 [889a];
Menhirs, 3 Hall, 437, 502, 881 [500H, 888c, 889a];
Mentuhetep II, temple of, 18, 36, 39 [32F] Library [8894]
Meopham (Kent), window at [499E] Middle Tower, Westminster New Palace,
Mercanzia (or Loggia dei Mercanti), 1020
Bologna, 608 [629G] Middleton (Lancs.), school at, 474
Mercedarian Monastery: Cuzco (Peru), Middleton (Wisconsin), Jacobs House, 1156
1135; Mexico City, 1135; Quito (Ecua- Midhurst (Sussex), Wispers, 999
dor), 1136 [1134C] Midland Bank, Piccadilly, 1047
Merchant Taylors School, London, 885 Mies van der Rohe, Ludwig (archt.), 1066
Merchants’ Exchange, Philadelphia (Pa.), bis, 1075, 1127, 1156, 1159 ter, 1160 bis,
I1§2 [1150A] 1163
Mere Church (Wilts.), rood loft [516c] ‘Might of Islam’ Mosque, Delhi, 1238
Mereworth Castle, Kent, 738, 938, 964 Miguel, Francisco (sculptor), 1136
[936A, 966G] Mikado’s Palace, Kidto, 1217
Merlons, 438, 1267 [484]] Milan (Italy), 666
Merrick, John (archt.), 1140 Baroque in, 673, 691, 695; cortili, 684
Mersham-le-Hatch (Kent), 937 [698F, H, 724D]; Early Renaissance in,
Merton College, Oxford, 473, 897 [895C, D] 673, 684-7; Galleria Vittorio Emanuele,
buttress at [497F]; Chapel, 469, 493 1103 [1105A]; High Renaissance in, 673,
[482B]; doorway at, 501 [498M-P]; fron- 688, 748; Ospedale Maggiore, 600, 608,
tispiece of ‘Orders’, 897, 973 [895D]; 684; Palazzo Marino, 688, 691 [724D];
library, 897 [895c]; sedilia in [515N]; Pirelli office block, 1111 [1110A]; Portin-
windows, 509 ari Chapel, 678; S. Ambrogio, 320, 329,
‘Merveille’, Mont S. Michel, 549 696 [318, 332B, H]; S. Eustorgio, 678
Mesopotamian architecture, 5, 7, 60-2, 66, [631A, K]; S. Giuseppe, 691 [697B]; S.
85, 86; Muslim, 1234-7 Maria delle Grazie, 657, 696, 751 [698a—
Messina Cathedral (Sicily), 624 E]; S. Satiro, 696 [697C, D]
Metal-and-glass see Glass-and-metal Milan Cathedral, 538, 604, 607, 647 bis,
Metalwork: English Mediaeval, 509, 510 648, 684 [324L, 598, 601-2]
[518]; German, 818, 823 buttresses, 600, 604; fléche, 687 [598c];
Metope, 112, 123, 156, 244, 1267 [120A, C, piers in, 633 [601B]; roof of, 604 [602A,
163K, M] E]; tower [598C, 601A]; windows, 604
Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, [6028]
198 Miles Brewton House, Charleston, South
Mewes & Davies (archts.), 995, 1047 Carolina, 1132
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1324 INDEX

Miletus (Asia Minor): agora at, 102; Bou- Monasteries, 307-8

leuterion, 147 [154A]; Temple of Apollo Augustinian, 304; Benedictine, 304,
Didymaeus, 107, 108, 128, 131, 139 308, 324, 344, 358 bis, 381; Buddhist,
[IO9N, I41J-P, 165B] 1178, 1183; Carthusian, 305, 308; Cis-
Military Orders (religious), 305, 308, 381, tercian, 304, 308, 336; Cluniac, 304, 308,
386 336; dissolution of (1536-40), 382, 385,
Millar, Sanderson (archt.), 875, 938 402, 655, 865; English, 381, 423-30
Mills, Peter (archt.), 870, 906 [425H]; Irish, 527; Jain, 1187
Mills, Robert (archt.), 1148 bis Monastery:
Milton, John, quoted, 376 Batalha, 644 [634c]; Belem, 644; Brev-
Minarets, 644, 1026 [273, 278B, F, 281G];N. nov, Prague, 817-18 [820A]; Clermont,
African, 1233; Turkish, 1237, 1238 305; The Escorial, 851; Grande Char-
[299A] _ treuse, 305; Klosterneuburg, 817; Melk,
Mindelheim (Germany), church, 817 811, 817 [819B, C]; Mingaora, 1183;
Minerva Medica, Rome, 206, 280, 298 Mount Athos [277E]; Nalanda, 1183; S.
[177N; 285A, B] : fn; Florian, 817; S. Francesco, Assisi, 623
Mingaora (India): acropolis, 1179; civil [620A]; S. Gall, 308, 358, 402; S. Luke of
settlement, I179; monastery, 1183; Stiris, 290, 301 [286B, 294A, 300L];
vihara, 1183 Takht-i-Bhai, 1183 [1182B]; ‘Taxila,
Ministry of Education, Rio de Janeiro, 1163 1183; Udayagiri, 1187
[1165B] Monastic cathedrals, 402 ter
Ministry of Finance, Vienna, 812 Monastic churches, 308, 309
Ministry of the Interior, Vienna, 812 Monastic kitchen, Fontevrault, 347 [350D]
Minos, King, Palace of, Knossos, 98 Monastic Orders, the, 304-5
[99B Monastic temples, Chinese, 1202
Minstrels’ galleries, 448, 459, 881 [455B, Monkwearmouth (Durham), S. Peter’s
887B] Church at, 397
‘Minyas, Treasury of’, Orchomenos, 102 Monmouth Town Hall (Mon.), 955 [927E]
Miraflores (Spain), Royal tombs at, 653 Monoliths, 3, 179, 1128 [2B]
[651E, J] Monoliths, Hall of the, Mitla, 1128 [1129E]
Misericords, 510, 856, 1267 [517H-K] Monreale Cathedral (Sicily), 319, 324, 329
Mistley Church, Essex, 950 [953A] [326B, 328]; cloisters of, 324, 331 [328B,
Mitcham (Surrey), Eagle House, 937 332E, F]
[o4rB]
Mitla (Mexico), Hall of the
}
Monoliths,
Mons (Belgium), S. Waldru [581c]
Monstrances, 653, 862
1128 [1129E] Mont S. Michel (France), fortified Abbey
Mitres, 856, 1267 of, 347; 549 [550A, 566C]
Mnesicles (archt.), 133, 143 Montacute House (Somerset), 881, 882,
Moberly, A. H. (archt.), 1048 964 bis [879B, 965B]; gate inscription,
Mocenigo, Sig., House for [742E, F] 9
Modern architecture: Montauk Building, Chicago, 1152
in the Americas, 16, 1127-8, 1156-63, Montecitorio, Palazzo, Rome, 726
1164, 1166 bis, 1167 bis, 1168, 11693 in Montepulciano (Italy): Madonna di S.
China, 1207; in Continental Europe, Biagio, 702 [706A]; Palazzo Contucci,
1066-8, 1071, 1075-9, 1085, 1103, 1104, 702; Palazzo Gagnati [753D]; Palazzo
IIII, L114, 1115, 1116; in Great Britain, Pubblico, 623 [612]
995, 1007-8, I019, 1035-6, IO5I, 1052, Monterey Cathedral (Mexico), 1135
1054, 1055; in S. Africa, Australia, and Montezuma, palace of, Tenochtitlan, 1131
N. Zealand, 1058, 1059 Monticello (Va.), 1132, 1143, 1148 [1141B]
Modillions, 187, 188 bis, 247 (ii); see also Montmagny (S. et O.), 1085 [1084B]
Consoles Montreal (Canada): Cathedral of S. James,
Moffat, W. B. (archt.), 990, 1008 1144; Church of Notre-Dame-de-Grace,
Mogul buildings, 1187, 1188 1144; Church of the Assumption, 1144;
Mohammad II (Sultan), Mosque of, Con- Notre Dame, 1144
stantinople, 289, 1237 Montreuil, Pierre de (archt.), 542
Mohenjodaro (India), excavations, 1176 Montuori, E. (archt.), 1111
Molfetta (Italy), S. Corato [631D, F] Monument:
Molle, Ponte, Rome, 239 [245B] Aliotti, at Florence [6318]; Bernardo,
Molton, John (royal mason), 459 Venice [758D]; Bonsi, Rome [754]];
Mompasson House, Salisbury, 937 [941C¢, Bridgman, Sir John, Aston [98o0F];
966A, 971B, L] Bunker Hill (Mass.), 1121; Gen. Col-
Monadnock Building, Chicago, leoni, Venice, 752 [606A, 757G]; Eliza-
I155
[1153C] beth I, Westminster Abbey, 974
Monasterboice (Co. Louth), cross at, 525 [424D]; Guillaume de Croy, Enghien
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1325
Monument (cont.) Mosque (cont.)
[838G]; Hadrian V, Viterbo [631C]; 1237 [1239A]; Jaunpur, 1241; Jerusalem,
Lysicrates, at Athens, 139-40, 152, 155, 1229 [12274]
156, 244 (i), 1036, 1152 [138G, I41A-E, Konia, 1237; Kufa, 1234; Kulbarga,
I60E, 163E, 165K]; Mary, Q. of Scots, 1241; Mandu, 1241; Mashhad, 1235
Westminster, 974 [424D]; Nereid, at [1246aA]; Nayin, 1235; Qayrawan, 1233;
‘Xanthos, 148 [135c]; Newcastle, Duke Samarkand, 1235; Samarra, 1235; Ta-
of, Westminster, 979 [980J]; Niccolo briz, 1235; Tunis, 1233; Veramin, 1235
Specchi [631G]; Pietro Cesi, Narni Mosques:
[754i]; The, London, 914 [925H]; Byzantine influence, 284; collegiate,
Vendramin, Venice [758j]; Victor Em- . 1246; congregational, 1235, 1241, 1245;
manuel II, Rome, 1086 [10924] Hindu influence, 1241; Madrasa, 1246;
Monumental pillars (‘stambhas’ or ‘laths’), tomb-, 1246
India, 1180 [1186] Moti Masjid: Agra, 1245; Delhi, 1245
Monumental tombs, Roman, 217-18 ‘Motte and bailey’ earthworks, 437, 438,
Monuments: 522, 1267
dating of, 687; Egyptian, 18; Greek, Mouldings, 1267
139-40, 148-51, 152 [I41A-E]; Indian, the Americas, 1168; British, 996,
1196; Italian [631B, C, G]; Jacobean, 869; 1055; Buddhist, 1195; Byzantine, 279,
mural, 684; prehistoric, 3; Trajan’s, 222; 301; Chinese, 1203, 1204, 1209; Con-
aga Abbey, 974, 979 [424D, tinental European, 1116; Early Christian,
980] 266; Egyptian, 22, 57 [55]]
Monza (Italy), Broletto, 608 [330D] Gothic: Belgian and Dutch, 578; Eng-
Monza Cathedral, cantoria at, 633 [630]] lish, 505-6, 565 (ii) [461A, 507-8];
Moor Park (Herts,), 932 French, 565 (i) [566F]; German, 594;
Moot House, Downton, 937 [941A] Italian, 633 [630, 631]; and Renaissance
Morden College, Blackheath, 928, 956 compared, 662; Spanish, 648
[927A, 966K, 971E] Greek, 129, 155-6 [124G, 164, 165A—
Moreira, Jorge (archt.), 1160 K]; Greek and Roman compared, 247;
Moro, Peter (archt.), 1036 Indian, 1195; interpenetration of, 594
Morris, Roger (archt.), 874, 905, 932 bis; Japanese, 1220; Muslim, 1249; orna-
Morris, William (designer), 991, 999 mented, 506 [508]
Mortier, A.-F. (archt.), 1071 Renaissance: Belgian and Dutch, 840;
Morton’s Tower, Lambeth Palace, 394 English, 973-4; French, 802 (ii); Ger-
Mortrée (France), Chateau d’O, 555 [5584] man, 823; Italian, 751-2, 802 (i); Span-
Mosaic, 1267 ish, 856 [860E]
British, 1011, 1055; Byzantine, 279, Roman, 155, 156, 230, 247 (ii) [162,
280, 289, 290, 293, 301 [292B]; Con- 163L-T, 164, 165L-T]
tinental European, 1116; “cosmato’, 627, Romanesque: English, 310, 505;
633; Early Christian, 253, 261 ter, 262, French, 348 [351]; German, 364; Italian,
265 bis, 266, 279 [267Q, Ss, T]; French, 33 I
1080; Italian, 324, 603, 614, 633; Roman, West Asiatic, 86
179 [241F, 249H, K—-M]; Swedish, 1093 Mount Abu (India): Dilwarra Temple,
‘Mosaic Mosque’, the, Constantinople, 284 1183 [1184B]; Jain temples, 1183, 1195
Mosaic paving, 205, 229, 233, 247 (i), 261, [11844]
266 [249H, K, 256H, 267Q, T]; Byzantine, Mount Airy, Richmond County (Va.), 1135
301; Italian [332K] Mount Pleasant, Philadelphia, 1132
Mosaic vault, Early Christian, 218 Mount Vernon, Fairfax County (Va.), 1135
Moscow (Russia), S. Basil, 293 Mu’ayyad, Mosque of, Cairo, 1230
Moscow Road Greek Church, London, 279 Mucross (Co. Kerry), monastery at, 527
Moser, Karl (archt.), 1085 ‘Mudéjar’ style, 1233, 1267
Mosque: Muhafiz Khan, Ahmadabad, 1241
Adrianople, 1237; Agra, 1245; Ahma- Muhammad II, the Conqueror, Mosque of,
dabad, 1241; Ajmer, 1238; Ardabil, Istanbul, 289, 1237
1235; Baghdad, 1235; Bijapur, 1241-2 Muhammad Ali, Mosque of, Cairo, 1238
[1247G, H]; Brusa, 1237; Bulak, 1238; Muhammad Ghaus, Tomb of, Gwalior,
Cairo, 1226, 1229-30, 1238, 1246, 1250 1242
[1228A, B, I23IA, B, 1232A—D, 1248G]; Muiden Castle, Amsterdam, 577 [575C]
Champanir, 1241; Cordova, 1233 Mullions, 243, 394, 50I, 510, 968, 1267;
[1231C] ; baluster, 390; Belgian and Dutch, 836;
Damascus, 1229, 1238 [12278] 3 Delhi, French, 769, 801 (ii); German, 812, 823
1238, 1241, 1245; Fatehpur Sikri, 1242 Mumine Khatun, Tomb of, Nakhshewan,
[1243A, 1247C]; Fustat, 1229; Gaur, 1235
1238; Isfahan, 1235, 1237; Istanbul, Mundie, W. B. (archt.), 1152
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1326 INDEX

Munich (Germany): Mycenae (Greece), Lion Gate at, ror [99A,

Cathedral, 588; Glyptotek, dO3 Pina- I00H]; Palace at, ror [99A]; “Tomb of
cothek, 817; Propylaea, 817;S. John Clytemnestra’, 102; Treasury of Atreus,
Nepomuk, 818; S. Michael, 8173 S; 93, 101-2, 240 (i), 527, 1192 [100]
Michael, Berg-am-Laim, 818 (8224, Mykerinos (Pharaoh), Pyramid of, Gizeh,
824], 825B] 3 Theatine Church, 817 17, 35 [24M, 314]
[816B] Mylasa (Asia Minor), tomb at, 151 [220A—D]
Munich Museum, antiquities in, 119 [117C] Mylne, Robert (archt.), 876, 956
Municipal Buildings, Norwich, 1035 Mysteries, Hall of the, Eleusis, 147
[1029p]
Minster (Germany), Town Hall, 593
Muradiye, Brusa, 1237
Nabu, Temple, of, Khorsabad, 73, 75
Mural reliefs, 808
Musée d’Art Moderne, Paris, 1094 [1100A]
Nachez (Miss.), Connelly’s Tavern, 1132
Musée des Travaux Publics, Paris, 1103
Naevoleia Tyche, Tomb of, Pompeii, 221
[r101B] [220M]
Musée Plantin-Moretus, Antwerp, 832, 836 Nagina Masjid, Agra, 1245
Nagoya (Japan), Shukin-ro Inn, 1218
[833C, 838D, H] Nail-head moulding, 505, 506 [5088]
Museum:
Ashmolean, Oxford, 1020 [1021E]; Nakhshewan (Iran), tombs at, 1235
Athens, 123; Berlin, 817; British, Lon- Naksh-i-Rustam (Iran): Fire Temple at,
don, see British Museum; Brussels [838F] ; 78, 79 [77c]; Tomb of Darius at, 78, 86
Capitoline, Rome, 714 [718B, E, F]; 778
Castle of S. Angelo, Rome, 218; Con- Nalanda (Bengal), monastery at, 1183
stantinople, 151; Dijon [566a]; Etruscan, Nan t’a Pagoda, Fang Shan, Chih-li, 1205
Villa of Pope Julius, Rome, 180, 183, 708 Nancy (France): civic scheme, 791 [787B];
[181L]; Fitzwilliam, Cambridge, 1019 Governor’s Palace, 791; Place Stanislas,
[1022c]; Florence, National [749E, H]; 791 [7878]
Hétel d’Ansembourg, Liége, 832; Hotel Naos in Greek temples, 7, 94, 107, 243 (i),
de Cluny, Paris, 559; India, London, 1267 [95B]; Corinthian [141J, L]; Doric,
1180 ; Istanbul, 151; Lateran Palace, II5, II9 [II7H, 122E, G]; Ionic, 1313
725; Louvre, 87, 123 [76F, G] GER of, 121, 125 [122], K]; planning
Metropolitan, New York, 198; of,I
Munich, 119 [117C¢]; Naples, 2333 Nasiee ety Castello Nuovo, 624
National Maritime, Greenwich, 898; Naples Museum, antiquities in, 233
Natural History, London, 1025; Pesha- Nara (Japan), Imperial Palace, 1217
war, 1180; Pompeii, 233; Rijksmuseum, Narni Cathedral (Italy) [7541]
Amsterdam, 1086 [1091A]; Royal United Narthex (church porch), 258, 262, 1267
Service Institution, 898; S. Maria del [259E, 264]]; Byzantine, 280, 283, 284,
Fiore, Florence [750B]; Saragossa, 648 289, 297 [278B, F, 292B]; Romanesque,
[650J]; Soane, London, 869, 877, 949 320, 348 [310A, 349B]
[947A]; Thorwaldsen, Copenhagen, Narthex screen, French, 792 [797B]
1085; University, Oxford, 1020 [1024A, Nash, John (archt.), 876, 878, 948 bis, 949,
B]; Vatican, Rome, 206; Venice, 266 956, 963, 988, 1058
[267K]; Victoria and Albert, London, Nashville (Tennessee), Hermitage, 1143
227, 364, 509 885 [916H, 977B]; Welsh Nasik (India), chaitya at, 1180
National, Cardiff [103 1B] Nassau Hall, Princeton University, 1140
‘Mushroom’ construction, 1066, IIII National Academy of Design, New York,
Muslim architecture, 7, 1222-52 [1256]; 1148 [1149C]
building materials, 1223; character- National Farmers’ Bank, Owatonna, 1155
istics, 1226; details, 1248; domes in, National Gallery, London, 877, 963 [961A]
1232-3; English architecture influenced National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh,
by, 1224; examples, 1226-45; fortifica- 1020 [1023A]
tions, 438; French art influenced by, 340, National Library, Paris, 1064, 1085-6
529, 530; influences upon, 1223-5; [1088]
Italian Romanesque influenced by, 312, Bees Maritime Museum, Greenwich,
315, 324; openings, 1246 [1248K-—M]; 9
ornament, 1223, 1226, 1246, 1249-50; National Museum of Wales, Cardiff [10318]
Persian influence upon, 1238; Spanish Nativity, Church of the, Bethlehem, 262
art influenced by, 635, 636, 639-40, 643, [260Aa-D]
oie 845, 846, 852, 855 bis, 856; walls, Natural History Museum, South Kensing-
12 4 ton, 1025
Mutules, in Doric Order, 112, 244 (i, ii), Naucratis (Egypt), Ionic capital in, 125
1267 [126K]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1327
Naumburg Cathedral (Saxony), apses at, New Church, The Hague, 836 [837D]
$93 New College, Oxford, 382, 473, 474 [4754]
Nautilus shell, 125 [126D] kitchen, 451
Naval buildings, Greek, 148 New Delhi (India), 1026 [1031c]; All
Nave, 1267 India War Memorial Arch, 1026; Birla
aisleless, 340 bis; basilican church, 258, Temple, 1188; Council Chamber, 1026;
265 [255K, 259C, E, 264J]; Belgian and Government Buildings, 1026; President’s
Dutch, $73 ter, 574 ter, 578; British, 999, House, 1026; Secretariats, 1026
IOII, IOI2, 1019, 1042 [1009D]; Byzan- New foundation, cathedrals of the, 402
tine, 283; English cathedral, 421, 423, New Haven (Conn.), Yale University, 1140
427, 906 [419], 420H, 9098]; English Re- New Orleans (La.), Cabildo, 1139 [1138c]
naissance, 950; French [532B]; German, New Sacristy, S. Lorenzo, Florence, 672,
818 bis [585C, D, 586B]; Gothic and Re- 677, 713-14 [716A]; see also Medici
naissance, 661; Italian Renaissance, 717, Chapel, Florence
748 [676G]; Romanesque, 309, 340 New Scotland Yard, London, 1025 [1027B]
[313B]; Spanish, 640 bis, 643 ter, 644, New Theatre, Berlin, 817
852 [641C, D, 652A, D, 859B]; see also Cella New Walsingham Church (Norfolk) [4356]
Nave arcades, 262, 265, 358, 493 bis, 562, New York:
593 [369F]; Italian, 624, 627 A. T. Stewart Store, 1152; Colonnade
Nave bays, 347, 363, 490 [342A, B, 356B, Row, 1143; Dyckman House, 1132;
416B, C]; domes in [658F-J]; French EmpireStateBuilding,1156[1154C];Epis-
[531D, F, 544A, C, D, F]; German [591D, E]; copal Cathedral of S. John the Divine,
vaulting of, 401 1147 [11458]; Exhibition Building, 1152;
Nave piers, English, 397 [425£]; French, Grace Church, 1144; Grand Central
348 [350H]; German, 594 [589B, D, 590A, Station, 1156; Harper Bros. Printing
591H]; Gothic, 368; Romanesque, 348 Works, 1152; International Building,
[350H, MR, 356E] 1156 [1154A]; Laing Stores, 1152; Lever
Nayin (Iran), Mosque, 1235 House, 1163 [1165c]; National Academy
Neandria (Asia Minor), Ionic capitals at, of Design, 1148 [1149c]; Panhellenic
125 [126M] House, 1155; Pennsylvania Railroad
Necking of columns, 111, 156 Station,1156[1154B] ;Public Library,1151
Necropolis, 1267; Cerveteri, 183; Vulci, Rockefeller Centre, 1156 [11544]; S.
183 [181D] Patrick’s Cathedral, 1144; S. Paul’s
Nedeham, James (master carpenter), 463 Chapel, 1139; Seagram Building, 1067,
Nelson Column, Trafalgar Square, Lon- 1163; Time and Life Building, 1156
don, 1025 [1154A]; Tombs, the (city prison), 11483
Nemesis, Temple of, Rhamnus, 108 [1094] Trinity church, 1144; United Nations
Neo-Babylonian architecture, 64, 66, 69, Headquarters, 1163 [1165A]; Vanderbilt
87 Mansion, 1143; Villard Houses, 1143;
Neo-Baroque, 992, 1026, 1047, 1064, 1071, Woolworth Building, 1155 [1153E]
1086 ter, III2 New Zealand architecture see Australian
Neolithic period, 1, 521 and New Zealand
Neptune, Baths of, Ostia [241F] Newcastle-on-Tyne: All Saints, 950;
Nereid monument, Xanthos, 148 [135C] Cathedral, 402, 406; Central Station,
Nero: Circus of, Rome, 215, 261; Golden 1036; Royal Arcade, 1036 [1038a];
House of, Rome, 206, 229, 707; trium- S. Nicholas, 490 [492B]
phal arch of, 289 Newel, 1267 [975E]
Nerva, Forum of, Rome, 184 [165P]; cor- Newgate Prison, London, 955 [958D]
nice in [246B] Newport, Rhode Island, Touro Synagogue,
Nervi, Pier Luigi (archt.), 1068, 1071, 1103, 1136
IIII ter Newton & Pullan (restorers), 148 [149¢c, L]
Nesfield, W. Eden (archt.), 991, 999 Newton Road, Paddington, house in, 1007
Netherlands Renaissance architecture, 10; [10068]
English architecture influenced by, 868, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario, S. Andrew’s
870, 871; see also Belgian and Dutch Re- Presbyterian Church, 1144
naissance Niche buttress, 178, 179
Neumann, Balthasar (archt.), 811, 818 Niches (wall), 179, 197, 209, 218, 229, 1267
Neumiinster, the, Wirzburg, 818 [815B] [199B]; British 19th century 1025; English
Neutra, Richard (archt.), 1159 Mediaeval, 493, 509; German, 811 bis
Nevile’s Court, Trinity College, Cam- [824a, c]; Italian, 752 [749E, 757F] ;Span-
bridge, 882 [9224] ish, 643, 647, 852 :
New Canaan (Conn.), Boissonas House, Niemeyer, Oscar (archt.), 1160, 1163 bis
1159 Niké Apteros, Temple of, Athens, 128, 129,
New Church, Haarlem, 836 [837B, 839E] 133 143 [103B, 104C, 135B, 142H]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1328 INDEX
Nikk6é (Japan): Temple at, 1217 [1221]; Notre Dame, Chalons-sur-Marne, capital
Tomb of Ieyasu, 1214 in [567C]
Nikolaikirche, Hamburg, 990, 1079 [1081A] Notre Dame, Hal, font in, 582 [5818]
Nimes (France), 183; amphitheatre, 213; Notre Dame, Louviers, flying buttresses
Maison Carrée, 188, 1147 [190E-G]; [564A] .
Pont du Gard, 236 [216E, 242B]; Roman Notre Dame, Maastricht, 573
remains at, 183, 188; Temple of Diana, Notre Dame, Montreal, 1144,
188, 240 (ii) [192F-L] Notre Dame, Paris, 534, 537, 538, 541 bis,
Nimroud (Iraq), palaces at, 64, 73 [71A, 647 [531-2].
84A, E, G,H] cylindrical piers at, 348; doorways,
Nine Altars, Chapel of the: Dusham 406, 537, 561 (i); double aisles, 534, 559 (i);
469, 559 (ii) [411E]; Fountains, 429, 469 model of [374A, 532C]; nave [532B]; pul-
Nineveh (Iraq), palaces at, 64, 73 [84C, J] pit stair [563F]; transepts, 559; vaulting,
Nitshill, Glasgow, 1007 [1002B] 307, 5343 western facade, 537, 562 (i),
Nocera (Italy), Baptistery, 293 [295H, J] 565 (i) [532A]; western towers, 376, 5375
Noisiel-sur-Marne (France), chocolate fac- 562 (i) [563C]; window, 537, 562 (i)
tory, 1064, 1103 [1105B] [563E]
Noorwits, P. (archt.), 836 Notre Dame, Le Raincy, 1080, 1085
Norman (English Romanesque) architec- [1083A, B]
ture, 384, 390, 1267 Notre Dame-de-Grace, Montreal, 1144
buttresses, 493 [497A, B]; castles, 437— Notre Dame de Pamele, Audenarde, 574
438; cathedrals, 309, 375; columns, 505 Notre Dame du Port, Clermont-Ferrand,
[503A-J, 504A-C]; dwellings, 444 [446a—- 340, 343
c]; manor houses, 444, 447 [446a-c]; Notre Dame du Travail, Paris, 1079
mouldings, 505 [507A-F, 508A-G]; open- Notre cies la Grande, Poitiers, 343 [337¢,
ings, 496 [498A, 499A]; ornament, 506; 338A
plans, 489-90; Roman influence on, 389; Nouveau Louvre, Palais du Louvre, 779,
vaulting, 390, 397; walls, 493 1071 [775C-E, 793B]
Norman Revival, see Romanesque Revival Novara (Italy), Cathedral, 329; circular
Normanton-on-Soar (Notts.), mediaeval baptistery, 329
house, 469 [467c] Novgorod (Russia), S. Sophia, 293 [294B]
Norrey (France), choir chapel [563]] Noyon Cathedral (France), 534, 541; tri-
North Africa: colonnaded streets in, 2253 forium, 537, 541
Muslim architecture, 1230-4 Nuns’ Choir, S. Helen, Bishopsgate [391B]
North Church, Amsterdam, 836 Nuremberg (Bavaria):
North Cray Church (Kent), pulpit, 878, Custom House, 593 [592E]; Frauen-
974 [9764] kirche, 588, 593 [589C, D]; ironwork at,
North Hinksey (Berks.), chevron moulding 594; Lorenzkirche, 594 bis; old houses,
at [508c] 593 [592D]; Pellerhaus, 812 [813D]; pul-
North Luffenham (Rutland), The Pastures, pit at, 594 [596J]; roofs at, 593; S.
1000 [998E] Lawrence [595F]; S. Sebald, 594 bis, 597
North Michigan Avenue (No. 333), [596G]; triptych at, 597 [596c]; two-
Chicago, 1156 storeyed church in, 363
North Pemberton Church (Somerset) Nuthall Temple (Notts.), 938
[S1ID, 518k] Nymphaeum, 206, 229, 1267 [232E]
Northampton: Nyrop, Martin (archt.), 1086
circular church at, 265, 305, 3903
Derngate (No. 78), 1007 [1001E];
Eleanor Cross at [486B, 508R]; S. John’s d@’O, Chateau, Mortrée, 555 [558A]
oleae 479 [500A]; Town Hall, 1025 Oak Park, Illinois, Unity Temple, 1147
NortonS. Philip (Somerset), George Inn, Obbergen, Anton van (archt.), 812
483 [484B] : Obelisks, 1267; Egyptian, 17, 49-50; ‘Cleo-
Norwich *CNorfolk): Dolphin Inn, 483 patra’s Needle’, London, 50; in Piazza of
[484M]; Great Hospital, 479; Municipal S. Giovanni Laterano, Rome, 50 [664]
Buildings, 1035 [1029p]; S. Andrew’s Cae (Germany), stone screen at, 594
Hall, 305; S. Mary [518pD] 595B
Norwich Cathedral, 376, 421 [511S, T] Ockwells Manor (Berks.), windows of, 510
east end of, 405; Lady Chapel, 376 Ocotlan (Mexico), sanctuary, 1136 [1134D]
[411D]; model of [407H]; monastic Octastyle temples, 1268; Greek, 107, 108,
foundation of, 402; piers, 505; plan of 129 [109H; 377¢]
[411D]; spire of, 405 Octavia, Portico of, Rome, 225 [208a]
Notre Dame, Avignon, 343 Odeion, 1268; Greek, 147-8; of Herodes
Notre Dame, Breda, 582 Atticus, Athens, 148, 210 [103B, I04Cc];
Notre Dame, Bruges, 574 of Pericles, Athens, 148
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1329
Odescalchi, Palazzo, Rome, 726 [706D] Oppenheim (Germany), S. Catherine, 594
O’Donnell, James (archt.), 1144 Opus:
Oecus, 233, 1268 [238a] _Alexandrinum, 279, 301, 1268; Greca-
Office buildings, London, rosr [10508] nicum, 261; incertum, 175, 176 [177B];
Offley Church (Herts.), font at [515D] mixtum, 176; quadratum, 165; reticula-
Ogee moulding, 156, 393, 506, 974, 1268 tum, 175 [177C]; sectile, 179 brs, 279, 3015
[164G, H]; see also Cyma Recta and Cyma signinum, 179; spicatum, 179; testa-
Reversa ceum, 175 [177D]
Ogee arches, 289, 1268 [1256, nos. 28, 29] Orange (France): Arch of Tiberius at, 221-
Ogivale, Style, 534 222 [226A]; Theatre at, 149 [145D-G]
O’Gorman, Juan (archt.), 1160 Orangery, the, Kensington Gardens, Lon-
Olbrich, J. M. (archt.), 1065 don, 928 [921D, 971K]
Old Barn, Fullstone, 483 [486G—]] Oratories, 521, 525 [526A]
Old Basing Church (Hants.) [491T] D’Orbay (archt.), 779
Old foundation, cathedrals of the, 402 Orchard, The, Chorley Wood, 1000 [10024]
Old London Bridge, 489 [4871] Orders, religious, 304-5, 308, 668; Friars’,
Old Sacristy, S. Lorenzo, Florence, 677, 305, 8353; Military, 305, 308
678 bis, 713 Orders of Architecture, 7, 96, 97, 155, 173,
Old S. Peter, Basilica of, Rome, 188, 258, 174-5, 656, 769, 779; 801 (i), 801 (ii), 823,
261, 375, 684, [259A-C] 835, 836, 1268
d Swan House, Chelsea, 999 [998D] British, 1055; Composite, 9, 174, 175,
Oldfield (restorer) [149]] 244; Corinthian, 7, 96, 97, 123, 137-41,
Olympieion, the, Athens, 107, 108, 139, 1553 174, 175, 244, 8523 Doric, 7, 96, 97;
140, 155 [109H, 146A]; capital in [162A]; 108-25, 244, 852; Doric and Ionic super-
columns from, 180 imposed, 209, 7373 ‘giant’, 738, 748, 751,
Olympia (Greece): 780, 785, 812 bis, 823, 852, 1019, 1020
Altis [1058]; Bouleuterion, 147 [1058]; [742G, 743C, G]; Greek and Roman use
Echo Colonnade, 147; Gymnasium, 148; compared, 174, 213, 243-4 [160, 165];
Heraion, 112 [105B, 114C, F]; Palaestra, Ionic, 7, 96, 121, 123, 125-37, 155, 174,
148; Philippeion, 108, 139 [105B, I09F]; 244; proportions of, 175, 656, 662 (i),
Prytaneion, 147; restoration of, 147 973 [972]; Renaissance, 656, 659, 662 (ii),
[105B]; statue of Hermes, 247 (i); Stoa 673, 674; Roman, 174-5; superimposed,
Poikilé, 147 [105B]; temenos at, 102; 201, 243 (i, li), 713, 725, 751, 812, 886
Temple of Zeus, 119 [105B, 118A] [970G-K] ;Tuscan, 96, 173, 174, 183, 225,
Olynthos (Macedonia), dwellings at, 151 244, 656, 688, 898
Open-air Sanctuary, Yazilikaya, 82 [83D] ‘Orders’ of arches, 309, 329, 347, 496, 505,
Open timber roofs, 316, 433, 451 506, 1268 [507]
Openings (doors, windows): Ordinates in vaulting, 307, 657
the Americas, 1166; British, 1012, Orfani ai Gesuati, Venice, doorway in
1042, 1054; Byzantine, 279, 284, 297-8; [7586]
Chinese, 1208; Continental European, Orford Castle (Suffolk), 438 [440B]
1114; Early Christian, 265; Egyptian, 53 Oriel Chambers, Liverpool, 1047 [1044B]
[40D, 54J,K] Oriel College, Oxford, 473, 897
Gothic: Belgian and Dutch, 578; Eng- Oriel windows, 452, 459 bis, 463, 501, 1268
lish, 390, 393-4, 451-2, 496, 562 (ii) [450D, 460F]; British r9th century, 996,
[387], 450A, 498-9]; French, 562 (i); 1047,1051,1054; English Renaissance,886
German, 593-4; Italian, 627; Spanish, Orientation:
Babylonian temples, 69; basilican
107, 133, 155; Greek and churches, 261 [259c]; Etruscan temples,
Roman compared, 243; Indian, 1192; 187; Gothic churches, 375; Greek
Japanese, 1219; Muslim, 1246 [1248J-M] temples, 129, 187, 240 (i); Muslim, 1229,
Renaissance: Belgian and Dutch, 836; 1245
English, 968 [969A—C, G—J, 970A-F, 971F- Orissa (India), temples, 1187 bis
H]; in Europe, 661 (ii); French, 801 (ii); Orleans (France): Hotel de Ville, 779;
German, 823; Italian, 748, 801 (i) [749D, House of Agnes Sorel, 779
F, G, J]; Spanish, 852, 856 Orly (France), airship hangar, 1066, 1104
Roman, 198, 222, 233, 243 [1106a]
Romanesque: English, 390, 496; ?Orme, Philibert de (archt.), 766, 773, 7795
French, 347-8; German, 363; Italian, 329 792
West Asiatic, 86 Ornament:
Opera House: Cologne, 1086 [1090B]; the Americas, 1168-9; Bactrian, 11953
Hanover, 1085; Paris, 1086 [1089] Baroque, 659; British, 1011, 1055-6; By-
Opisthodomos, 108, 115 bis, 121, 129, 1268 zantine, 301 [300]; Chinese, 1209; Con-
[122G]; Ionic, 129 tinental European, 1065, 1116; Early
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1330 INDEX

Ornament (cont.) } Oxford (cont.)

Christian, 266 [267]; Egyptian, 57-8 394, 473, 914 [400A, 9258]; Clarendon
[54A, B, E, G, 56]; fretted, 156, 230 [163F] Building, 963 [475A]; Colleges, 394, 473,
Gothic, 662 (i); Belgian and Dutch, 501, 881, 882, 897, 914, 963; Convoca-
578; English, 506, 565 (ii) [508, 511-12]; tion Room, 974 [976F]; Corpus Christi
French, 565 (i), 568 (i) [566-7]; German, College, 473; Divinity School, 401, 502
594 [596]; Italian, 633 [630-1]; Spanish, [400¢, 475A; 497M] ;Exeter College, 473
636, 640, 643, 647, 648 [651D-K] Iffley Church, 390 [497A, 503F, 508D];
Greek, 156-8, 247 (i) [162, 163]; Indian Institute [475A]; Jesus College,
heraldic, 510 ter, 647, 773, 802 (ii), 846 473, 882, 897; Keble College, 1011
ter, 852, 856, 1116; Indian, 1195-6; [1010c]; Lincoln College, 473; Mag-
Japanese, 1220-1; Muslim, 1196, 1235, dalen College, 473 [475A, 492], 507W,
1238, 1246, 1249-50 512M, 517M]; Merton College, 469, 473;
Renaissance, 662 (ii); Belgian and 493, 501, 509, 897, 973 [482B, 497F,
Dutch, 832, 835, 840; English, 905, 974, 498M-P, 5I5N, 895C, D]; New College,
[975-8, 980]; French, 766, 769 bis, 785, 382, 451, 473, 474; Old Ashmolean
792, 802 (ii) [804G]; Italian, 674 bis, 687, Museum [4754]; Oriel College, 473, 8973
696, 752, 802 (i); Spanish, 852, 856 [860] Pembroke College, 897; Queen’s Col-
Roman, 178, 230, 247 (ii) [249-50] lege, 473, 914, 963 [475A; 922C, 959C];
Romanesque, 310; English, 506 [508A— Radcliffe Library, 963 [475A; 959A]
G, 512A, J, NJ]; French, 347, 348 [351] S. Ebbe [508D]; S. Frideswide’s Shrine
German, 364 [362F, G]; Italian, 331 [332] [5081]; S. John’s College, 473; S. Mary
‘strap’, 869, 974 bis [891A, 892D, E, Magdalen [497], 499H]; S. Mary the Vir-
977B; C; E] gin, 490 [396C, 475A, 492E, 503T; 507V; X,
West Asiatic, 86-7 [84] 508V, 515P]; Sheldonian Theatre, 914
Orthostates, 85, 152, 1268 [475A, 925x]; Trinity College, 473, 914
Ortiz de Castro, José Damian (archt.), 1135 bis [922B] ;University College, 473 [475A];
Orvieto Cathedral (Cen. Italy), 614 [619B, University Museum, 1020 [1024A, B];
628c]; marble in, 627 Wadham College, 897 [891c]; Worcester
Osaka (Japan), Tenno-ji Pagoda, 1214 College, 738, 963
[1216G] Oxford Cathedral (Christ Church), 304,
Osiris pillars, 57 [54H] 421 [400B]; model of [4098]; plan of
Ospedale degli Innocenti, Florence, 672, [412]; vaulting at, 393, 401, 502 [400B]
677; 732 [6754] ; Oxford Society for promoting the study of
Ospedale Maggiore, Milan, 600, 608, 684 Gothic Architecture, 984, 988
[698F-H]
Ostberg, Ragnar (archt.), 1068, 1093
Ostell, John (archt.), 1144 Pa Li Chuan Pagoda, Peking, 1205
Osterley Park (Middx.), 938 [942C] Pacheco, Vegas (archt.), 1163
Ostia (Italy): Baths of Neptune [241F]; Pack-horse bridge, Coombe Bisset, 489
houses at, 235 [237A, 241C]; Roman [488c]
theatre at, 210 [208B]; tombs at, 217 Paderborn Cathedral (Germany), 587
Oswestry (Salop), school at, 474 Padua (N. Italy): Arena Chapel, 633
Otranto Cathedral (Italy), crypt in, 324 [610B]; brick and terra-cotta churches,
Ottawa (Canada): Dominion Parliament 607; S. Antonio, 290, 604 [605, 758c];
Buildings, 1151[1275];Peace Tower, 1151 tomb of S. Antonio, 633 [630C]
Ottobeuren (Germany), Abbey Church, 818 Paeonius of Ephesus (archt.), 131 bis
Ottoman buildings, 1237 Paestum (Italy): Basilica at, 94, 108 [109K,
Oud, J. J. P. (archt.), 1066, 1067, 1075 II4H, 136E, H]; Temple of Demeter at,
Ouistreham (Normandy), church at, 344 III, 115 [113B]; Temple of Poseidon at,
Ouro Preto (Brazil), penitentiary, 1139 III bis, 115, 155 [I13C, 114A, B, D, G, 116]
Outwell Church (Norfolk), roof of, 434 Pagoda:
Oviedo (Spain), church, 648 bis Bessho, 1214; Black, Kanarak, 1187
Ovolo, 156, 1268 [164F, 165L, Q] [1194c-D]; Great, Soochow, 1205; Ho-
Owatonna (Minnesota), National Farmers’ kiji, 1214; H6riuji, 1214; Ink, Soochow,
Bank, 1155 1205; Kew Gardens, London, 1205; Ling
Owens College, Manchester, 1025 Kuang Sst, Peking, 1205; Nan t’a, Fang
Oxburgh Hall (Norfolk), 452, 881 [450G-L] Shan, Chih-li, 1205; Pa Li Chuan,
Oxford, 473 [4754] Peking, 1205; Pei t’'a, Fang Shan, Chih-
All Souls’, 473, 963 [475A; 507Y, 926 li, 1205; Sung Yiieh Sst, Honan, 1202;
7&8]; Ashmolean Museum, 1020 [102 1E]; Tenno-ji, Osaka, 1214 [1216G]; Twin
Balliol College, 473; Bodleian Library, Pen, Soochow, 1205; White, Foochow,
886, 897, 967, 973 [4754, 895A]; Brase- 1205; Yakushiji, 1214; Yasaka, 1214
nose College, 473 [4754]; Christ Church, [12158]; Yuan Ming Yiian, Peking, 1205
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1331
Pagodas: Chinese, 1201, 1202-5, 1208 Palace (cont.)
[1203B, I204E]; Japanese, 1214 898 [899]; Williamsburg, 1140; Win-
‘Pai-lous’ (gateways): Chinese, 1180, 1201, chester, 928 [925F]; Wolvesey, 968
1202, 1205 bis, 1208 [1203c]; Japanese, pias of Xerxes, Persepolis, 75, 78
1217, 1219 76C
Paimio (Finland), Tuberculosis Sanato- Palaces:
rium, 1094 [1099c] Aegean, 97, 98-101 [99, 100H]; As-
Paine, James (archt.), 874, 932 937, 964 syrian, 73, 371 [71A, B, 74]; Chinese,
Palace (see also Palazzo): 1206; Italian, 748, see also Palazzo;
Alcazar, Seville, 12333; Archbishop’s, Japanese, 1217; Rajasthan, 1188; Re-
Alcala, 846; Croydon, 452; Lambeth, naissance, 213; Roman, 8, 169, 227, 229—
393, 394; Palermo, 624 bis [626c, J]; Ar- ; 230 [231-2]; Rome’s, 673; Syrian, 85;
taxerxes II, Susa, 75; Ashurbanipal, ee gt 64, 70; 73 75> 79 [7IA, 725
Nineveh, 73; Ashurnasirpal II, Nim- 745
roud, 64, 73 [71A]; Augustus, Rome, 227 Palacio de la Audiencia, Barcelona, 644
[2328]; Bishop’s, Alcala, 648 [646G] Palacio de Monterey, Salamanca, 956
Bishop’s, Wells, 452; Blenheim, 931-2, Palacios, A. P. (archt.), 1160
967 [930, 933A; 934A]; Bromley-by-Bow, Palaestra, Greek, 148; Roman, 202
ee 974 [977B]; Buckingham, London, Palais de Justice: Brussels, 1086 [1090A];
Malines, 831; Paris, 791; Rouen, 555,
de Chaillot, Paris, 1094 [1100B] ;Charles 559 [556B, 558B]; Zaltbommel [838k]
V’s, Granada, 851 [847A, C]; Clam Gallas, Palatine Hill, Rome, Palaces on, 227 [232]
Prague, 812; Crystal, London, 1041-2 Palazzetto dello Sport, Rome, 1103 [11024]
[1043]; Ctesiphon, 79 [801—pP]; Cyrus Palazzo:
the Great, Pasargadae, 75 Albergati, Bologna, 702; Barbarano,
Darius I, Persepolis, 75, 78 [76c]; Vicenza, 738; Barberini, Rome, 725, 748
Darius I, Susa, 75 [76F, G]; Diocletian, [724A, B]; Bargello, Florence, 623; Bevi-
Spalato, 194, 229-30, 875 [231]; Doge’s, lacqua, Verona, 732 [744J]; Borghese,
Venice, see Doge’s Palace; Domitian, Rome, 691, 725 [724F]; Braschi, Rome,
Rome, 227, 229 [232E]; Ducal, Guadala- 8
jara, 647, 846 [646A, 843A]; Ducal, Gub- Ca d’Oro, Venice, 608 [612c]; della
bio, 695; Ducal, Urbino, 695 [6758] Cancelleria, Rome, 696, 701 [699, 753C];
Eltham, 437 [500G]; Esarhaddon, Nim- Capitanio, Vicenza, 738; Carega, Genoa
roud, 64, 73 [71A]; Esarhaddon, Nineveh, [759E]; Carignano, Turin, 695 [6948];
64; Feruz-abad, 79 [80A-F]; Fontaine- Cavalli, Venice, 608; Chiericati, Vicenza,
bleau, 774, 802 (ii) [764B, 767-8, 803A, B, 738; del Commune, Verona [628D]; dei
D, E]; Furstenburg, Innsbruck [592F] Conservatori, Rome, 714 [718D, E]; del
Governor’s, Nancy, 791; Hampton Consiglio, Verona, 664 (ii), 732 [744H];
Court, 380, 394; 437, 459, 463, 496, 502, Contarini-Fasan, Venice, 608; Contucci,
510, 914, 967, 974 [460, 46IC, E, 923A, Montepulciano, 702; Cornaro, Venice
925U]; Hungarian Guard, Vienna, 812 [757F]; Corner della Ca’ Grande, Venice,
[825B]; Kensington, 914; Kinsky, 737, 747 bis [734c]; Corner Spinelli,
Vienna, 812 [813F] Venice, 731 [7348]; Corsini, Rome, 748
Louvre,762,769; 774,779,780; 78537915 dei Diamanti, Verona, 737 [7446];
871, 880, 898 [775—7, 7938] ;Luxembourg, Durazzo-Pallavicini, Genoa, 691 [689D];
769, '780[781E, F] ;Marqués de Dos Aguas, Episcopio, Pienza, 684
Valencia, 852 [857B, C]; Minos, King, at Farnese, Caprarola, 708, 748 [711];
Knossos, 98 [99B]; Montezuma, at Farnese, Rome, 217, 702, 725, 748 [705,
Mexico City, 1131 753A, B]; Farsetti, Venice, 324; Foscari,
Persepolis, 75, 78 [76c, 77A]; Petit, Venice, 608; Franchini, Verona [7578]
Paris, 1064, 1086 [1092B]; Phaestos, 98; Gambaro, Genoa [759D]; Gondi, Flor-
Royal, Madrid, 852; S. James’s, London, ence, 748 [749A]; Grimani, Venice, 737
394 [461A, 462B]; San Antonio, 11393 [745]; Guadagni, Florence, 685 [680F];
Santa Fé, 1139 [1138A]; Sargon II, tiell, Barcelona, 1065, 1071 [1069Cc];
Khorsabad, 64, 73-5 [718, 74]; Sarvistan, del Laterano, Rome, 725 [664, 706F]
79 [80G—K]; Schwarzenberg, Vienna, 812 Marino, Milan, 688, 691 [724D]; Mas-
[813F]; Sennacherib, Nineveh, 64, 73 simi, Rome, 673, 702 [703]; Micheletti,
Tiryns, 98, 101 [99C]; Troja, Prague, Lucca, 687 [689c]; Montecitorio, Rome,
812 [814A]; Tuileries, Paris, 774, 779 726; Municipale, Genoa, 688, 691 [690];
[775E; 7778) Versailles, 762, 780, 785 del Municipio, Perugia, 623; Odescalchi,
[783, 784A, 788D, F, 804c]; Waldstein, Rome, 726 [706D]
Prague, 812 [810B]; Wells, Bishop’s Pandolfini, Florence, 707, 748, 1019
452; Westminster, 451, see also West- [756]; Pazzi, Florence, see Quaratesi;
minster Hall; Whitehall, London, 866, Pesaro, Venice, 747 [734A]; Piccolomini,
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1332 INDEX

Palazzo (cont.) Panel, 1268

Pienza, 684 [682B]; Piccolomini, Siena, Panelling:
684, 701-2 [675C]; Pisani, Venice, 608 English Mediaeval, 493 bis, 496, 510
[612B]; Pitti, Florence, 673, 678, 748 [461J]; English Renaissance, 967 [971K;,
[680a-D, 749F]; del Podesta, Florence, 975A]; French, 769, 774, 785, 801 (ii),
623; Pompeii, Verona, 737 [744A-C]; dei 802 (ii) [803D, E]; Italian, 802 (i); Span-
Priori, Volterra, 623 [612F]; Pubblico, ish, 648
Cremona, 608 ; Pubblico, Montepulciano, Panhellenic House, New York, 1155
623 [612H]; Pubblico, Piacenza, 608; Pansa, House of, Pompeii, 233 [234, 238A]
Pubblico, Pienza, 684; Pubblico, Siena, ‘Pantheon, The’, Oxford St, London, 956
623 [612D]; Quaratesi, Florence, 678, 748 Panthéon, The, Paris, 770, 799, 908, 913
[680E,749D] c [797¢, 798A, 800D-F]
Regio, Venice [757D]; Rezzonico, Pantheon, The, Rome, 197-8, 290, 855
Venice, 747 [7468]; Riccardi, Florence, [196, 199]
657, 672, 678, 748 [681]; Rucellai, Flor- bronze roof of, 179, 198; buttresses
ence, 657, 683, 684 [680G] of, 178-9; columns in, 179, 197 [196B,
Sacrati, Ferrara [7536]; Sauli, Genoa, 199B]; Corinthian features in [160F];
688, 691 [686B]; Sciarra, Rome [753F]; dome of, 178, 717, 719; doorways of,
dello. Sport, Rome, 1103 [1102B, C]; 243 (ii) [159A-C]; ‘eye’ of, 179, 198 [197B,
Stefano, Taormina, 624 [626B]; Strozzi, 199A]; imitations of, 726, 950; lighting of,
Florence, 657, 684, 707, 748 [685] 198; niches in walls of, 197, 209; panel
del Té, Mantua, 707-8 [709A]; Thiene, in [246F]; pilaster capital in [246A];
Vicenza, 738; dell’ Universita, Genoa, portico, 197, 717 [199C, D, E]; Rotunda,
641, 725 [692B, D]; Valmarana, Vicenza, 197-8 [196B, 199A]; tiling of, 243 (ii)
738 [742D]; Vecchio, Florence, 623 Pantry, 451 [449¢]
[610C, 750A]; Vendramini, Venice, 731 Paolo, Fontana, Rome, 725 [753H]
[734D-G]; di Venezia, Rome, 696 [682E] Papier-maché, 802 (ii)
Palermo (Sicily): Papyrus, Egyptian, 22 [55A—-C]
Archbishop’s Palace, 624 [626c]; Parabolic vaulting, 1066, 1068, 1080, 1104
Capella Palatina, 324 [327c]; Cathedral, Parapets, 490, 493, 562, 647, 662 (1), 823,
600, 624 [626A]; La Martorana, 319, 324; 856, 1268 [SI IA-F]
La Zisa, 324 [327D]; Muslim architec- battlemented, 316, 493, 549, 562 (ii),
ture in, 1234; S. Cataldo, 324; S. Gio- 662 (i) [511D-F]; Italian, 608, 687;
vanni degli Eremiti, 324 pierced, 493 bis, 542, 562 (i), 662 (i), 967
Palestine: basilican churches in, 262 [563H, 564F]
[260A—D]; Muslim architecture, 1229 Parasuramesvara Temple, Bhuvaneshwar
Palgrave Church (Suffolk), roof, 437 (India) [11868]
Palladianism, 10, 659, 660; Dutch, 831, 835 Parclose screen, 510, 1268 [516A]
ter, 871, 928; English, 872, 873-5, 932, Parenzo (Yugoslavia), mosaic from [267s]
938,948 Pargetting, 510, 1268
Palladian motif, 738, 1268 [741] Parigi, G. & A. (archts.), 678
Palladio, Andrea (archt.), 9, 607, 659, 691, Paris:
738, 747, 748 Arc de Triomphe de 1’Etoile, 770, 791
Classic Orders and, 175, 656, 674, 708; [793A]; Arc du Carrousel, 770, 791; Bas-
English architecture influenced by, 738, tille métro station, 1104; Chambre des
867, 870, 871, 873, 931, 938, 968; on Députés, 770, 791 [794A]; Champs
Orders of architecture, 801 (i), 973 Elysées Theatre, 1093 [1106B]; Church
Palm House, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, of the Sacré Coeur, 1080; Church of the
1041 [1040B] Sorbonne, 792 [796c]; Church of the Val
Palm vaulting, 502; see also Fan vaulting de Grace, 792 [797A]; Collége des Quatre
Palmette, 156 Nations, 785 ;Dome of the Invalides, 799
Palmolive Building, Chicago, 1156 [797D, 800A-c]; Ecole Militaire, 791;
Palmyra (Syria), 183; colonnaded streets, Eiffel Tower, 1064, 1103; Garage, Rue
184, 194, 225; forum at, 184; four-sided de Ponthieu, 1104 [1101c]; Grand
arch, 225; Great Temple of the Sun, 194; Palais, 1086
temple-shaped tombs, 218 Halle des Machines, 1064, 1103; Hotel
Pamplona (Spain), Cathedral, 855 de Brunoy, 785; Hétel de Cluny, 559
Pampulha (Brazil), Church of Sao Fran- [557B, 558H]; Hétel de Salm, 785; Hotel
cisco, 1160 de Sully, 785 [786A]; Hotel des Invalides,
Panathenaic frieze, Athens, 121, 123 [163H] 769; 799; 800 (ii) [788B-c]; Hétel Lam-
Pancratii, Tomb of the, Rome, 218 [219C] bert, 785 [786B]; Hétel Lamoignon, 780
Pandolfini, Palazzo, Florence, 707, 748, [778D]; Hdétel des Monnaies, 770, 791
1019 [756] [790B]; Hétel Rue de Cherche-Midi
Pandrosus, Sanctuary of, Athens, 133, 137 [788E]; International Exhibitions, 1064,
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1333
Paris (cont.) Pasargadae (Persia), Palace and Tomb of
1086, 1094, 1103 [1105D, F]; Library of Cyrus the Great, 75
S. Genevieve, 1085, 1151; Louvre, the, ‘Pastas’ houses, 151, 152, 1268 [153B]
see Palais du Louvre; Louvre Museum, Pastures, The, North Luffenham, 1000
87, 123 [76F, G]; Luxembourg Palace, [998E]
687; Lycée Napoléon [804D] Patent Office, Washington (D.C.), 1148
Madeleine Church, 770, 799 [7988]; Patera ornament, 1268 [163G, J, 461A]
Musée d’Art Moderne, 1094 [1100a]; Patio, 644, 647, 842, 846 quater, 851 bis,
Musée des Travaux Publics, 1103 852, 855, 856, 1163, 1268 [848A, 8498,
[1101B]; National Library, 1064, 1085-6, 850A, 854B]
[1088]; Notre Dame, see Notre Dame, . Patio de los Evangelistas, The Escorial, 851
Paris; Notre Dame du Travail, 1079; Patio de los Reyes, The Escorial, 851
Nouveau Louvre extensions, 1071; Patriarchal Chair, Canterbury, 406 [519c]
Opera House, 1086 [1089] Patrington (Yorks.), gargoyles at [511L]
Palais de Chaillot, 1094 [1100B]; Palais Pattadakal (India), Hindu temple, 1187
de Justice, 791 ;Palais du Louvre, 762,769, Paul, Bruno (archt.), 1065
774>779s 780, 79% [775-75 790C, 793B]; Paul Revere House, Boston, Mass., 1132
Palais du Luxembourg, 769, 780; Palais Pavement: Early Christian, 261, 266;
des Tuileries, 774, 779 [775E, 7778], mosaic, 205, 229, 233, 247 (i), 261
Panthéon, 770, 799, 908, 913 [797¢ [249H, K, 267Q, T]; Roman, 198, 205
798A, 800D-F]; Petit Palais, 1064, 1086; Pavement slabs, Assyrian, 87 [84c]
Place de la Concorde, 791 [790A]; Place Pavia (Italy): Cathedral, 684; Certosa di,
Vendéme, 785 [787A]; Place des Vosges, 305, 600, 603, 604, 624, 684, 751
785 [7848]; Pont Alexandre III, 1086; [617D-F, 686A]; S. Michele, 309, 320,
Porte S. Denis, 785 [786c]; Quai du 323, 329, 604 [322]
Louvre, 791 Pavilion: Chihil Sutun, Isfahan, 1237; Great
Rue Franklin, 1072 [1073D]; Rue de Temple of Honan, Canton [1204N];
Milan, 1071 [1069B]; Rue Raynouard, Summer Palace, Peking [1204F]
1079 [1069F] ;Rue deRivoli, 1071 [10694]; Pavilions, 791, 801 (ii), 818, 1036, I103
. Augustin, 1079; S. Chapelle, 542 [790A, I1105D]; Egyptian, 22, 30; Japan-
[546A, B, 560D, 566B]; S. Denis [3104]; S. ese, 1217 bis
Clotilde, 1079; S. Etienne du Mont, 791; Pavillon:
S. Eugéne, 1079 [1081D]; S. Eustache, de Flore, Palais du Louvre, 779 [790c];
792 [796A]; S. Geneviéve Library, 1063, de l’Horloge, Palais du Louvre, 774, 779
1085 [1087]; S. Gervais, 792; S. Jean de [7754, 776A]; de Marsan, Palais du
Montmartre, 1064, 1080 [1081B]; S. Louvre, 779 bis; Richelieu, Palais du
Sulpice, 770, 792 [797B]; SS. Paul and Louvre, 779 [775D]; de Rohan, Palais du
Louis, 769, 792 [796B]; Samaritaine Louvre, 779; Turgot, Palais du Louvre,
Department Store, 1104 [1105c]; Swiss 779 [775¢] ;
Hostel, Cité Universitaire, 1079 [10774]; Paxton, Sir Joseph, 872, 989, 1041 bis
Théatre Francais, 1063 Paycocke’s, Coggeshall (Essex), 469 [464D]
Parish churches: Pazzi Chapel, Florence, 678, 683, 696
Belgian and Dutch, 577; craftsman- [676A-F]
ship in, 509 bis; English Mediaeval, 376, Peace Tower, Dominion Parliament Build-
385, 402, 430; Scottish, 522; Spanish, ings, Ottawa, II51
647; timber roof types [435] Pearl Mosque, Agra, 1245
Parlange, Pointe Coupée (La.), 1132 Pearson, F. L. (archt.), 1059
[11338] Pearson, J. A. (archt.), 1151
Parler, Peter (archt.-craftsman), 372 Pearson, J. L. (archt.), 988, 990, 1008,
Parma (Italy): Baptistery, 323 [327A, B, IOII, 1048, 1059
332L]; portico, 627; Teatro Farnese, 691 Pede, Jan van (archt.), 577
[693D, F] Pediments, 119, I2I, 155, 156, 774, 7925
Parma Palace (now Palais de Justice), 1047, 1268 [117C, 124G, 165A]; English,
Malines, 831 898 bis, 967; Ionic, 129; Italian, 707, 7255
Parque Guinle Flats, Rio de Janeiro, 1159 Renaissance, 659, 661 (ii); Roman, 188,
Parroquia, Spanish, 647 197 [231B]
Parthenon, the, Athens, 119, 121-3, 247 (i) Pei t’a Pagoda, Fang Shan, 1205
II5I [103, 104, IIOA, B, 113F, 122, 144B] Peking (China):
inclination of columns, 94; Ionic fea- Great Altar of Heaven, 1202, 1205;
tures, 121; method of lighting, 121; opti- Hall of Central Peace, 1202; Imperial
cal corrections, 94; Panathenaic friezes, Palace, 1206; Institute of Iron and Steel
I2I, 123; sculptures, 119, I21, 123 Technology, 1207; Kuo Tzu Chien,
Parthian architecture, 78-9 1202; Ling Kuang Sst Pagoda, 1205;
Pasadena (California), Gamble House, 1144 Pa Li Chuan Pagoda, 1205; Sacrifice
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 1334 INDEX

Peking (China) (cont.) Perret, Auguste (archt.), 1066, 1067, 1068,

Hall of Yung Lo, 1202; Summer Palace, 1071, 1079, 1080, 1085, 1093, 1103, 1104,
1206, 1207 [1203A]; Temple of Agri- III2
culture, 1202 [1204p]; Temple of Persepolis, palace complex at, 75-8 [76A-E,
Heaven, 1201, 1202; Temple of the TTA
Sleeping Buddha, 1202, 1205 [12034]; Apadana of Darius, 78; Gatehouse of
Tomb of Yung-lo, 1205; Yiian Ming Xerxes, 75, 87; Hall of the Hundred
Yiian Pagoda, 1205 Columns (Apadana of Xerxes), 78;
Pele-towers, 444 bis, 522 : Palace of Darius, 78; Palace of Xerxes,
Pellerhaus, Nuremberg, 812 [813D 78; Treasury, 78; Tripylon, 78; walls, 66
Pemberton Tower, Chester, 489 [487c] Persepolitan capitals, 1180 bis
Pembroke College, Cambridge, 473; book- Persia, Muslim architecture, 1234-7
case, 974 [976D]; Chapel, 871, 906, 914 Persian architecture, 7, 65, 66, 75-8;
[908A, B]; turret [971A] columns, 66, 78, 86 [76A, B, D]; palaces,
Pembroke College, Oxford, 897 75 [774]; temples, 62
Pendant vaulting, 401 bis, 427, 502, 565 (i) Perugia (Italy): Arch of Augustus, 180, 183
[426c] [181B]; Palazzo del Municipio, 623
Pendants, 502, 510, 565 (ii) [426B-F, 512R] Peruzzi, Baldassare (archt.), 9, 701-23; his
Pendentived domes, 657, 691, 713, 719, 726 plan for S. Peter’s, 688, 717 [722F]
[658A-F] Pesaro, Palazzo, Venice, 747 [7344]
Pendentives, 643, 1036, 1086, 1268; Byzan- Peshawar (India), museum, 1180
tine, 209, 276, 279, 280, 283 bis, 284, 297, Peter Jones Store, London, 1048 [1050]
298 [277; 281C, 285B, D]; Roman, 209 Peter Martyr, S., tomb of, Milan [631A]
Penguin Pool, Regent’s Park Zoo, 1048 Peterborough Cathedral, 308, 376, 390, 421
[1050c] [403A, 414]
Penitentiary, Ouro Preto, 1139 choir [494A, B]; model of [408F];
Penn Mutual Life Insurance Building, monastic foundation of, 402; mouldings
Philadelphia, 1152 [408H]; piers, 505 [503A]; plan of
Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts, [410D]; roof, 506; rose windows [414A,
Philadelphia, 1148 C]; vaulting at, 397 brs, 401, 501 [399B]
Pennsylvania Railroad Station, New York, Peterhouse, Cambridge, 473; wall tablets at,
1156 [1154B] 878, 974 [976]]
Pennsylvanian Marble, 1121 Petit Palais, Paris, 1064, 1086 [1092B]
Penshurst Place (Kent), 451, 881, 964 Petit Trianon, Versailles, 785 [788A, 789A]
[449A-E] Petra (Jordan), temple-shaped tombs
Pentastyle temples, Greek, 107, 1268 around, 218, 221 [220N]
Pentley Park Primary School, Welwyn Petrikirche, Hamburg, 1079
Garden City, 1035 [1033C] Petworth (Sussex), Somerset Hospital, 956
Percier, Charles (archt.), 770, 779; 791; ‘Peutinger Tabula’ (Roman map), 353-4
1071 Pews, Decorated, 509
Pergamon (Asia Minor): basilican church Phaestos (Crete), Palace at, 98
at, 265; gymnasium at, 148; Roman Pharos (lighthouse), Alexandria, 19
forum at, 184; sculpture at, 156 Pheidias (sculptor), 119 bis, 121
Peribolus, 140, 187, 188, 225, 1268 [192B] Philadelphia (Pa.):
Pericles, Odeion of, Athens, 148 Carpenters Hall, 1140; Christ Church,
Périgueux (France): Byzantine art in, 271, 1139; City Hall, 1151 [11468]; Eastern
335; S. Front, 289, 290, 1080 [288D-G] State Penitentiary, 1148; Founder’s
Peripteral temples, 108 bis, 123, 131, 184, Hall, Girard College, 1148; Independ-
1268 [109], 1201] ence Hall, 1140 [11388]; Merchants’ Ex-
Peristyles, 108, 121, I5I, 152, 1269 [149B, change, 1152 [1150A]; Mount Pleasant,
150F] 1132; Penn Mutual Life Insurance
Byzantine, 279; English, 913 [91I1A, C]3; Building, 1152; Pennsylvania Academy
French, 799; Greek origin of, 230; of the Fine Arts, 1148; Provident Trust
Italian, 701 [723D]; Roman, 179, 194, Company Buildings, 1148; Second Bank
218 bis, 233 [220C, 231B, 232E, 238A] of the U.S., 1151
Perpendicular style, 9, 389, 393-4, 522 Philae, Island of [46a]; Mammisi temple,
buttresses, 493 [497K-M, N, S]; castles, 49 [46A]; stone, use of, 168; Temple of ~
443-4; columns, 505 [503T-V, 504K—M]; Isis, 44, 46 bis, 47 bis, 53
manor houses, 451-2; mouldings, 506 Philibert le Beau, tomb of, Brou [567F]
[507V-Z, 508T—-X]; openings, 501 [498M-P, Philippeion, Olympia, 108 [109F]
499L-N]; ornament, 509-10, 565 (ii) ee ie(Arizona), David J. Wright House,
[508T-x]; roofs, 502; vaulting, 398; II5
walls, 493 Piacenza (N. Italy): Palazzo Pubblico, 208;
Perrault, Claude (archt.), 769, 774; 779 S. Antonino, 320 [3178]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1335
Piano nobile, 688, 691, 702, 780, 785, Plans:
_801 (i), 812, 932, 996, 1269 [703] British, 1000, 1008, 1012, 1019, 1026,
Piazza of S. Peter, Rome, 717, 719 [721] 1051-4 [1018c]; Byzantine, 280, 297,
Piccadilly Hotel, London, 1047 [1046] 1052; Chinese, 1208; circular, 1103 ; Con-
Piccolomini, Palazzo: Pienza, 684 [6828]; tinental European, 1111-123 cruciform,
Siena, 684, 701-2 [675c] 1008, 1012, 1103; E-shaped, 780; Early
‘Picturesque’ movement, 948 bis, 1269 Christian, 265, 647; Egyptian, 50; Eng-
Piddleton Church (Dorset) [504K] lish cathedrals, 405, 559 (ii) [410-13]
Pienza (Italy): Palazzo Episcopio, 684; Gothic: Belgian and Dutch, 577; Eng-
Palazzo Piccolomini, 684 [682B]; Pa- lish, 489-90, 559 (ii); in Europe, 661 (i);
lazzo Pubblico, 684 French, 559 (i) [560B, 561]; German,
Pierce, Roland (archt.), 1035 375, 5933 Italian, 375, 624 [616F, 617D];
Pierrefonds, Chateau de, 549 [552c] Spanish, 640, 643, 647 [649, 651L]
Pierrepont, Farnham, 999 Greek, 152, 240 (i) [109]; Indian,
Piers, 1269 1191; Japanese, 1218; Muslim, 1245;
Pilaster strips, 323, 329, 358, 390, 490 rectangular, 1012
Pilasters, 240, 1269 Renaissance: Belgian and Dutch, 836;
Pilgrim’s Chapel, Houghton-le-Dale, 469 English, 964-7; in Europe, 661 (ii);
[4714-C] French, 769, 780, 799 (ii) [764B, 781B, C,
Pilkington, W. (archt.), 955 E]; German, 817, 818, 823 [8098]; Ital-
Pillars, 1115-16; iron, 989, 1020, 1051, ian, 747-8, 799(1) Spanish, 851,855[853B]
1085; monumental, India, 1180; rein- Roman, 240 (ii)
forced-concrete, 1036, 1048, IIIT; steel, Romanesque: English, 375-6, 489-90;
1675; see also Pilotis and Stanchions in Europe, 308-9; French, 347; German,
Pilotis, 1008, 1067, 1075 1079 bis, 1269 357, 363; Italian, 329
Pinacotheca (picture gallery), 246 (i), 1269; West Asiatic, 85
Athens [104c, 142H] Plasterwork, 802 (i), 855, 856
Pinacothek, Munich, 817 ‘Plate’ tracery, 496, 562
Pindar’s (Sir Paul) House, London, 885 Plateresque style, 845, 846 bis, 853 ter, 856,
Pinnacles, 367, 371, 1269 [369] 862, 1126, 1269
Pinto de Abreu, Francisco (archt.), 1139 Platt, John (elder and younger, archts.), 949
Pir i-Alamdar, tomb of, Damghan, 1235 Playfair, W. H. (archt.), 877, 963, 987, 1020
Piraeus (Greece), Arsenal at, 148 Pleasantville, N.Y., Friedman House,
Piranesi, Giambattista (etcher), 875; draw- 1156
ing of Pantheon by [196B] Plinth, 128, 1313 Assyrian, 75, 1269 [74F]
Pirelli office block, Milan, 1111 [1110A] Pliny (Gaius Plinius Secundus), 229
Pisa (Italy): Ploughshare twist, 398, 1269 [373C]
Baptistery, 319-20 [313A, 3I14E-G, Plymouth (Devon), Bank, 1036
330K, 377F, 630D-G]; Byzantine influ- Podesta, Palazzo del, Florence, 623
ence in, 316; Campanile (leaning tower), Podium, 148 bis, 151, 174, 184, 719, 799;
319 [313A, 3144-D]; Campo Santo, 319, IOII, 1012, 1047; Roman, 187 ter, 188,
614 [314B, 618A]; Cathedral, 319, 633 197, 217 ter, 218 ter, 222 [190F]
[313, 314B, 630D-G]; S. Maria della Poelaert, Joseph (archt.), 1086
Spina, 614 [6183] Poelzig, Hans (archt.), 1065
Pisan Romanesque style, 990 Pointe Coupée Parish (La.), Parlange, 1132
Pisani, Palazzo, Venice, 608 [612B] [11338] ;
Pisano, Andrea (archt.), 613 ter Pointedarch, 10, 298, 319, 371 67s, 657 [1256]
Pisano, Giovanni (archt.), 614 English Mediaeval, 397 ter, 5015
Pisano, Niccolo (archt.), 607, 614 French Gothic, 537; French Roman-
Piscina, English Mediaeval, 506, 509 bis, esque, 343, 347; German Gothic, 587;
510, 1269 [515E-H] introduction of, 9, 307, 309, 340, 344,
Pistoia (Italy), Cathedral, 320 [3174]; 347, 368, 530; lancet, 496; Renaissance
tower, 624 ousting of, 657
Pitti, Palazzo, Florence, 673, 678, 748 Poissy (S.-et-O.), Villa Savoye, 1075
[680A-D, 749F] [1074B] ,
Pittsburgh(Pa.):Alcoa Buildings, 1163 ;Alle- Poitiers (France): Cathedral, 549, 559 (i);
gheny County Courthouse and Gaol, 1151 Notre Dame la Grande, 343 [337C, 338A]
Place de la Concorde, Paris, 791 [790A] Pola (Yugoslavia): amphitheatre, 213; arch
Place des Vosges, Paris, 785 [784B] at, 222
Place Royale, Brussels, 832 [834B] Polk, W. J. (archt.), 1156
Place Stanislas (formerly Place Louis XV), Polk Mansion, Rattle and Snap (Tennes-
Nancy, 791 [7878] see), I143
Place Vendome, Paris, 785 [7874] Pollaiuolo, Simone (Il Cronaca), 684
Plano (Ill.), Farnsworth, 1156 [11574] Pollini, Casa, Siena, 702 [692F]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1336 INDEX

Polunnawara (Ceylon), Buddhist remains, Porta Nuova, Verona, 732

1183 Porta del Palio, Verona, 732 [746A]
Polychromy, 983, 990 bis, 1008 bis, 1011, Porta Pila, Genoa, 691 [693C]
1020, 1025, 1052, 1054, 1055, I112, I116 Porta Triumphalis, Rome, 215
Polycleitus (archt.), 143 Portcullis, 509-10, 1269
Polygnotos (artist), 247 (i) Porte d’Arroux, Autun, 225
Polygonal masonry, 93, 152, 240 (i) [161]; Porte de Mars, Rheims, 225
Byzantine, 276; Etruscan, 173 Porte S. André, Autun, 225 [216G]
Polytechnic School, Berlin, 817 Porte S. Denis, Paris, 785 [786c]
Pompeii (Italy), 230 Portico, 1269; of Octavia, Rome, 225 [208A]
Amphitheatre, 213; Arch of Tiberius, Portinari Chapel, S. Eustorgio, Milan, 678
225; basilica at, 202; Baths at, 202, 206; Portuguese architecture, see Spanish
capitals in [246H, K]; excavations at, 230; Medieaval
Forum at, 184, 225 [226B]; fountains at, Portunus, Temple of, Rome, 197 [172A] _
239; frescoes at, 247 (i, ii) [249G]; Gate Poseidon, Temples of: Paestum, 111 bis,
of Herculaneum, 217; houses, 8, 152, 115, 155 [I13C, I14A, B, D, G, 116];
230, 233, 235 [234A, B, D, F, 249F]; Ionic Sunium, 112
order in, 244 (ii); mosaic at, 233 [249H, Post, Pieter (archt.), 831, 835, 836
K-M]; Street of the Tombs, 217; table Post Office Savings Bank, Vienna, 1093
supports from [249J]; theatres at, 210 [1095B] !
[145c]; Tomb of Naevoleia Tyche, 221 Postlip (Northants), pier base at [503H]
[220M]; wall shrine from [249D] Potsdam (Germany), Einstein Tower,
Pons Cestius, Rome [238c] 1093-4 [1099B]
Pons Fabricius, Rome, 176, 239 [238C, Potstone, Indian use of, 1175
241E] Pottsville, Pa., Farmers’ and Mechanics’
Pons Mulvius, Rome, 239 [245B] Bank, 1152
Pons Sublicius, Rome, 236 [245A] Poundisford Park (Somerset), Garden
Pont Alexandre III, Paris, 1086 house, 937 [927C]
Pont d’Avignon (France), 347, 549 Powell and Moya (archts.), 1008
Pont du Gard, Nimes, 236 [216E, 242B] Poyet, Bernard (archt.), 770,791
Ponte di Castel Vecchio (or Scaligero), Pozzo, Andrea (designer), 713
Verona, 608 [632B] Pozzolana, building use of, 168, 175
Ponte Molle, Rome, 239 [245B] Pozzuoli (Italy), amphitheatre at, 213
Ponte S. Trinita, Florence, 687 [682c] Prague (Czechoslovakia) :
Ponte Vecchio, Florence, 624 [625B] Brevnov Monastery, 817-18 [820A];
Ponti, Gio (archt.), 1111 Cathedral, 593; Clam Gallas Palace, 812;
Ponzio, Flaminio (archt.), 725 Rathaus chapel, 594 [592H]; S. Nicho-
Pope, John Russell (archt.), 1151 las, 818 [821c, D]; Troja Palace, 812
Pope Julius ITI, Villa of, Rome, 180, 183, [814A]; Waldstein Palace, 812 [810B]
708 [181L, 710A-G] Prandtauer, Jakob (archt.), 811, 817
Poppelmann, M. D. (archt.), 817 Prato (Italy), S. M. delle Carceri, 678
ee ornament, 510, 1269 [517B, Prato marble, 614 ’
C,G Pratt, Sir Roger (archt.), 871, 905 bis
Porcelain pagodas, Chinese, 1205 Prefabricated buildings, 983, I07I, 1079,
Porch: 1103
church, 358, 542 [255K, 396C, 564F, Prehistoric architecture, 1-4, 382
595F, H, 749J]; English Renaissance, 974 Premonstratensian Canons, Order of, 304
[969H]; manor house, 448, 4593 projec- Presbytery [410F, 416E]
ting, 316, 329, 405, 603 [330] Prescelly (Wales), stone from, 3
Porches: Presse (Germany), Steel Church, 1085
Belgian and Dutch, 578; British, 1000, [1084c]
1007, IOII, 1019, 1020; cathedral, 405, Preston-Plucknett (Somerset), tithe barn at,
624 [415A, 567A, D, E, G, 595G, 626A]; 483
German, 818; Spanish, 1080 ee (S. Africa), Government Building,
Porcia, Basilica, in Rome, 202 105
Porden, William (archt.), 948 Priene (Asia Minor) [132G]
Porphyry, 168, 179, 188, 266,293 agora at, 102; Ecclesiasterion, 147;
Port Sunlight (Cheshire), 1000 ‘House No. 33’, 151-2 [234¢, E]; pedes-
Porta, Giacomo della (archt.), 713, 717, 726 tal at [157A]; propylaea at, 143 [126R];
Porta Aenea, Spalato, 229 [231D] Prytaneion, 147; public buildings, 147;
Porta all’Arco, Volterra, 173, 180 Temple of Athena Polias, 128, 131, 155
Porta de’ Banchi, Bologna, 713 [127F, 132G—M]; theatre in, 147
Porta della Carta, Venice, 608, 731 Priests’ College, Cobham, 479 [480A-c]
Porta Nigra, Tréves, 225 [216F] Primaire period of French Gothic, 534
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1337
Primaticcio, Francesco (archt.), 707, 762, Pugin, A. C. (antiquary), 877
: 766, 7745 869 ; Pugin, Augustus W. N. (archt.), 988, 996,
Princeton University, N.J. Nassau Hall, 1008 bis, 1019, 1059
I140 Pugin, E. W. (archt.), 996
Prior, Edward S. (archt.), 992, 1000, 1012 Pugin’s House, Ramsgate [994B]
Prior Park, Bath, 905, 932 bis, 979 [933B, Pulham (Norfolk), S. Mary Magdalen
« 935D] [435D]
Priori, Palazzo dei, Volterra, 623 [612F] Pulpit:
Priory, 1269 Baptistery, Pisa [630D-G]; North Cray
Binham [503M, N, 508M]; Bridlington Church, Kent, 878, 974 [976a]; S.
[504]; Castle Acre, 308; Dunstable Ambrogio, Milan, 320 [332B]; S. Fran-
[508m]; Great Malvern [500B] cesco, Assisi, 623, 633 [630K]; S. Maria
Prisons, Georgian, 955 [958D] Novella, Florence, 687 [750F];_ S.
Pritchett, J. P. (archt.), 956 Stephen, Walbrook, 913 [921E]
Projecta, bridal casket of, Rome, 301 [300F] Pulpits:
Promontory Apartments, Chicago, IIl., Belgian and Dutch, 840; English
IIS9 Mediaeval, 509, 510 [517L-P]; external,
Pronaos, 107, 108, 115, 121, 1269 [122G]; 791, 1085 [793c]; French, 791 [793c];
Tonic, 129; Roman, 188 German, 594 [596]]; iron, 640, 653, 862
Proportions, principles of [377] [651A, 860k]; Italian, 320, 623, 633, 687
Propylaea, 93, 143, 247 (i), 1270 [332B, 630D-G, K, 750F]; Spanish, 640,
Aegean, 82, 93, 101 [99B, C, 100C]; 653, 862 [651A, 860E]; Wren’s, 913, 974
Athens, 112, 143, 152, 817 [103B, 104B, [9215]
IOSA, 142, 165D]; Eleusis, 143; Epi- Pulteney Bridge, Bath, 964
dauros, 143 [106B]; Munich, 817; Priene, Pumice stone, building use of, 198, 210,
143 [126R]; Yazilikaya, 82 276, 336
‘Prostyle’ temples, 1270; Greek, 107, 108, Purbeck marble, 380, 427, 505
131 [109C]; Roman, 187, 188 Puri (India), Jagannath Temple, 1187
Proto-Baroque architecture (see also ‘Man- Purlins, 433, 447 [485C, 486H, 500F]
nerist’), 659, 671, 672, 673 ter, 674, Putley (Herefordshire), house with crucks,
687-8, 695, 708, 714 469 [4678] _
in Belgium and Holland, 831, 8353 in Pylons, Egyptian, 36, 39, 50 [40C]
France, 766, 769, 774, 792; in Germany, Pyramid:
808, 812, 817, 823; in Spain, 846 ‘Bent’, the, at Dahshir, 26 [24s];
Providence (R.I.): Providence Arcade, Caestius, at Rome, 218 [220K]; Cheops,
II5I-2; First Baptist Meeting House, at Gizeh, 17, 33-4 [12, 31, 32A-E];
1136; University Hall, 1140 Chephren, at Gizeh, 17, 78, 34-5, 503;
Provident Trust Company Building, Phila- Great, at Cholula, 1128; Huni (attrib.),
delphia, 1148 at Meydim, 30 [24H]; Mykerinos, at
Province House, Halifax (Nova Scotia), Gizeh, 17, 35 [314A]; Sahura, at Abusir,
1140 17, 353 Seneferu, at Dahshir, 26, 33 bis;
Prudential (formerly Guaranty) Building, Sesostris II, at Kahun, 50; of the Sun,
Buffalo, N.Y., 1155 San Juan Teotihuacan, 1128 [11298];
Prytaneion (civic hall), 102, 147, 1270 Temple, Tenayuca, 1128 [11298]; Unas,
[105B] at Sakkara, 17; Zoser, at Sakkara, 17, 27-
Pseudo-dipteral temples, 108 67s, 129, 1270 30, 57 [28-9]
[109L] Pyramidal tombs, Roman, 217, 218
Pseudo-peripteral temples, 108 ter, 151, Pyramids (America), 1125, 1128, 1164[1129]
1270 [109G]; Roman, 184, 188 bis Pyramids (Egypt), 5, 17, 26-35 [24]
Public buildings: Pythius (archt.), 131, 148
American, 1139-40, 1147-51; British, Pyx, Chapel of the, Westminster, 397, 423
985, 986, 989 bis, 1019-36, 1051; Con- [424D]
tinental European, 1085-1103; Dutch,
832-5; French, 785; Georgian, 955-64,
973; Greek, 147-8; Roman, 169, 187, Qa’it Bay, Mosques of, Cairo, 1230, 1250
201 -[1228B, 1231A-B]
Public Library: Boston, Mass., 1085, 1151 Qalawin, Mosque, etc. of, Cairo, 1230
[1149E]; Melbourne, 1059; New York, Qalb Louzeh (Lebanon), basilican church
II5I at, 265 [260J-N]
Puebla (Mexico): Casa del Alfenique, 1135 Qasr ibn Wardan
(Lebanon), Byzantine
[1134F]; Cathedral, 1135 arches at, 298
Puente de Alcantara, Toledo, 644 [64583] Qayrawan (Tunisia), Great Mosque, 1233
Puerta de Serranos, Valencia, 647 [646F] Quadrangle, 1270 [480D, F]
Puerta del Sol, Toledo, 647 [646H] Quadrant, the, Regent St, London, 949
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1338 INDEX

Quadriga, 158, 215, 222, 1270 [149¢, L, Raphael (painter and archt.), 9, 229, 324;
216C, 223F] 633, 687, 707, 1019
Quadripartite vaulting, 307, 397, 448 career of, 707; frescoes by, 701, 7523
Quaratesi, Palazzo, Florence, 678, 748 ornamentation by, 802 (i, ii); plan for S.
[680E, 749D] Peter’s, 717 [722E]
Quatrefoils [486F] Raschdorf, J. (archt.), 1086
Quebec, Marial Chapel, 1160 Rathaus (see also Town Hall): Bremen,
Queen Anne style, 868, 991, 999 bis, 1000, 812 [813c]; Cologne [813E]; Heilbronn,
1052, 1054 811 [810A]
Queen Square, Bath, 948 Raths, 1175 [1185A, B]; at Mamallapuram,
Queenby Hall (Leics.), 886 1188
Queens’ College, Cambridge, 473 Ratisbon, see Regensburg
Queen’s College, Oxford, 473, 963 [475A; Rattle and Snap (Tennessee), Polk Man-
959C]; Library, 914, 963 [922¢, 959C] sion, I143
Queen’s Gate, London, 999-1000 [998B, C, Raunds (Northants.), S. Peter, 496 [4924]
F Ravanica (Yugoslavia), church at, 290
Queen’s House, Greenwich, 898, 928, 937, Ravello Cathedral (Italy), bronze pilaster
964 [896A, 900, 901] [3326]
Queen’s Park, Glasgow, 1011 Ravenna (Italy), 257
Querétaro (Mexico), Ecala Palace, 1135 Baptistery at, 293; Byzantine art in,
[11344] ; 271, 303, 312, 316; marble sarcophagus
Quinta de Presa, Lima, 1135 at, 301 [300J]; S. Apollinare in Classe,
Quirinal, the, Rome, 178 262, 266 [252, 264F—K, 267E, H, J]; S.
Quito (Ecuador), Mercedarian Monastery, Apollinare Nuovo, 262 [269A]; S. Fran-
1136 [1134C] cesco [263B]; S. Vitale, 209, 276, 280,
Quoins, 769, 851, 966, 1000, 1019, IO4I 290, 298, 357 [285C,D, 299B, 300C];
Qutb Minar, Delhi, 1238 Tomb of Galla Placidia, 258, 297, 298
Quwwat al-Islam, Mosque of the, Delhi, [277B, 296F-J]; Tomb of Theodoric, 297
1238 [267R, 296K—M, 299C]
Rawlinson, Sir Robert (archt.), 1020
Raydon (Suffolk), buttress at [497E]
R.C.A. Building, Rockefeller Centre, New Raynham Hall (Norfolk), 905 [907¢, 940E]
York, 1156 [1154a] ‘Rayonnant’ period of French Gothic,
R.1.B.A. Building, London, 1035 [1032B] 554
Rabat (Morocco), Minaret of Hasan, 1233 Real Cabildo, Antigua (Guatemala), 1139
Rabirius (archt.), 227 Rebelo, J. M. J. (archt.), 1126
Rabot Fort, Ghent, 577 Recife (Brazil): church of the Rosario, 1136;
Raby Castle (Co. Durham), 443 Santo Antonio Church, 1136; Sao Pedro
Racine (Wis.), Johnson Wax Co. Buildings, dos Clérigos, 1136 [1134B]
1160 [11624] Rectangular temples, Roman, 184-94
ea Library, Oxford, 963 [4754, Red House, Bexley Heath, 999 [9974]
959A Redentore, Il, Venice, 747 [743F-]]
Radcliffe Observatory, Oxford, 963 [962A] Redman, Henry (archt.-mason), 459
Raglan Castle (Mon.), 443-4 Reed and Stem (archts.), 1156
Railton, William (archt.), 1025 Refectory, hospital, 479 [478c, D] ;monastic,
Railway Station, Stuttgart, 1104 [1107B] 308, 423, 429 [424D, 432C]
Rainaldi, Cairo (archt.), 729 bis, 774 Reform Club, Pall Mall, London, 707,
Rainaldi, Girolamo (archt.), 714 bis LOIg [102IC, D]
Ralph Small House, Macon (Georgia), 1143 Reformation in Europe, 10, 655
Rameses II ‘the Great’, monuments of, 18, Regency architecture, 10, 928
44 quater ; obelisk of, Rome, 215 Regensburg (Bavaria): Town Hall, 593
Rameses III, mortuary temple of, Medinet- [592G]; Walhalla, 817
Habu, 36 [48a] Regensburg Cathedral, 588, 593 brs [585c,
Rameses ITI, IV and IX, tombs of, Thebes, 586c]
36 [32Q] altar and canopy, 594 [5961]; cloisters,
ees a the, Thebes, 18, 36, 44 [37D, 588 [597]; holy well, 597 [595D]; porch,
54H 594 [586c]; tabernacle at, 594; vaulting
Ramryge Chantry, S. Albans, 473 [472A] of, 594
Ramsgate (Kent), Pugin’s House, 996 Regent’s Park Zoo, London, 1048 [1050c]
[994B ; Regio, Palazzo, Venice [757D]
Ranchos de Taos (New Mexico), church, Register House, Edinburgh, 956
1136 Regnier (Savoy), dolmen at [2F]
Rani Sipari, Ahmadabad, 1241 Regolini-Galassi Tomb, Cerveteri, 183
Ranpur (India), Jain temple in, 1183 Regula, 111, 1270 [110A]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1339
Reilly, Sir Charles (archt.), 1048 Ribs (cont.)
Reinforced concrete, 995, 1061, 1064-51, bis, 502 bis [399F, G]; longitudinal, 307;
1066 ridge, 397-8; Roman, 176, 202, 209;
bridges, 1104; buildings, 1051, 1093, semicircular, 390, 397; tierceron, 397-8,
1094, I104 ter; domes, 1058, 1059; 502 [399D] ; transverse, 307, 397, 401, 502
_ framework, 983, 1019, 1052, 1054, 1079, [373¢]5 wall, 397; 398, 401, 502 [373C]
1112; pillars, 1048; roofing, 1012; Riccardi, Palazzo, Florence, 657, 672, 678,
vaults, 1080, 1104 748 [681]
‘Rejas’, 648, 842, 855, 856, 862, 1270 Ricchini, Francesco (archt.), 684, 691
Reliance Building, Chicago, 1155 [1153D] Richard of Stow (archt.), 406
Reliefs, spiral, 227 [228H, J] Richardson, H. H. (archt.), 1127, 1143,
Religion: 1147, 1151 bis, 1152 bis, 1167, 1168
Aegean, 90; Buddhist, 1176-7, 1209, Richelieu, Chateau de (France), 780
1212, 1214, 1218; Christian, 8, 19, 253, Richelieu, walled town of, 780 [7824]
254, 272, 293, 304-5, 381-2, 842, 913, Richmond (Va.), State Capitol, 1147
949; Confucian, 1198-9; Egyptian, 5, [11454]
14-15; Greek, 90-1; Hindu, 1176; Jain, Richmond Bridge (Surrey), 964
1177; Muslim, 636, 842, 1223, 1224; Rickards, Edwin Alfred (archt.), 992
Persian, 62; Roman, 169 Rickman, Thomas (archt.), 877, 950,
Reliquaries, 633, 752, 1270 [630B, 750H]; 989
Belgian and Dutch, 574, 582 [581D]; Ridge-and-furrow glazing, 1041, 1042
Spanish, 653, 862 Ridge ribs, 397-8
Renaissance, the, 655, 656, 1270 Rievaulx Abbey (Yorks.), 382, 429
Renaissance architecture in Europe, 5, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, 1086 [10914]
9-10, 175, 654-64 Rimini (Italy): Arch of Augustus, 222,
analysis, 661 (ii); character, 656-60; 683; Bridge of Augustus, 239 [245c]; S.
columns, 662 (ii); mouldings, 662 (ii); Francesco, 683 [682A]
Openings, 661 (ii); ornament, 664 (ii); Ringhiera (balcony), 608 bis, 1271 [330D]
plans, 661 (ii); roofs, 662 (ii); walls, 661 Ringstead (Northants.), pier base at [5038]
ii Rio de Janeiro (Brazil): Customs house,
Renaissance Revival, 956, 987, 988, 989 bis, 1126; Itamarati Palace, 1126; Ministry of
996, IOI9, IO4I Education, 1163 [1165B]; Parque Guinle
Rennie, John (engineer-archt.), 964 bis, 989 Flats, 1159; University City, 1160
Rennie, Sir John (engineer), 489 Ripley, Thomas (archt.), 956
Renwick, James (archt.), 1144, 1148 Ripley (Surrey), Anchor Inn, 483 [484D]
Repoussé work, 648 Ripon Cathedral, 376, 381, 421 [413G];
Repton School (Derbyshire), 885 Choir, 493 [494c, D]; Collegiate Church
Reredos, 851, 1270 (see also Retablo); origin of, 402 bis; model of [4078]
English, 510, 913 [420G, 917F]; Italian, Ritz Hotel, London, 995
633 [631H, K] River Forest (Illinois), Winslow House,
Restormel Castle (Cornwall), 438 [4418] 1143
Retablos, 643, 647, 648, 856 Riverside (Illinois), Coonley House, 1144
Reticulate work, 175, 176 [177C] Riza, Imam, shrine of, Mashhad, 1235
Retro-choir, 421 bis Rizzo, Antonio (archt.), 731
Rezzonico, Palazzo, Venice, 747 [746B] Robertson, Sir Howard (archt.), 1047;
Rhamnus (Greece), Temple of Nemesis 1163
[108, 109A] Robie House, Chicago, 1144 [1142E]
Rheims Cathedral, 376, 427, 530, 534, 538, Roche, M. (archt.), 1152, 1155
541 [543-4] : Rochester, Corn Exchange, 955 [9574]
aisles, 538, 541, 562 (i); chevet chapels, Rochester Castle, 438, 4633 fireplace, 438
538, 541 [544A, C]; doorways, 562 (i) [5t9L] :
[543]; flying buttress, 541 [369E, 544E]; Rochester Cathedral, 393, 402, 421, 562 (ii)
sculpture, 565 (i) [543]; western towers, [412H]; central tower, 562 (ii) [409D];
541, 562 (i) [543]; windows, 562
(i) [543] model of [409D]; pier base in [503]];
Rhone, Groot Drakenstein (S. Africa), 1058 transepts, 559 (ii)
Rialto Bridge, Venice [757E] Rock-hewn temples: Egypt, 44 [37¢, E, 45];
Riano, Diego de (archt.), 846 India and Pakistan, 1175, 1180 [1181A,
Riario, Pietro, tomb of, Rome [754K] B, I185A, B]
Rib and panel vaulting, 9, 307, 340, 348, Rock-hewn tombs: Asia Minor, 151, 218,
3715 390, 501 [370E; F, 373C; 399C-E] 221 [220N]; Cyrenaica, 151, 218; Egyp-
Ribera, Pedro (archt.), 852 tian, 17, 35-6 [31B, 32L-Q] |
Ribs: Rock-hewn viharas (monasteries), 1187
diagonal, 307, 397, 401, 502 [370H, Rockefeller Centre, New York, I156
373C]; imbricated, 691; lierne, 393, 398 [11544]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1340 INDEX

Rococo style, 660, 1271; Belgian and Dutch, Roman temples (cont.)
831, 832 bis, 835; French, 769; German, 184, 187, 1943 rectangular, 184-94
808, 812, 818, 823; Italian, 660; South Roman Thermae, Bath, 206
African, 1058 Romanesque architecture in Europe, 8,
Rohe, Ludwig Mies van der (archt.), 1066 303-10
bis, 1075, 1127, 1156, 1159 ter, 1160 bis, character of, 306-7; columns, 309 bis;
1163 comparative analysis, 308-10; mouldings,
Reker XCo. Durham), S. Andrew, 1012 310; Openings, 309; ornament, 310;
Roll moulding, 1271 plans, 308, 308-9; roofs, 304, 3093 vault-
Rolls Chapel, London, tomb in, 380 ing, 276, 307 [370C, D, 3738]; walls, 309
Roman architecture, 9, 97, 166-251 Romanesque Revival, 991, 992, 1012, 1047;
amphitheatres, 8, 170, 187, 210-14; 1052, 1127, 1147 bis, 1148, 1151 bis
aqueducts, 174, I79, 205, 206, 235-6 Romano, Giulio (painter and archt.), 673;
[203B, 204A, 241B, 242]; arches, 23, 174, 707-8, 752
176, 213, 221-2, 223-4, 230 [226A]; basi- Rome:
licas, 178 bis, 201-2, 205 [177J, 200, Aqueduct: Claudia, 236 [242A]; Julia,
241A]; bridges, 222, 236, 239 [238B, C, 236; Marcia, 236; Tepula, 236
241E, 634A]; building acts, 170, 235; but- Arch of: Constantine, 222 [224H]; the
tresses, 178, 243 (ii), 367; character of, Goldsmiths, 222 [223H—-K]; Janus Quad-
174-9; circuses, 148, 215, 261 [216A-—D]; rifrons, 225 [172A, 223L]; Septimius
columns, 213 [160B, D, F, 165L-T]; com- Severus, 222, 791 [182, 224A-G, 377E];
parative analysis, 240-8; Composite Titus, 222, 247 (ii), 963 [223A-G]
Order in, 9, 96; concrete used in, 168, Atrium Vestae, 230 [182B]; Baptistery
175, 176, 187, 198, 235, 247 (ii), 2763 of Constantine, 293, 323 [295E-G]; ‘Bar-
decoration, 179, 247; domes, 176, 178, caccia’, the, 725
198, 205, 209 [I77H-N, 199A, 207D]; Basilica: Aemilia, 202 [182B]; of Con-
doorways, 243 [159A-C]; dwellings, 169, stantine (or Maxentius), 201 [182B,
230, 233-6, 258 [237A] 200C-F, 241A]; Julia [1828]; Porcia, 202;
Early Christian dependence on, 253, of Trajan, 201 [182B, 200A, B]
257, 258, 265-6; Egyptian influence Capitol, 714, 898 [182B, 718]; Castel
upon, 218, 235; English remains of, Gandolfo Church, 726; Castle of S
382-3, 389; Etruscan influence upon, Angelo, 197, 217; catacombs in, 198, 217,
173, 174, 175, 184, 217, 244 (ii); forums, 258
170, 183-4 [182]; Greek compared with, Circus: of Flaminius, 215; of Maxen-
94, 156, 240, 243-4, 247-8 [159, 160, 164, tius, 215 [216A]; Maximus, 215 [216B-
165]; Greek influence upon, 233, 235; D]; of Nero, 215
mosaic, 179 [24IF, 249H, K-M]; mould- Cloaca Maxima, 180 [181A]; Collegio
ings, 155, 156, 230, 247 (ii) [162, 163L-T, Romano, 687; Colosseum, 174, 210-13,
164, 165L-T]; openings, 243 (ii) [166a]; 229, 243 [I165L, Q, R,S; 166, 211, 212]
Orders of, 174-5, 656 [160B, D, F, 165]; Column of: ‘Antoninus Pius, 227
ornament, 178, 230, 247 (ii) [249-50] Marcus Aurelius, 227 [228H-N]; Trajan,
Palaces, 8, 169, 227, 229-30; pillars of 184, 221, cate 719 [182B, 200B, 228A-F]
victory, 225, 227; public buildings, 169, cortili, 673, 701, 702, 708 [699B, D,
187, 201-6; Renaissance architecture 703G, H, 7O5E-G, 710A, C, F, 724F]
and, 656, 657; revived style of, 394, see Etruscan Museum, 180, 183, 708 [181L]
also Renaissance; Romanesque com- Fontana: Paola, 725 [753H]; delle Tar-
pared with, 306-7; roofs, 188; sculpture, tarughe [754F]; di Trevi, 729 [730B,
178, 205-6; shops, 184 bis, 230, 233, 235 754D]; del Tritone [754H]
[185D, 234B]; temples, see Roman Forum: Boarium, 184, 197, 225 [1724];
temples; theatres, 8, 170, 187, 209-10 of Augustus, 184, 187 [182B, 190A, C]; of
[145D-G, 208A]; thermae, 202, 205, 206 Nerva, 184 [163P, 2468]; Romanum, 184,
[203, 204, 207]; tombs, 215, 217-21 289 [171, 182A]; of Trajan, 178, 184, 201
[220-1, 237B, C]; town gateways, 225; [182B, 185A-C, I86B, 246M]
triumphal arches, 221-2 [223-4, 226A]; Gest. Church, 673, 713, 748, 752
vaulting, 176-7, 179 bis, 187, 202, 205, [704D-H]; Golden House of Nero, 206,
213, 222, 229, 235, 243 (ii), 368, 397, 398 229, 707; House of Livia, 230; Markets
[192D, 370A, B, 373A]; walls, 168, 175-6, of Trajan, 184 [185D-F, 186]
201, 235, 240 (il), 367 [369A]; windows, Mausoleum of: Augustus, 217 [2378];
2.43 [2374] Hadrian, 217 [220E-G, 237]
‘Roman Order’, 696 Minerva Medica, 206, 209, 280, 298
Roman temples, 8, 169, 170, 1753 circular [177N; 285A, B]
and polygonal, 194-201; Etruscan influ- Palaces of the Emperors, 227, 229
ence upon, 184; Greek compared with, [232]; Palazzetto dello Sport, 1103
175 184, 187, 240; Greek influence upon, [1102A]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1341
Rome (cont.) Rome (cont.)
’ Palazzo: Barberini, 725, 748 [724A, B]; Tabularium, 184, 714 [171A, 182B];
Borghese, 691, 725 [724F]; Braschi, 748; Tempietto of S. Pietro in Montorio, 673,
della Cancelleria, 696, 701 [699, 753C]; 7ox [700A-C]
dei Conservatori, 714 [718D, E]; Corsini, Temple of: Agrippa, 197; Antoninus
748; Farnese, 217, 702, 725, 748 [705, and Faustina, 188 [189D-F, 246]]; Castor
© 753A, B]; del Laterano, 725 [664, 706F]; and Pollux, 187-8, 244 (ii) [191]; Con-
Massimi, 673, 702 [703]; Montecitorio, cord, 187 [182B]; Jupiter Capitolinus,
726; Odescalchi, 726 [706D]; Sciarra 140, 180 [172B, 182A]; Portunus, 197
[753F]; del Senatore, Rome, 714; dello [172A]; Saturn, 180, 188, 244 (ii) [189G—
Sport, 1103 [1102A, B]; di Venezia, 696 J]; Venus and Rome, 187, 188, 261
[682E] [182B, 192A-E]; Vespasian, 188, 244 (ii)
Pantheon, (see Pantheon, The, Rome); [165M, T, 182B]; Vesta, 170, 194, 197,
Piazza of S. Peter, 717 [720A, 721] 230 [195A-G]
Pons: Fabricius, 176, 239 [238, 241E]; Theatre of Marcellus, 209, 213, 914
Mulvius, 239 [245B]; Sublicius, 236 [165N, 208A]
[245] | Thermae of: Agrippa, 206; Caracalla,
Portico of Octavia, 225 [208A]; Pyra- 176, 178, 202, 205-6, 283, 1156 [177K, L,
mid of Caestius, 218 [220K] ; Quirinal, 178 203-4]; Diocletian, 206 [207]; Titus, 206
Renaissance: Early, 673, 695-6; High [249B]; Trajan, 206
and Proto-Baroque, 696-725; Baroque, Tomb of: Annia Regilla, 218 [219A];
673, 674, 725-9 Augustus, 217, 218 [237B]; Caecilia
S. Agnese, 729, 818 [728A]; S. Agnese Metella, 217 [220]]; the Caetennii, 261;
fuori le Mura, 258, 261, 261-2 [264A-E, the Valerii and Pancratii, 218 [219B, C]
267A]; S. Andrea, 713[700D-J]; S. Andrea Vatican, see Vatican; Victor Emanuel
del Quirinale, 726 [727B]; S. Andrea della II Monument, 1086 [10924]
Valle, 817 [754¢, E]; SS. Apostoli [754k]; Villa: Farnesina, 701 [710H]; Mada-
S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane, 726 ma, 707 [710J]; Medici, 713 [246G,
[727Cc]; S. Clemente, 258, 261, 266 [255, 706E]; Pia, 713 [715B]; of Pope Julius,
256A, 630H]; S. Constanza, 293, 297 180, 183, 708 [181L, 710A—G]
[2944-E] Romsey (Hants.) [5086]
S. Giorgio in Velabro, 222; SS. Gio- Ronchamp (France), Chapel of Notre
vanni e Paolo, 261 [267T]; S. Giovanni Dame, 1085 [10844]
in Laterano, 258, 261, 266, 320, 329, 729 Rondelet, Jean (archt.), 799
[267N, 664, 7368]; S. Gregorio Magno Rood lofts, 510, 1271 [516]
[754]]; S. Ivo della Sapienza, 726 [727D]; Rood screens, 510, 549 [516]
S. Lorenzo fuori le Mura, 258, 261 Rood stair [516F]
bis, 262 [263A, 267Q]; S. Lorenzo in Roof gardens, 1075
Damaso, 701 [699D]; S. Lorenzo in Roof tiles, Greek, 107, 119, 125 [117A, B, G,
Miranda, 188 J]; Roman, 175, 197
S. Maria degli Angeli, 206, 714 [207A, Roof-truss: Early Christian, 265, 276; Eng-
F]; S. Maria dei Miracoli, 729 [728c]; S. lish Mediaeval, 433-4, 437, 502; Gothic,
Maria del Sole, 197; S. Maria della Pace, BTSs Greek, 108, 243 (i); Roman, 240 (ii),
701, 729, 748 [728B, 753E]; S. Maria di 243 (il)
Monte Santo, 729 [728c]; S. Maria in Roofs:
Via Lata, 729; S. Maria Maggiore, 258, aisle, 437 [435G, J] in the Americas:
261, 729 bis [256B, 267B, 724E]; S. Maria indigenous, 1166 [1130A]; colonial, 1166—
Rotonda, 198; S. Maria sopra Minerva, 1167 [1132, I1133A, C, D, E; 1134A, E]5
623 [622B]; SS. Martina and Luca, 729 national, 1167 [1142E, 1153B, D]; modern,
S. Onofrio [754B]; S. Paolo fuori le 1167 [1161C]; balustraded, 851; British,
mura, 258 bis, 261, 266, 320, 329, 375 983, 989, 1000, IOI2 bis, 1025, 1042,
[259E-G, 267G, 330H]; S. Peter (basilican 1054; Byzantine, 272, 297, 298; Chinese,
church), 188, 258 bis, 261, 375, 684, 1144 1201, 1208, 1209 bis, 1219; collar-braced,
[259A-C]; S. Peter’s (Cathedral), 261, 434 [435D]; conical, 773; Continental
671, 707; 714 [720-3]; S. Pietro in Mon- European, 1114-15; domed, see Domes;
torio, 673, 701 [692A, 700A-—C]; S. Sabina, Early Christian, 261, 262; Egyptian, 22,
261 [269B]; S. Sebastiano fuori le mura, 55 [40D] 5
725 [727A]; S. Stefano, 262 [295A-D]; S. English Mediaeval, 430, 501-2, 565
Susanna, 691, 725 [697B]; SS. Vincenzo e (ii) [435, 500]; Decorated, 502; Early
Anastasio [7544] ; English, 502; Perpendicular, 502; Tudor,
Scala Regia, 726 [715c]; Scala di 502
Spagna (‘Spanish Steps’), 725,729 [730A] Gothic: Belgian and Dutch, 578; Eng-
Sistine Chapel, 633, 687, 713, 752 [7546]; lish, 430, 447-8, 501-2, 565 (ii); French,
Stazione Termini, 1111 [1113 565 (i); German, 593, 594; Italian, 627
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1342 INDEX

Roofs (cont.) Royal Corinthian Yacht Club, Burnham-

[602A]; and Renaissance compared, 662; on-Crouch, 1035 [1033B]
Spanish, 648 Royal Courts of Justice, London, 643
Greek, 94, 107, 108, 155 [I141D, 163E]; Royal Crescent, Bath, 874, 948 [946a]
Greek and Roman compared, 243; Royal Festival Hall, London, 1036, 1051
hammer-beam, 430, 434, 437, 451, 502 [1037B] _
ter, 885 [435F, H, K, L]; ‘helm’ (bulbous), Royal Horticultural Hall, London, 1047
817 bis, 818, 1265 [816B, 819B, 822A, C, J]5 [1046B]
‘helm’ (Rhenish), 358, 363, 1265 [355C; Royal Hospital, Greenwich, 871, 873, 898,
362K, 387E]; ‘hipped’, 979; Indian, 1192, 928 [900, 901, 925E]; giant columns of,
1195 [1190D]; Japanese, 1213, 1214, 973 [901A, F]; King Charles’s Block, 898, —
1218, 1219, 1220 [1216A, H, J, M]; Japan- 928 [901A, E]; Queen’s House, 898, 928
ese and Chinese compared, 1219; man- [896A, 900-1]
sard, 769, 800 (ii), 999, 1054, 1086, II153; Royal Institute of British Architects, 869
metal-and-glass, 983, 989, 1020, 1093 Royal Institution, Edinburgh, 1020
bis; Muslim, 1249 [1023B]
Renaissance: English, 662 (ii), 968; Royal Manchester Institution, 877, 956,
French, 769, 780, 8or (ii); German, 806, 987 [10224]
811,812, 823; and Gothic compared, Royal Music Hall, Leamington, 956
662; Italian, 662 (ii), 751, 801 (i); Span- Royal Naval Dockyard, Sheerness, 983,
ish, 842, 856 1042-7 [1045]
Roman, 304, 309 Royal Palace: Amsterdam [834A]; La
Romanesque: English, 447, 501; in Granja, 852 [857c]; Madrid, 852
Europe, 309; French, 348; German, 363; Royal Pavilion, Brighton, 876, 948 [947D]
Italian, 312, 329 Royal Society of Arts, London, 956
South African, 1058; tie-beam, 329, Rucellai, Palazzo, Florence, 657, 683, 684
433-4 [435B, E];_ trussed-rafter, 433 [680G]
[435A]; West Asiatic, 65, 85, 86; wood- Rue:
and-glass, 989 Franklin, Paris, 1072 [1073A]; de Milan
Root, J. W. (archt.), 1152, 1155, 1156 (No. 11), Paris, 1071 [1069B] ; Raynouard,
Roper, D. R. (archt.), 955 Paris, 1079 [1069F]; de Rivoli, Paris,
Rosario, church of the, Recife (Brazil), 1136 houses in, 1071 [1069A]; Royale, Brus-
Rose window (see also Wheel window), 309, sels, 832; de Turin (No. 12), Brussels,
509, 1271 [414A, C]; French, 534, 538, 1065, 1071-2 [1069D]
SAI, 542 [563E, H]; German, 594; Italian, Rufford Hall (Lancs.), 452 [457A, B]; mov-
14 able screen, 452 [475A]
Rosetta stone, 19 Rugby School (Warwicks.), 885
Ross House, Delavan Lake (Wis.), 1144 Ruggeri, Anton Maria (archt.), 678
Rossall College (Lancs.), 985 ‘Runic’ cross, 525
Rossellino, Bernardo (archt.), 683 Rushden Church (Northants.), sedilia in
Rosslyn Chapel (Midlothian), 522 [524A, B] [515M] We
Rosso, II (archt.), 707, 762, 774 bis, 869 Ruskin, John (critic), 608, 988, 990, 992,
Rostral columns, 227, 1271 [71A, 228G] 1020
Rothenburg (Germany): Klingentor [5928]; Russia: Byzantine churches in, 293; devel-
town walls of, 588 opment of dome in 298
Rothesay Castle (Buteshire), 522 [520A, B] Rustication, 657, 661 (ii), 1271; English,
Rotonda, the, Vicenza, 73 932, 968, 988, 1047 [980A, C]; Florentine
Rotterdam (Holland), Van Nelle Factory, Renaissance, 673, 678, 683, 684, 687, 707
1067, 1104-11 [II109A] [680A, B, D, 681B, E, G, 685B, D, H]3
Rouen (France): French, 769, 770, 785; Genoese Baroque,
Hétel_du Bourgtheroulde, 559, 779 691 [693c]; German, 1104; Mantua
[5544]; Palais de Justice, 555, 559 [556B, Mannerist, 708 [706B]; Roman Renais-
558B]; S. Maclou, 542; S. Ouen, 534, sance, 673, 708 [7IOE, 7IIA, B]; Spanish,
542, 562 (i), 647 [546D, 561D, 563H]; S. 851; Venetian Renaissance, 474 bis, 732
Vincent [564F]; timber houses, 559 bis, 747 [744B, E; G, 746A]
Rouen Cathedral, 541, 562 (i) [374B, 561C]; Ruysbroeck, Jan van (archt.), 577
tomb of Cardinal d’Amboise, 791 [789B] Rylands Library, Deangate, Manchester,
Round churches, see Circular churches 1026 [1029A]
Round towers: Irish, 527; Scottish, 521
Royal Arcade, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 1036
[10384] Saarinen, Eero (archt.), 1160 ter
Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, 1041 [10408] Saarinen, Eliel (archt.), 1068, 1156, 1160
Royal College of Physicians, Edinburgh, Sabratha (N. Africa), theatre at, 210
1020 [1021F] Sacconi, Giuseppe (archt.), 1086
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1343
ge College Hospital, E. Grinstead, S. Asaph Cathedral (Flintshire), 402, 421
97 [412A]
Sacrament House: Meerson, 582; S. Peter, . Augustin, Paris, 1079
Louvain, 582 Augustine, Watling St [925P]
Sacré Coeur, Church of, Paris, 1080 Austremoine, Issoire, 343
Sacrifice Hall of Yung Lo, Peking, 1202 Barbara, Kuttenberg, 588
Sacsahuaman (Peru), Fort of, 1131 Barthélémy, Liége, 573
Saffron Walden (Essex), pier at [503T] Bartholomew the Great, Smithfield,
Sagrada Familia, Church of, Barcelona, London, 304, 390, 496 bis [391A]
1080 [1082] Bartholomew’s Hospital, London, 955
Sahsaram (India), Tomb of Sher Shah, Basil, Moscow, 293
1241 Bavon, Ghent, 574
Sahura, Pyramid of, Abusir, 17, 35 [24N] Benet, Cambridge, 489 [387F, P]
S. Abbondio, Como, 329 [330F] Benet, Paul’s Wharf, London, 872
S. Agnese, Rome, 729, 818 [728A] Benetfink, Threadneedle St, London,
S. Agnese fuori le Mura, Rome, 258, 261, 914 [916c]
261-2 [264A-E, 267A] Bernardo, Rome [207pD]
S. Agostino, Bergamo, 627 [629H] Botolph, Boston (Lincs.) [492D]
S. Aignan-sur-Cher (France), capital at Bride, Fleet St, London, 661 (ii), 913-14
[351C] [915D, 918E-H, 919C, D, F, 920B, 925C]
S. Alban, Wood St, London, 914 Carlo alle Quattro Fontane, Rome, 726
S. Albans (Herts.): Benedictine monastery [727¢]
at, 381; Fighting Cocks Inn, 483 [484a]; Cataldo, Palermo, 324
Roman Theatre at Verulamium, 210, 389 Catherine’s College, Cambridge, 473
S. Albans (Abbey) Cathedral, 376, 390, 393, Chad, Shrewsbury, 950 [953c]
402, 4213; corbel in [512P]; Lady Chapel Chapelle, La, Paris, 542 [546A, B, 560D];
in, 469 [412F]; ornamental mouldings gargoyle at [566B]
[508]; piers in [503A]; plan of [412F]; Charles, Antwerp, 835
Ramryge Chantry Chapel, 473 [4724]; Charles Parish (La.), Keller Mansion,
shrine of S. Alban, 473 [472G] 1132
Alessandro, Lucca [749]] Clement Danes, Strand, London, g14,
Alphege, Greenwich, London, 949 950 [920C, 924B]
Ambrogio, Milan, 320, 329 [318, 332H]; Clemente, Rome, 258, 261, 266 [255,
Canonry of, 696; pulpit at, 320 [332B] 256A]; aumbry in, 633 [630H]
Ana, altar of, Burgos, 643 [651B] Clotilde, Paris, 1079
Anastasia, Verona, 607 [610A] Columba, Cologne, tower of [362Q]
Andrea, Mantua, 683, 713, 732 [679F-x]; Constanza, Rome, 293, 297 [296A-E]
portico of, 683 [679F] Corato, Molfetta, bench-ends [631D, F]
Andrea del Quirinale, Rome, 726 [727B] Cristo de la Luz, Toledo, 1233
Andrea, Rome, 713 [700D-J] Cristoforo, Lucca [330B, C]
Andrea della Valle, Rome, 817 [754C, E] PYYRRRN
YDVY
BYARH
BUUNHH
HWYUH
YHnnnH
Croce, Florence, 614, 678 [622A, 749G];
Andrea, Vercelli, 607 altar-piece [750E]; Bruni tomb in, 684;
Andrew, Heckington, 430, 502 [431, pulpit bracket [750G]; reredos in, 633
503P; 511C] [631H]; tabernacle in [750A]
Andrew, Roker, 1012 [1015] S. Cross Hospital, Winchester, 479 [478A-
Andrew’s (formerly Brunswick) Chapel, D]
Hove, 987 S. Cruz, Segovia, 648 [650B]
Andrew’s Hall, Norwich, 305 S. Cunibert, Cologne, 358
Andrew’s Presbyterian Church, Niagara- S. Damaso, Rome, Cortile of, 701 [7204,
on-the-Lake, 1144 721]
Andrews Cathedral (Fife), 522 S. Davids Cathedral (Pembrokeshire), 402
Angelo, Castle of, Rome, 197, 217 bis, 421 [413E]
PDN
DA
BDRNKRH
2H
UHH
YON
Anne, Limehouse, London, 949 [951D] S. Demetrius, Salonica, 265 [300E]
S. Anne and S. Agnes, London, 914 S. Denis, Abbey of, near Paris, 340, 344,
[916F] 534, 791 bis [310A, 341C, 789C]
SS. Annunziata, Genoa, 695 [692E] S. Denis, Liege, 573
S. Antonino, Piacenza, 320 [317B] S. Denys de l’Estrée (Seine), 1079
S. Antonio, Padua, 290, 604 [605, 630Cc]; S. Donato, Zadar, 320
domes, 606 [605A]; nave, 604 [605B] S. Dunstan-in-the-East, London, 421, 914
S. Antonius, Basle, 1085 [1083c] [925N]
S. Apollinare in Classe, Ravenna, 262, 266 S. Dunstan-in-the-West, London, 877, 955
[252, 264F-K, 267E, H, J] : [954D]
S. Apollinare Nuovo, Ravenna, 262 S. Ebbe, Oxford [508D]
bis
[2694] S. Edmund, Lombard St, London [9259]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1344 INDEX

S. Elizabeth, Marburg, 593 bis [590]; capi- S. Giorgio in Velabro, Rome, 222
tal in [596B]; portal at, 593 [595H]; win- S. Giovanni degli Eremiti, Palermo, 324
dows,
594 [590C; D] S. Giovanni in Laterano, Rome, 258, 261,
Estéban, Salamanca, 852 266, 729 [267N, 664, 736B]; cloisters of,
Estephe (France) [350A] 320, 329; facade of, 729 [736B]; obelisk
Etheldreda, Holborn, London, 393, 502 near, 50 [664]
Etienne, Caen, see Abbaye-aux-Hommes SS. Giovanni e Paolo, Rome, 261 [267T]
Etienne du Mont, Paris, 791 SS. Giovanni e Paolo, Venice, 607 [606A, C,
Eugéne, Paris, 1079 [1081D] 7583]
Eustache, Paris, 792 [796A] S. Giuseppe, Milan, 691 [6874]
Eustorgio, Milan: Portinari Chapel, 678; S. Giusto, Lucca [332]]
reredos [631K]; shrine, 633 [631A] S. Godehard, Hildesheim, 358
Florian Monastery, 817 S. Gregorio Magno, Rome [754]
Fosca, Torcello, 262, 290 [270] S. Gudule Collegiate Church, Brussels,
NNNHHNKY
ANNFrancesco, Assisi, 623 [606B, 620-1, 573> 578 [571A-F] :
630K, 631G]; monastic buildings, 623 S. Helen, Bishopsgate, London, 393 bis
[620A]; pulpit and monuments, 623, 633 [3918] ¢
[630K, 631G] S. Irene, Constantinople, 284, 343 [282c, D]
Francesco, Ravenna, 265 [263B] S. Isidoro, Leon, 640 [650c]
Francesco, Rimini, 681 [680A] S. Ivo della Sapienza, Rome, 726 [727D]
Francesco, Viterbo, monument in [631C] S. Jacques, Dieppe, 534, 542
Francisco el Grande, Madrid, 855 S. Jacques, Liége, 574, 582 [580c]
Frideswide’s Shrine, Oxford [508T] S. Jacques sur Coudenberg (Brussels), 832
Front, Périgueux, 289, 290, 1080 [288D- S. James, Baldersby, 1o1r
G 2, S. James, Piccadilly, London, 914 [918A—D,
Gall (Switzerland), monastery of, 308, 920A]
358, 402 S. James, Westerleigh, parapet of [5 10F]
Gallen Cathedral (Switzerland), 823 S. James’s Church, Sydney, 1058
Genevieve Library, Paris, 1063, 1085 S. James’s Palace, London, 394 [4628];
[1087] chimney piece at [461A]; Marlborough
George, Bloomsbury, London, 949 Chapel, 905
[9518] S. James’s Square (No. 20), London, 949
George, Camberwell, London, 955 S. Jean de Montmartre, Paris, 1064, 1080
George, Hanover Sq., London, 949-50 [1081B]
[952c] _ S. John, Clerkenwell, London, 390
George, Liverpool, 877, 950 S. John, ’s-Hertogenbosch, 574, 578 [575B;
George, Salonika, 290 582]
George-in-the-East, London, 949 S. John, Stamford [503v]
WHNHHY
NDHwPYLH
YH George’s Chapel, Windsor, 381, 394; S. John, Westminster, 949
469 [377K, 471G-K]; door at [499M]; S. John the Evangelist, Toorak, 1059
panelling at, 493 [471H]; vaulting of, 401, S. John Lateran, Rome, see S. Giovanni in
§02 [471H]; windows of, 381, 501, 662 (i) Laterano
George’s Hall, Liverpool, 987, 1020 S. John Nepomuk, Munich, 818
[1023c] S. John’s Anglican Cathedral, Brisbane,
Georges, Boscherville, 344 1059
Gereon, Cologne, 265, 587 [360A, C, S. John’s Chapel, Tower of London, 469
585A] | [436c]; arcades in, 496; capitals in, 309,
Germain-en-Laye, Chateau de, 774 565 (ii) [504A]; columns in, 505 [503A];
Germans (Cornwall), gable cross at vaulting of, 397 bis, 501
[512A] S. John’s, Cley (Norfolk), door at, 506
Gervais, Paris, 792 [498F-L]
Giles, Camberwell Church Street, Lon- S. John’s College, Cambridge, 469, 473,
don, 1008-11 [1009B] 882 [461B,
475B, 476]
Giles, Cheadle, 1008 [10094] S. John’s College, Oxford, 473
Giles, Edinburgh, 421, 522 [523A] S. John’s Hospital, Bruges, 582 [581D]
Giles-in-the-Fields, London, 874, 950 S. John’s Hospital, Coventry, 474
Gilles, Arles, 336, 343 [349A]; doorway S. John’s Hospital, Northampton, 479
in, 348, 352 [351L]; fireplace and chim- [500A]
ney from, 347 [350B];. nave pier at S. John’s Hospital, Sherborne, 479
[350P] S. Juan de los Reyes, Toledo, 644 [638c,
S. Giobbe, Venice, 732 641D]
S. Giorgio dei Greci, Venice, 732 [735F-H] S. Jude, Hampstead Garden Suburb, ro12
S. Giorgio Maggiore, Venice, 738 [736A,; [r013c]
7434-£] SS. Justo y Pastor, Barcelona, 643
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1345
. Katherine’s Dock, London, 964, 982 S. Maria im Capitol, Cologne, 358
Kevin’s Kitchen, Glendalough, 527 S. Maria in Carignano, Genoa, 688, 851
[526B] [682D]
Lambert, Hildesheim, 588 S. Maria in Valle, Cividale, 265 [267M]
Laurence, Evesham [4971] S. Maria in Via Lata, Rome, 729
Lawrence, Bradford-on-Avon, 381 S. Maria Maggiore, Bergamo, 627 [330E,
[387M,Q] 629E]
Lawrence Jewry, London, 914, 968 S. Maria Maggiore, Rome, 258, 261, 729
[916B, 921C] [256B, 267B]; entrance facade, 729
Lo (France): Cathedral, 376; timber [724E]
houses
at, 559 [558J] . Maria Maggiore, Toscanella [332c]
Lorenzo, Florence, 672, 677 [670G-L]; anMaria Novella, Florence, 614, 683, 713
Sacristies in, 672, 677, 678, 713 [632A]; lavabo and pulpit [750D, F];
Lorenzo, Turin, 691 monument of Aliotti [6318]; reliquary
Lorenzo fuori le mura, Rome, 258, 261 at, 633 [630B]
bis, 262 [263A, 267Q] . Maria Rotonda, Rome, 198
Lorenzo in Damaso, Rome, 701 [699D] Maria sopra Minerva, Rome, 623 [6228]
Lorenzo in Miranda, Rome, 188 Marie’s Grange, Salisbury, 996
Louis (Mo.), Wainwright Building, 1155 nnn
Mark, Venice, 289, 290 ter, 340 [288A-C,
[1150F] 291-2]
Luke, Chelsea, London, 877, 955 [954c] Altar of S. Giacomo [758F]; Campanile
DY
VOD
HHH
YH
2NR
DD Luke of Stiris, monastery of (Greece), of, 323, 608 [611A, D]; exterior of, 289
290, 301 [286B, 294A, 300L] [291A, 611A]; interior of, 289 [288A, 291B,
S. Luke’s Church, Liverpool, Australia, 292]; Library of, 702, 737 [740]
1058 Martin, Canterbury, 390
S. _Luke’s Church, Smithfield, Va., 1136 Martin, Cologne, 358 [3594, B]
[1137C] Martin, Groningen, 582
. Luke’s Hospital, Finsbury, London, 955 Martin, Landshut, 588
Maclou, Rouen, 542 Martin, Leicester, 434 [435E]
Madeleine, Vézelay, 343 [337A;, B]; Martin, Ludgate, London, 836, 914
narthex of, 348 [349B] [916D, 924A, 925D]
Magnus-the-Martyr, London Bridge, Martin, Stamford, tomb in [976E]
914 [916K,
920D, 925L] Martin, Worms, doorway in [362R]
Marcos, Leon, 856 Martin-in-the-Fields, London, 950
Margaret, Ipswich, roof, 437 [952D]; circular window, 974 [980E]
Margaret, Lothbury, London [925k] SS. Martina and Luca, Rome, 729
Margaret, Westminster, 393 S. Martino, Lucca, 320
Maria degli Angeli, Rome, 206, 714 S. Mary, Beverley, mouldings [507P, Q];
[207A, F] pier at [503U, v]
Maria dell’ Assunta, Ariccia, Rome, 726 . Mary, Bloxham, 490 [492H]
Maria delle Carceri, Prato, 678 . Mary, Cambridge [475B]
Maria della Consolazione, Todi, 702 Mary, Dinan, window [563D]
[7o4a-c] Mary, Leicester, sedilia in [515K]
Maria del Fiore, Florence, see Florence Mary, Manchester [4926]
Cathedral Mary, Norwich, ironwork in [518D]
BDANNH
NH
DN
HDVHD
Maria Gloriosa dei Frari, Venice, 600, Mary, S. Neots [492F]
603, 607 [628F, G, 758D]; apse, 607 Mary, Taunton, parapet at [5115]
[628E]; carved screen, 633 [628F] Mary, Warwick, 394 [370B, 482A]
Maria delle Grazie, Milan, 657, 696, 751 Mary, Wimbotsham, roof of [435c]
[698A-E] . Mary, Wyndham Place, London, 955
Maria del Mar, Barcelona, 643, 648 ADDNNRAHADNDY
. Mary Abchurch, London, 914 [916A,
oA
Maria
ee e
dei Miracoli, Brescia, 732 [689B]
92 1B]
S. Mary Aldermary, London, 914 [925G]
Maria dei Miracoli, Rome, 729 [728c] S. Mary-at-Hill, Love Lane, London, 914
Maria dei Miracoli, Venice, 731, 732 [916E, 921A]
[735, 758B, E, H]; balustrade,
731 [758H] S. Mary-le-Bow, Cheapside, London, 390,
Maria di Monte Santo, Rome, 729 913 [915C, 916G, 919A, B, E, 925R]
[728c] . Mary-le-Strand, London, 873, 949
Maria della Pace, Rome, 701, 729, 748 [952B]
[728B, 753E] S. Mary Magdalen, Oxford [497], 499H]
Maria del Pino, Barcelona, 643 S. Mary Magdalen, Pulham, roof [435D]
Maria della Salute, Venice, 677, 747, 748 S. Mary Pammakaristos, Constantinople,
[739A, B] { ; 290 [287A]
DUN
UND
HH
YHHD Maria della Spina, Pisa, 614 [6188] S. Mary Redcliffe, Bristol [399G]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1346 INDEX

S. Mary the Virgin, Oxford [396c, 475A]; S. Paul’s Cathedral, London, 644, 671, 792,
mouldings [507V, X, 508V]; pier at [503T]5 906, 913 [663B, 908C, D, 925-6]
porch of, 872 [396c]; sedilia [515P]; dome, 677, 719 bis, 799 bis, 906 [908c,
steeple of, 490 [492E] 909, 9IOC, D, 9IID, 912]; dome chains,
Mary Woolnoth, London, 949 906 [9IIE, 912A]; facade, 719; nave bays,
Mary the Younger, York, 496 [3876] 661 (1i) [658F-J] ;old Cathedral, 402, 8713
Mary’s Guild, Lincoln, 447 [446B] painted ceiling, 974; plan of, 406; S.
Mary’s Hospital, Chichester, 479 bis Dunstan’s Chapel, 906 [910D]; screen-
[478E-G] wall, 913 [911B]; ‘Stone Gallery’, 913;
Marylebone Parish Church, 950 [954A] Towers, 661 (ii), 913; Whispering Gal-
Matthew, Diisseldorf, 1085 lery, 906 [910D]
Matthew’s Church, Windsor (Australia), Paul’s Chapel, New York, 1139
1058 Paul’s School, London, 474
Michael, Basingstoke [499N] Paulin, Trier, 818 [822B]
Michael, Berg-am-Laim, Munich, 818 Peter, Brighton, 987
[822A, 824]] Peter, Kettering, 490 [492K]
Michael, Cornhill, London, 914 [925]] Peter, Louvain, 574, 582 [581]A
Michael, Coventry [492c] Peter, Northampton, capital at [504B]
Michael, Hildesheim, 358 Peter, Raunds, 496 [492A]
Michael, Munich, 817 [825B] Peter, Utrecht, 573, 582
Michael, Zwolle, 574 Peter’s Cathedral, Rome, 261, 671, 707,
Michael Paternoster Royal [925v] 714, 1144 [720-3]
Michael’s Church, Charleston, S.C., architects employed on, 714, 717, 719,
1136 [1137B] 725, 726; baldachino in, 197; cupolas at,
ichel, Louvain, 835 [8374] 713, 717; dome, 677, 717, 719, 747
Michele, Lucca, 320 [722A-D, 723B-E]; nave, 717, 747 [720B] ;
ee Pavia, 309, 320, 323, 329, 604 portico, 717, 719 [723F, G];S. Paul’s
[322 building history compared with, 913
Michele in Orto, Florence, 614 [608c] Old sities church, 188, 258 bis, 261,
Mildred, Bread St, London, 914 375 [259A-C]5 pulled down by Pope Julius
Miniato, Florence, 265, 309, 320, 323, ye 261, 717; reconstruction of (1450),
677 [321A, B] 684
Neots (Hunts.), S. Mary [492F] Peter’s Hospital, Bristol, 897 [894c]
Nicholas, Burnage, Manchester, 1012 Peter’s House, Middelburg, 577
[1016c] Petronio, Bologna, 604, 607, 701 [609A,
Nicholas (Nikolaikirche), Hamburg, 990, wo —

1079 [108TA] Philibert, Tournus, 344

Nicholas, King’s Lynn [491v] Philip, Birmingham, 949 [952A]
Nicholas, Newcastle-on-Tyne, 490 Philip, Salford, 955
[4928] Piat Chapel, Tournai Cathedral, 574
Nicholas, Prague, 818 [820c, D] [5816]
Nicholas Cole Abbey, London [925T] Pierre, Aulnay [350G]
Nicola, Bari, 324 Pierre, Caen, 542, 562 (i), 791 [794B]
Omer Cathedral (France), 376 Pierre, Ghent, 835
Ouen, Rouen, 534, 542, 647 [546D, Pierre, Lisieux, 542
561D]; rose window, 562 (i) [563H] Pietro in Montorio, Rome, Tempietto at,
Pablo, Valladolid, 643 [642c] 673, 701 [692A, 700A-C]
Pancras Church, London, 877, 950 Quentin, Mainz, 588, 593
[9548] , Rémy, Provence: arch at, 222; Tomb of
Pancras Station, London, 1025, 1042 the Julii, 221 [220H]
[1039D] | \ Reparata, Florence, 613
Paolo fuori le Mura, Rome, 258 bis, 261, Sabina, Rome, 261 [269B]
266 [259E-G, 267G]; cloisters of, 320, 329 Salvatore, Venice, 732
[330H] : Satiro, Milan, 696 [697c, D]
S. Patrick’s Catholic Cathedral, Melbourne, Saviour, Eltham, 1ro12 [1016p]
1059 PRLDNDDH
DH
see
NNHYH
NRARH
Saviour in the Chora, Constantinople,
S. Patrick’s Cathedral, New York, 1144 284 [299A]
S. Paul, Brighton, 1008 <i Saviour Pantokrator, Constantinople,
S. Paul, Covent Garden, London, 898 902
[902G—H] S. ue ie Vicarage, Coalpitheath, 996
2 Paul, Deptford, London, 949 [994 E
Paul, Sheffield, 949 Ss Sebald, Nuremberg, 594; parsonage,
Ss: Paul, Worms [5964] 5943 shrine of, 597 [5966]
S S. Paul and Louis, Paris, 769, 792 [796B] S. Sebastiano, Mantua, 683
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1347
S. Sebastiano fuorile mura, Rome,725 [7274] S. Zaccaria, Venice, 731, 732 [7574]
S. Sepulchre, Cambridge, 265 S. Zeno Maggiore, Verona, 309, 323 [3255
S. Sepulchre, Holborn, London, 394 3266, 330]]
SS. Sergius and Bacchus, Constantinople, Saintes (France), bridge at, 222
280 bis, 290, 298 [277G, 278A-C, 286C] Sakjegeuzi (Syria), 85
S. Sernin, Toulouse, 340, 549, 640, 647, Sakkara (Egypt): mastaba tombs at, 25-6
648 [341A, B, 35ID]; twin capitals at [24a» ” G]; pyramids at, 17, 26, 27, 57
[351D] 8-9
S. Servaas, Maastricht, 573 cise (Spain):
S. Sindone chapel, Turin, 691 [693E] bridge at, 239; Casa de las Conchas,
S. Sophia, Constantinople, 8, 201, 275, 279, 846 [843B]; Cathedral, Old and New,
280 ter, 283-4, 1237 bis, 1238 [273-4, 640 [634A, 650D, F, 6520]; Churriguer-
281, 282A, B, I239B] esque style in, 845; Palacio de Monte-
arches and buttresses in, 280, 283, rey, 856; S. Estéban, 852; Torre del
284; capital and gallery window [300A, Clavero, 644; University, 846 [844A]
K]; columns in, 279, 283; domes of, 279, Saldanha Palace, Salvador, 1135
283 [277G, M]; exterior of, 284 [273]; in- Salem (Mass.): House of the Seven Gables,
terior of, 283-4 [274, 282A, B]; lighting 11323; John Ward House, 1132
of, 284; minarets of, 284 [273]; vaults of, Salford (Lancs.), S. Philip, 955
283, 298; window in gallery of [300K] Salginatobel Bridge (Switzerland), 1104
Sophia, Kiev, 293 [1108]
Sophia, Novgorod, 293 [294B] Salim Chishti, Tomb of, Fatehpur-Sikri,
Sophia, Salonica, 290 1242 [1243B, 1247D-F]
Spirito, Florence, 678 [679A-E, 749Cc]; Salisbury (Wilts.):
sacristy of, 684 College of Matrons, 956 [9588];
Stefano Rotondo, Rome, 262 [295A-D] Council House, 955; Eyre’s Hospital,
Stephen, Mainz, 588, 593 897; Market Cross, 483 [486A]; Mom-
Stephen, Rochester Row, London, 1008 passon House, 937 [941C, 966A, 971B, L]5
DAMN
Ann
Stephen, Walbrook, London, 913 [917, S. Marie’s Grange, 996; Trinity Alms-
925M]; Grinling Gibbons carved organ, houses, 956
913 [917E]; pulpit, 913 [9215] Salisbury Cathedral, 308, 366, 376 bis, 393,
Stephen’s Cathedral, Vienna, 588, 593 402, 421, 717 [395, 415]
ter [374], 591]; vaulting, 588 [591B, F] arcading in, 509; Chapter House, 393,
Stephen’s Chapel, Westminster, 469, 405 [396A, 410E, 415G, 504F]; cloisters of,
542 [560c] ; 402 [410E, 415], 560A]; crocket [511N];
Stephen’s Porch, Westminster New doorway, 562 (ii) [415A]; Lady Chapel,
Palace, 1020 366, 376, 469 [410]; model of [407G];
Sulpice, Paris, 770, 792 [7978] old foundation, one of the, 40235 piers in,
Susanna, Rome, 691 [697B] 505 [503N, 504F]; plan of, 490 [4I0E,
Swithin, Cannon St, London, 914 560A]; spire of, 405, 4215 tomb of Bishop
[9164] Bridport, 509 [472B]; tower of, 421, 490,
Theodore, Athens, 290 bis [286] 562 (ii) [407G]; transepts of, 405, 421,
Theodore, Constantinople, 284, 298 493, 559 (i) [560]; triforium, 493
[277F, 278D-G] [415F]; vaulting of, 397 [399C, 415H];
Theodosia, Constantinople, 290 walls, 562 Gi); windows, 496; Wyatt’s
Thérése, Montmagny, 1085 [1084B] ‘improvements’ to, 976
Thomas, convent of, Avila [651C] Salle des Chevaliers, Mont S. Michel, 549
HH
ALND
HD Trophime,
NAH
DH Arles, 336, 343; cloisters of, Sallust, House of, Pompeii [233]
Salonica (Greece): Church of the Holy
347 [350F]; porch of, 347-8, 348 [350K]
Ulrich, Augsburg, 594 [585D] Apostles, 290; S. Demetrius, 265 [300E];
Urbain, Troyes, 542 [5645] S. George, 290; S. Sophia, 290
Vicente, Avila, 648 [642A] Saltaire (Yorks.), planning of, 1000
S. Vincent, Rouen, porch at [564F] Salvador (Brazil), Saldanha Palace, 1135
S. Vincent Street, Glasgow, Presbyterian Salvi, Dioti (archt.), 319
Church, ro1rr Salvi, Nicola (archt.), 729
SS. Vincenzo e Anastasio, Rome, font Salvin, Antony (archt.), 988, 996
[754A] Salzburg (Germany), Cathedral, 817
S. Vitale, Ravenna, 209, 276, 280, 290, 298, Samaria (Jordan), Roman forum in, 184
357 [285¢, D, 299B, 300C] Samaritaine Department Store, Paris, 1104
S. Vulfran, Abbeville, 542 [546c] [r105C]
S. Waldru, Mons, 574 [581C] Samarkand (U.S.S.R.): Gur Amir, 1235
S. Werburgh, Convent of, Chester, 406 [12368]; Madrasa of Bibi Khanum, 1235;
S. Wilfred, Hulme, Manchester, 1008 Mosque of Ulugh Beg, 1235; Tomb of
S. Winifred’s Quarry, Coombe Down, 1000 Shah Zinda, 1235
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
H.O.A.
2u
1348 INDEX

Samarra (Iraq), Malwiyya Mosque, 1235 Sarcophagi: Early Christians’ sculptured,

Sambin, Hugues (archt.), 780 266 [267H]; Italian Renaissance, 683
Samos, Temple of Hera in, 107, 128 Sarcophagus, 215, 217 bis, 582, 1271
San Antonio, Texas, Governor’s Palace, [220P]
1139 Alexander, 151 [150G, H]; Cnidos
San Estevan, Church and Convent of, tomb, 151 [150J]; Etruscan, 183 [181C,
Acoma, 1136 [11374] E]; Hadrian’s, at Rome, 218; marble, at
San Francisco (Calif.), Hallidie Building, Ravenna, 301 [300J]; Medici Chapel,
1066, 1156 [1171] Florence, 714 [716A]; pulpit over, at
Sag Frungisco Javier, College ‘of, Sucre, Milan, 320 [332B]; S. Apollinare in
Classe, Ravenna [267H]; S. Sebald, in
SuaGulla. Giuliano da (archt.), 678 Nuremberg, 597 [596G]
San Geronimo de Taos, New Mexico, 1131 Sardis (Asia Minor), Temple of Artemis-
[11304] Cybele, 128
San Gimignano (Italy), towers at, 323-4, Sargon IJ, Palace of, Khorsabad, 64, 73-5
624 [625C] [71B, 72C-E, 74]
San José Church, Laguna (N.M.), 1136 Sarnath (India), stambha at, 1180
San Juan Teotihuacan (Mexico), Pyramid Sarvistan (Persia), Palace at, 79 [80H—K]
of the Sun, 1128 [1129p] Sas Bahu Temple, Gwalior, 1187 [11894]
San Marco, Scuola di, Venice, 731, 732 Sash windows, 968 [903E, 940A, 971F]
[739¢] — Sassanian architecture, 78-9
Sanchi (India), Great Stupa, 1180 [11824, Saturn, Temple of, Rome, 180, 188, 244 (ii)
II94A-E] [189G-]]
Sanctis, Francesco de (archt.), 729 Satyrus (archt.), 148
Sanctuary: church, 258 bis, 297, 308, 320, Saugus (Mass.), Scotch-Boardman House,
490, 491 [255K]; French, 537; Ocotlan, 1132
1136 [1134D]; open-air, at Yasilikaya, 82 Saulbau, Heidelberg, 811
3D Sauli, Palazzo, Genoa, 688, 691 [686B]
Penis of the Bulls, Delos, 148 [157¢, E, Saulnier, Jules (archt.), 1103
F,H Savage, James (archt.), 877, 955
Sanctuary of Pandrosus, Athens, 133, 137 Sayyid Mubarak, Tomb of, Ahmadabad,
Sandwich (Kent), ornamented moulding I24I
[5o8F] Sayyid Usman, Tomb of, Ahmadabad
Sandwich School, 885 I241
Sane oe Antonio da (the elder, archt.), 702 Scala dei Giganti, Venice, 731 [733A; F]
ay Scala Regia, Rome, 726 [715c]
Sangallo, Antonio da (the younger, archt.), Scala di Spagna (‘Spanish Steps’), Rome,
702; plan for S. Peter’s, 717 [722D, G] 725,729 [730A]
Sangallo, Giuliano da (archt.), 9, 684, 7175 Scaligero, Ponte, Verona, 608 [632B]
762 Scaligers, tomb of the, Verona, 233 [299B]
Sanmichele, Michele (archt.), 674, 691; Scamozzi, Vicenzo (archt.), 656, 691, 7475
732; buildings by, 732, 737 [7444-G, J; 871; buildings completed by, 737, 738,
7455 746A] TAT
Sansovino, Jacopo (archt.), 9, 674, 7373 Scarisbrick Hall, Lancashire, 996 [994c]
buildings by, 702, 737, 747, 751; sculp- Scarpagnino, Antonio (archt.), 731
ture by, 731 [733A; B] Schelling, H. G. J. (archt.), 1111
Santa Fé (N.M.), Governor’s Palace, 1139 Scherpenheuvel Church (Belgium), 835,
[1138] 836 [837¢]
Sant’ Elia, Antonio (archt.), 1068 Schinkel, Karl Friedrich (archt.), 817
Santiago de Compostela (Spain), 3405 Schlesinger-Mayer Store, Chicago, 1155
Cathedral, 636, 640, 845, 856 [858B] [r150D]
Santo Antonio church, Recife, 1136 Schloss, Karlsruhe, 817 [814c]
Santo Domingo (now Ciudad Trujillo), Schmidt, F. von (archt.), 1079
Dominican Republic, Cathedral, 1135 Scholae, 258
Sao Francisco, Church of, Pampulha, 1160 Scholer, F. E. (archt.), 1104
[1161Cc] School of Art, Glasgow, 1026 [1030A-C]
Sao Pedro dos Clérigos, Recife, 1136 Schools: Elizabethan, 885; English Medi-
[11348] ; aeval, 474, 866 [480D, G]
Sapelo Island, Georgia (U.S:A.), South Schwarzenberg Palace, Vienna, 812
End House, 1143 Sciarra, Palazzo, Rome [753F]
Saragossa (Spain): Cathedral, 648, 856 Scopas (sculptor), 131, 148
[6384]; Casa Infanta, 855; El Pilar Scotch-Boardman House, Saugus (Mass.),
Cathedral, 855 [8618]; Museum, 648 1132
[650] Scotia, 128, 156, 1271 [164E, 165H, T]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1349
Scotney Castle (Kent), 996 Secondaire period of French Gothic, 534
Scott, Bailey (archt.), 992 Secundini, tomb of the, near Tréves, 221
Scott, Elizabeth (archt.), 1048 Sedilia, 1271; English Mediaeval, 509 ter,
Scott, Sir George Gilbert (archt. 1811-78), 510 [515K, M-P]
421 quater, 473, 988, 990, 995, 1008, Segesta (Sicily), Temple at, 112
1079 Segovia (Spain), 183, 648; Alcazar castle,
Scott, Sir Giles Gilbert (archt., 1880-1960), 644; aqueduct, 236 [241B]; Cathedral,
995, IOII, IOI2, 1025 bis, 1042 640, 647 [650A, G]; S. Cruz, 648 [650B]
Scott, J. Oldrid (archt.), 279 Seleucid architecture, 78-80
Scott, Chesterton, and Shepherd (archts.), Selimiye: Adrianople, 1237; Istanbul, 1237
048 Selinus (Sicily): Temple ‘B’ at, 108 [109c];
Scottish architecture, 521-5 [520, 523-4]; Temple ‘C’ at, 112; Temple ‘G.T.’ at,
beehive huts, 521 [2D]; French influence 108, I12 [I09L]
upon, 521-2 Selles-sur-Cher (France), [3515]
Scottish Rite, Temple of, Washington, Sempringham (Lincs.), mouldings at [507c]
I151 [1149P] Semur (France), crocket at [566]]
Screen walls, 801 (ii) Senate House: Cambridge, 963 [475B,
Screens (church): 960B]; University of London, 1035
Belgian and Dutch, 578, 582 [580G, [10334]
581E]; British, 1008; Byzantine, 290 Seneferu, Pyramids of, Dahshur, 17, 26, 33
[300L]; English Mediaeval, 427, 509, 510 Senlis Cathedral (France), 534
[428, 512F, H, 516]; English Renaissance, Sennacherib, palaces of, Nineveh, 64, 73
881, 974 [976B]; entrance, 780; French, Sens, William of (master-mason), 382, 406,
780, 791, 792; German, 594 [5958]; 501
narthex, 792; Spanish, 643 [860B, Cc]; see Sens Cathedral (France), 534
also Jubé Septimius Severus: Arch of, Rome, 222
“Screens” (passage), 448, 451, 459 [182, 224A-G, 377E]; Palace of, Rome,
Scroll capital, 125, 506; see also Volute 227 [232E]
Scroll mouldings, 506, 1271 Sepulchre, the Holy [260F, Gc]
Sculpture (Ancient): Serapeum, the Great, Alexandria, 19
Aegean, 101 [100H]; Assyrian, 63, 73 Serlio, Sebastiano (archt.), 762, 774, 831;
[72B, 84J]; bas-relief, see Bas-relief; By- 865, 869, 871
zantine, 272, 301; Egyptian, 20, 39, 57 Serquigny (Normandy), Romanesque door-
[54N, 56]; Greek, 115, I19 ter, 121, 129, way at[350J]
148 bis, 156, 247 (i; ii) [I14D, I20N, 122H, Servandoni, Jean Nicolas (archt.), 770,792
162B, C]; Persian, 78, 86 [76E]; Roman, Seti I (Pharaoh), Temple of, Abydos, 18,
178, 205-6, 222 43-4 [37B, 41B]; tomb of, Thebes, 36
Sculpture (Gothic), 372 30P
Belgian & Dutch, 578; English, 405, Settignano (Italy), Villa Gamberaia, 673
506, 509, 510 bis, 565 (ii) [403B]; French, [7128]
538, 541, 565 (i); German, 593, 594 Sevenoaks (Kent), school at, 474
[586A, 595F, H]; Italian, 607, 614, 633 Severy (vaulting), 1271
[630, 631K]; Spanish, 643 bis, 644 quater, Seville (Spain):
4
648 Alcazar, 1233; Casa de Ayuntamiento,
Sculpture (Indian and Pakistani), 1179-80 846 [8448]; Casa Lonja, 852 [850A];
Sculpture (Renaissance): Belgian & Dutch, Cathedral, 643-4, 648 bis, 862 [641C°
832; English, 913; French, 774, 792, 802 645A]; Churrigueresque style in, 846;
(ii); Italian, 687, 714, 752 ter, 802 (i), Giralda minaret, 644, 1233
862; Spanish, 846, 851, 852, 856 Sexpartite vaulting, 307, 344 bis, 501, 537
Sculpture (Romanesque): French, 348 bis [370E]
[351J, M]; German, 364; Italian, 331, 603 Sezincote House (Glos.), 948
Sculptured memorials, 217, 221 Sgraffito decoration, 664 (ii), 684, 1271
Scuola di San Marco, Venice, 731, 732 *s-Gravensande, Arent van (archt.), 835,
[739¢] j 836
Scuola di San Rocco, Venice [757C] Shafts, column, 1271
Seagram Building, New York, 1067, 1163 Shah-ji-ki-Dheri (India), Stupa at, 1180
Seaton Delaval (Northumberland), 932 Shah Zinda, Tomb of, Samarkand, 1235
[934B, D] : ? Shakespeare Memorial Theatre, Stratford-
Sebek and Haroeris, Temple of, Kom on-Avon, 1047-8 [1046D]
Ombo, 49 Shapur I, Palace of, Bishapur, 79
Second Bank of the U.S. (Old Customs Sharpe, Edmund (archt.), 989
House), Philadelphia, 1151 Shaw, John (archt.), 877,955
Second Leiter Building, Chicago, 1155 Shaw, Norman (archt.), 983, 991 51s, 992
[1150C] ter 999, 1000, 1025, 1047
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
2U2 H.O.A.
1350 INDEX

Shaykh Safi, Mosque of, Ardabil, 1235 Siena Cathedral (cont.)

Sheerness (Kent), Royal Naval Dockyard, Cc]; holy water stoup [750C]; tower, 624
983, 1042-7 [1045] [6174]
Sheffield (Yorks.), S. Paul, 949 Siguenza Cathedral (Spain) [8604]
Sheldonian Theatre, Oxford, 914 [4754, Sikandra (India), Akbar, Mausoleum of,
925X] 1242
Shell hoods to doorways, 968 [940D, 971G] Sikhara form of spire, 1179-80
Shell-keeps, 437-8 Silchester (Berks.), 183; basilica at, 2025
Shell vaulting, 1068 Roman forum at, 184, 383, 389
Shepherd, James (archt.), 956 Siloe, Diego de (archt.), 852
Shepley, Rutan and Coolidge (archts.), 1147 Simons, Ralph (archt.), 882
Sher Shah: Mosque of, Delhi, 1241; Tomb Sinagoga del Transito, Toledo, 640
of, Sahsaram, 1241 Sinan (archt.), 1237
Sheraton, Thomas (furniture designer), 979 Sinan Pasha, Mosque of, Bulak, 1238
Sherborne (Dorset), S. John’s Hospital, 479 Singing-gallery, 687, 752 bis [754G]; see also
Sherborne Abbey, 394, 502; flying buttress Cantoria
at, 497 Sinjerli (Syria), Citadel at, 85 [72F, G];
Sherborne School, 4 Upper and Lower Palace, 85 [726]
*s-Hertogenbosch (Holland), S. John, 574, Siphnian treasury, Delphi, 131
578, 582 [575B, 582] Sirceli, Mosque of, Konia, 1237
Shields and Stools, Tomb of the, Cerve- Sissinghurst (Kent), King’s Head Inn, 483
teri, 183
Shielings, Scottish [2c]
‘[4sauy]
Sistine Chapel, Rome, 633;
-
ceiling of, 713,
Shingle style, 1143 7523 singing gallery of, 687 [7546]
Shint6é shrines, 1214 [1220] Six Bells, Hollingbourne, 483 [484F]
Shint6 temples: approaches to, 1219; Bud- Sixtus III, Pope, Baptistery of, Rome, 293;
dhist compared with, 1218 mosaics of, 261
Shintédism, 1212 Sizergh Castle (Westmorland), 881, 882,
Shire Hall, Monmouth, 955 [927E] 967
Shirley, Charles City County, Va., 1132 Skara Brae (Orkneys), dwellings in, 521
Shoguns: Palaces of the, Tokyo, 12173 Skellig Islands (Co. Kerry), monastic cells
Tombs of the, Tokyo, 1214 bis on, 527
Shreve, Lamb and Harmon (archts.), 1156 Skidmore, Owings and Merrill (archts.),
Shrewsbury (Salop): Abbot’s house, 1163
Butcher’s Row, 469 [464F]; Old Market Skipper’s House, Ghent, 577 [599B]
Hall, 897 [893B]; S. Chad, 950 [953¢] Skipton (Yorks.), Gledstone Hall, 1007
Shrewsbury School, 474 Skylines, Gothic and Renaissance, 661, 662
Shrine of: Imam Riza, Mashhad, 1235; S Skyscrapers, 1067, IIII, 1127, 1152, 1155
Ursula (Bruges), 582 [581D] ter, 1156 bis, 1163 bis
Shrines, 1271 Slater,J.A. (archt.), 1048
Belgian and Dutch, 574, 578, 582 Sleeping Buddha, Temple of, Peking, 1202,
[581pD]; Buddhist, 1178-9; English Medi- 1205 [12034]
aeval, 427, 473, 509 [424D, 425], 4726, Sluter, Claus (sculptor), 578
J]; French Gothic, 530; German, 597 ‘Small Theatre’, Pompeii, 210 [145Cc]
[596G]; Hindu, 1178-9; Italian, 633, 691 Smeaton Manor, Yorkshire, 999
[631A]; Jain, 1178-9; Shinto, 1214 [1220] Smirke, Sir Robert (archt.), 877, 878, 948,
Shute, John, First and Chief Groundes of 955 bis, 956 bis, 987
Architecture (1563), 865 Smirke, Sydney (archt.), 963, 989, 1041
Sicilian architecture: Gothic, 604, 624; Smithfield (Va.), S. Luke’s Church, 1136
Renaissance, 665; Romanesque, 312, 315 [1137C]
bis, 316, 319, 3245 329, 331 Smithills Manor House (Lancs.), 451
Sicily (Italy): Doric temples in, 112; Mus- Smithson, Huntingdon (archt.), 869, 870,
lim architecture in, 1234 886
Sidi Sayyid, Ahmadabad, 1241 Smithson, John (archt.), 870, 886
Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, 882 Smithson, Robert (archt.), 870, 882
Sidon (Lebanon): Alexander sarcophagus, Smithsonian Institution, Washington,
151 [150G, H]; Tomb of the Weepers, I51 D.C., 1148
[150K] Smyth’s Almshouses, Lewisham, London,
Siena (Italy): Casa Pollini, 702 [692F]; Pa- 956
lazzo Piccolomini, 684, 701-2 [6758]; Soane, Sir John (archt.), 876-7, 878, 955,
Palazzo Pubblico, 623 [612D] 987, 1144; his Museum, 869, 877, 949
Siena Cathedral, 603, 614; balustrade in [9474]
[750J]; baptistery of S. Giovanni, 614; Society for the Protection of Ancient
dome, 624 [617A]; hexagon, 614 [617B, Buildings, 991
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1351

Soffit, 1271 Spanish Mediaeval architecture (cont.)

Soissons Cathedral (France), 537, 538 quater, 647 bis, 648 ter; secular, 644-7;
Solar, 447, 448 bis, 451, 882, 1272 [4468, F, spires, 640 bis, 647, 653; stained glass,
455¢C 643, 644, 648 bis; towers, 636, 640, 643,
Solari, Guiniforte (archt.), 684 647 [652A, B]; vaulting, 639, 643 quint,
Solari, Santino (archt.), 817 644 bis, 647, 648; walls, 636, 647
Solihull Church (Warwicks.), 433 [491R] Spanish Renaissance architecture, 644,
Somerset Hospital, Petworth, 956 841-62
Somerset House, London, 956 [9604] analysis, 855-62; Antiquarian period,
Somnathpur (India), Hindu temple, 1188 846; Baroque, 660, 842, 845, 852, 855;
Sompting Church (Sussex), 358, 3903 856; character, 845-6; Churrigueresque,
tower of, 489, 496, 501 [387D, E] 845, 852, 855, 862; cimborio, 852, 8553
Sonning (Berkshire), Deanery Garden, Classical period, 845, 852, 855; columns,
1007 [1004B] 856; domes, 852, 855, 856; Early period,
Soochow (China): Jewel Belt bridge, 1207; 8453; ecclesiastical, 825-5; fresco, 8513
pagodas, 1205 Moorish influence, 845, 846, 852, 855,
Sopo¢ani (Yugoslavia), church at, 290 856; mouldings, 856 [860E]; openings,
Sorbonne, Church of the, Paris, 792 [796B] 851, 852, 856; ornament, 852, 856, 862;
Soufflot, Jacques Germain (archt.), 770,799 periods of, 845-6; plans, 851, 855 [853B];
South African architecture, 1057-9; Plateresque, 845, 846, 852, 856, 862;
Colonial phase, 1058; examples, 1058; roofs, 842, 856; sculpture, 846, 851, 852,
influences upon, 1057-8; stages of, 1057 856, 8625; secular, 846-52; towers, 852,
South Bank Exhibition, London, 1036, 855, 856; walls, 855-6
1051 [1053B] ‘Spanish Steps’, Rome, 725, 729 [730A]
South Church, Amsterdam, 835-6 Specchi, Alessandro (archt.), 729
South End House, Sapelo Island, 1143 Specchi, Niccolo, monument to, Assisi
South Mimms (Middx.), Wrotham Park, [631G]
938 Specus, 1272 [216E]
South Parade, Bath, 948 Speke Hall (Lancs.), 459 [456B]
South Wraxall Manor House (Wilts.), 452 Spence, Sir Basil (archt.), ro12, 1019
bis, 897 [456c] Spencer House, London, 938
Southampton (Hants.), walls of, 489 Spere-truss, 448
Southfleet Church (Kent) [491P] ‘Speres’ (or spurs), 448
Southwark Cathedral, London, 393, 421; Speyer Cathedral (Germany), 344, 358, 363
parish church origin of, 402; vaulting of, [359C, D]; vaulting at, 307, 358
398 [373C] Spezza, Antonio (archt.), 812
Southwell Cathedral (Notts.), 393, 421 Spezza, Pietro (archt.), 812
[412K] Sphinx Gates, Hittite, 81
buttress, 562 (ii) [497C]; capitals in Sphinx, the Great, at Gizeh, 18, 35 [12, 314]
[504H]; Chapter House, 393, 421; Col- Sphinxes, Egyptian, 5, 23, 50
legiate church origin of, 402 bis; orna- Spires, 367, 368, 1272
mented mouldings [508N]; piers in, 505 Belgian and Dutch Renaissance [839D,
Spa Green Estate, London, 1008 E]; British, 990, 1008 ter, IOII, 1012,
Spain, Muslim architecture, 1230-4 1025 ;broach, 430, 490, 1259 [4414]; Eng-
Spalato, now Split (Yugoslavia): aqueduct lish Mediaeval, 405, 430, 490 ter, 562 (ii)
at, 236; Cathedral at, 293; Diocletian’s [431A, D]; English Renaissance, 913, 914,
Mausoleum, 201, 218, 229, 293 [231D]; 950 bis [917B, 919C, D]; evolution of, 363;
Diocletian’s Palace, 194, 229-30, 875 French, 340, 344, 541, 542 ter, 562 (i)
[231]; Temple of Jupiter, 194, 229 [231D] [563A]; German, 588 bis, 593 [586A, C, D];
Spandrel, 1272 Hindu temple, 1179; Italian, 702; open-
Spanish Gothic architecture, 639, 643, 644, work, 640, 647, 1080; Spanish, 640 bis,
647, 846, 852, 855, 856 647; 6535 856, 1080; triple, 406
Spanish Mediaeval architecture, 635-53 Spires (Germany), see Speyer
analysis, 647-53; castles, 644, 647 Split (Yugoslavia), see Spalato
[646]; character, 639-40; cimborio, 640, Springers, 371, 1272 [370H; 373C]
644 bis, 647, 648, 1260 [6378]; columns, Squinch arches, 79, 309, 614, 1272 [80H]
644, 648; coro, 640 bis, 643 bis, 644, 647; Srirangam (India), Hindu temple, 1191
1261; domes, 6403; ecclesiastical, 640-45 [1194F] vd
Moorish influence, 635, 636, 639-40, 643, Stabian Baths, Pompeii, 206
647-8 ; mouldings, 648; openings, 647-8 5 Stables, Government House, Sydney, 1058
ornament, 636, 640, 643, 647, 648 [651D— Stadium, 148, 202 [203B]
K]; plans, 640, 643, 644, 647 [649, 651L]; Athens, 148 [1468]; Delphi, 148;
rejas, 648, 12703; retablos, 643, 647, 648; Ephesus, 148; Epidauros, 148 [1068];
roofs, 648, 12713; sculpture, 643 bis, 644 Olympia, 148 [105B]; Roman, 215
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1352 INDEX

Stafford (Staffs.), Upmeads, 1007 [1001E] Steeple Aston Church (Oxon.), bench-end
Stained glass, 310 [5174]
Belgian and Dutch, 840; British, 1011, Steeples, 12725 see Spires and ‘Towers
IOIQ, 10553 Continental European, 1116; Stefano, Palazzo, Taormina, 624 [626B]
English, 423, 493, 509 bis, 565 (ii); Steiner House, Vienna, 1072 [1073C]
French, 534, 538 61s, 542, 565 (i), 1080; Steinfurt (Germany), two-storeyed church,
German, 594, 808; Gothic, 298, 371, 3725 363
664 (i); Romanesque, 3523 Spanish, 643, Stele, 25, 63; Greek, 151, 158, 1272 [157G,
644, 648 bis, 862 162D, 163D]
Staircase: Stellar vaulting, 393, 398 bis, 502 bis, 565
Ashburnham House, London, 905, (ii) [3996]
967 [904A, 971J]; Aston Hall, Warwicks., Stent, F. W. (archt.), 1151
881 [975B]; Blickling Hall, Norfolk, 881, Step Pyramid, Sakk4ra, 17,26, 27-30 [28-9]
[975B, Cc]; Chateau de Blois, 555, 773 Stephenson, David (archt.), 950
[558E, 771A, C]; Chateau de Chambord, Stephenson, George (engineer), 989
773 [772D, G]; Chateau de Maisons, 780; Stephenson, Robert (engineer), 989
Knole House, Kent, 881 [879c]; Laurent- Stepped gables, 573, 811, 812, 817, 823,
ian Library, Florence, 714 [7168]; 836, 1080
Opera House, Paris, 1086 [1089c]; Stewart, George (archt.), 950
Orchard, Chorley Wood, The, 1000; Stewart (A. T.), Store, New York, 1152
Palazzo Farnese, Caprarola, 713 [711C]; Stewkley Church (Bucks.) [4916]
Palazzo Municipale, Genoa, 688 [690D]; *Stile Liberty’, 1065
Petit Palais, Paris, 1086 [1089c]; Rue de ‘Stilting’ of arches, 307, 309, 319, 397, 1272
Turin, Brussels [1069D] [373B, 1256, No. 4] ;
Staircase tower, 773 [771C] Stirling (Scotland), Cowane’s Hospital, 525
Staircases: [520], K] .
Aegean, 92, 98 [99F]; Belgian and Stoa (portico), 102, 147, 243 (i), 1272; Atta-
Dutch, 574, 840 [838] ;double, 773, 792 lus II, at Athens, 147, 155 [105A, 158]5
[772G]; English Renaissance [971], L]5 Delphi [106A]; Epidauros [106B]; Eu-
French Gothic, 555 [558E]; French Re- menes, at Athens, 147 [103B, I04C];
naissance, 773 061s, 785, 792 [77IA, C, Poikilé, Athens [105A]; Poikileé, Olympia,
772D, G]; German Renaissance, 812; 147 [105B]
horseshoe, 812; Italian Renaissance, 708, Stock Exchange, Amsterdam, 1093 [1095a]
726, 748 [7IIC, 715C]; Persian, 86, 87 Stockbridge (Hampshire), Marsh Court,
[774]; Roman, 213; Spanish, 644, 846, 1007
855; terraced, 785; Tudor, 394 [4004] Stakioins (Sweden): City Hall, 1068, 1093
Stalactite ceilings, 324, 329 [1096]; City Library, 1094 [10994]; Ex-
Stalls, 1272 hibition (1930), 1111 [10778] ;Engelbrekt
Belgian and Dutch, 578, 582; English Church, 1080 [1082B]; Hogalid Church,
Mediaeval, 509, 510 [517D, F, G]; English 1080 [1082c]
Renaissance, 878 [915A, 977M]; German, Stocklet House, Brussels, 1072 [1073B]
594 [595E, 596F, H]; Italian, 633 [631D- Stockton House (Wilts.), 882, 886, 967
F]; Spanish, 643 bis, 644, 653, 856 [651C] [975A]
Stambhas, 1180 Stoke d’Abernon Church (Surrey), 509
Stamford (Lincs.): All Saints [503k]; Bede Stoke Bruerne Park (Northants.), 905, 931
House, 479 [480H-K]; S. John [503Vv]; [966N]
tomb of Lord Burghley, 974 [9765] Stoke Hall (Derbyshire) [9048]
Stanchions, ‘H’ section, 1047, I1123 see Stokesay Castle (Salop), 443, 448 [4424-G];
also Pillars and Pilotis hall, 434, 447 [442A, B, D, E]
Stanton, William (mason), 905 Stone, Nicholas (master-mason), 870, 898
Stanton Harcourt (Oxon.), kitchen, 451 Stone Church (Kent), 393
Stanway House (Glos.), 881 ‘Stone Row’, 3
Staple Inn, London, 885 Stonehenge (Wilts.), 3, 382, 389 [1, 2G]
Star Inn, Alfriston, 483 [484G] Stoneleigh | (Warwicks.), | ornamented
State Capitol, Richmond, Va., 1147 [11454] moulding [508E]
State House, Boston, Mass., 1147 Stopham Bridge (Sussex), 489 [487]
Station, Amstel Suburb, Amsterdam, 1111 Stoughton House, Cambridge (Mass.),
[rr09B] 1143 [1142D]
Stazione Termini, Rome, 1111 [1113] Stourbridge (Cambs.), capital at [503D]
Stedum (Holland), church, 577 Stow Bardolph Church (Norfolk), 433
Steel, structural, 1066, 1071, 1075 [4354]
Steel Church, Presse, Cologne, 1085 [1084c] Stowe House (Bucks.), 937 [9354]
Steel-framed buildings, 983, 995, 1035 “Strapwork’, 774, 812, 823, 869, 973, 974
quater, 1047, 1054, 1079, I1I7 bis, 1058, 1272 [891A, 892D, E, 977B, C, E]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1353
Strasbourg Cathedral (France), 542, 547 Surgeon, House of the, Pompeii, 233
[362s, 374G]; doorways in, 542 [362s, [249F]
547C, D]; model of [3746]; western Susa (Persia), arch at, 222; Archer and Lion
facade, 542 [5474] friezes, 87 [76F, G]; palaces at, 75 [76F, G]
Stratford-on-Avon (Warwicks.): grammar Suspension bridges, Chinese, 1207
school, 474; misericord [517J]; Shake- Sutton Coldfield, Warwicks., school at, 474
speare Memorial Theatre, 1047-8 Sutton Courtenay, Berks., timber roof, 434,
[1046D] 451 [sooc]
Stratton Park (Hants.), 948 Sutton Place, Guildford, 380, 386, 394, 463
Strawberry Hill, Twickenham, 875, 876, [457C, 458E-H]
938, 948 [9444] Swan House, Chichester, 937, 967 [940A]
Street, George Edmund (archt.), 990-1, 1025 Swansea (Glamorgan.), City Hall, 1035
Street of the Tombs, Pompeii, 217 [1032c]
Strickland, W. (archt.), 1151, 1152 Swart, P. de (archt.), 831
String courses, 1272 Swiss Hostel, Cité Universitaire, Paris,
Strong, E. (archt.), 955 1079 [10774]
Strozzi, Palazzo, Florence (Italy), 657, 684, Sydney (Australia): Fort Macquarie, 1058;
707 [685] ; Government House, 1058; Hyde Park
Stuart, James, and Nicholas Revett, 875 Barracks, 1058; S. James’s Church, 1058
Stuart architecture, 660, 867, 868, 897-928 Syon House, Isleworth, 938 [942A, B]
character of, 870-1; columns, 973; Syracuse: amphitheatre at, 213; Cathedral,
Inigo Jones phase of, 870-1, 897-906; 262 [263c]; Temple of Apollo at, 111,
meaning of term, 870; ornament, 974; 112; Temple of Athena, 262 [263c];
plans, 964, 967 [966]; roofs, 9733 walls, theatre at, 147, 210
967; Wren phase of, 870, 871, 906-28 Syria: architecture in, 82; basilican churches
Stucco, 769, 774, 801 (i), 802 (i), 802 (ii), 812 in, 262, 265 [260J—M]; colonnaded streets
bis, 818, 823, 1000 bis, 1035, 1058, 1272 in, 225 bis; Muslim architecture, 1229
English Renaissance, 876, 967; Greek, Syro-Hittite architecture, 82, 85
90; Indian, 1118; Proto-Baroque use of,
659, 671, 797; 713
Stucco Reliefs, Tomb of the, Cerveteri, 183 “Tabby’, 1143
Stupas, 1179, 1180, 1183 bis, 1272 Tabernacle work, 648, 653
Stuttgart (Germany), Railway Station, 1104 Tabernacles, Belgian and Dutch [581a];
[1107B] English Mediaeval, 509 bis [515], L]3
Style Ogivale (= French Gothic, g.v.), 534 German, 594; Italian, 752 [750A]
Styles of English Mediaeval, 386, 389 Tabernae (shops), Roman, 235 [185D]
Stylobate, 94, 119, 131, 213, 1272 [95C, G]; Tablet-flower ornament, 506, 509 [508Q, R]
Italian, 608 Tablinum (living-room), 229, 233 [232B, E;
Sucre (Bolivia), College of San Francisco 238a]
Javier, 1136 Tabriz (Iran), Blue Mosque, 1235
Suleymaniye, Istanbul, 1237 [1239] Tabularium, Rome, 184, 714 [171A, 182B]
Sullivan, Louis (archt.), 1127, 1148, I152, Tacoma Building, Chicago, 1152
II55, 1168 guint Taenia, III
Sultan Ahmed, Mosque of, Istanbul, 1237 ‘Tai Ho Tien’ Hall of Highest Peace,
Sultan Barkik, Tomb of, Cairo, 1230 Peking, 1206
[1251] Taj Mahal, Agra, 1242, 1245 [1240D, 1244,
Sultan Hasan, Mosque of, Cairo, 1230 1247A, B]
[1232C¢, D] Takht-i-Bhai, monastery at, 1183 [1182B];
Sultan Muhammad II, Mosque of, Istan- vihara at, 1183
bul, 289, 1237 Talenti, Francesco (archt.), 613 bis, 614
Sultaniya (Iran), Tomb of Khudabanda Talman, William (archt.), 872
Khan, 1235 Tangmere Church (Sussex) [491H]
Summer Palace, Peking, 1206, 1207 [12034] Tanjore (India), Great Temple, IIQI
Sun, Great Temple of the, Palmyra, 194 [11938] |
Sun, Pyramid of the, Mexico, 1128 [1129D] Tanner, Sir Henry (archt.), 995
Sun Fire Office, Threadneedle Street, Taormina (Sicily): Palazzo Stefano, 624
London, 1036 [6268]; Roman theatre, 210
Sun House, Hampstead, 1007 [10054] Tapestries, 506, 509, 582, IO19
Sung Yiieh Ssti Pagoda, Honan, 1202 Tapper, Sir Walter (archt.), 1012
Sunium (Greece), Temple of Poseidon at, Tarputry (India), temple, 1180 [1190B]
112 Tarragona (Spain), 183; aqueduct in, 236
Superga, the, Turin, 695, 729 [6944] Tattershall Castle (Lincs.), 444 [440Cc,
Superimposed Orders, Greek and Roman 445G-N] ;chimney-pieces, 510 [4456, J]
compared, 243 Taunton (Somerset), S. Mary [511]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1354 INDEX

Tavera Hospital, Toledo, 851 [849A] Temples, Egyptian (cont.)

Taxila (Pakistan), Buddhist architecture at, Mammisi, Dendera, 49; Mammisi, Island
I180, 1183 of Elephantine, 43, 49 [38A-D]; of
Taylor, Sir Robert (archt.), 874, 948 bis, 955 Mentuhetep, Dér el-Bahari, 18, 36, 39
Tchoga-Zanbil (Persia), ziggurat at, 70 [32F]; of Rameses III, Medinet-Habu, 36
[68c] [48a]; the Ramesseum, Thebes, 18, 36,
Tea-houses, Japanese, 1218 [1216B] 44 [37D, 54H]; of Sebek and Haroeris,
Teatro Farnese, Parma, 691 [693D, F] K6m Ombo, 49 [37F]; of Seti I, Abydos,
Teatro Marittimo, Tivoli [241D] 18, 43-4 [37B, 41B]
Teatro Olimpico, Vicenza, 691, 738 [693B] Temples, Greek, 7, 23, 93, 107-41
Tebessa (N. Africa): Arch of Caracalla, of Aphaia, Aegina, I12, 115 [113D,
225 [224k]; forum at, 184 154B]; of Apollo, Corinth, 112; of Apollo,
Tecton (archts.), 1008 bis, 1035 Delos, 112 [113G]; of Apollo, Delphi
Tekkiya Mosque, Damascus, 1238 [106A]; of Apollo, Didyma, 107, 108, 128,
Telamones, 155, 1273 131, 139 [IOQN, I41J-P, 165B]; of Apollo,
Telesterion, at Eleusis, 147 Syracuse, III, 112; of Apollo Epicurius,
Telford, Thomas (engineer), 964, 989 Bassae, 112, 123-5, 128, 129 bis, 244 (i)
Tell el-Amarna (Egypt): palace and temple [124, 127C, 138F]; of Artemis, Ephesus,
at, 18, 50; typical mansion at [52B]; 86, 128, 129, 244 (1), 283 [127A, E, 130]3
workers’ dwellings at, 50 of Artemis, Epidauros [106B] ; of Artemis-
Tell Tayanat (Turkey), 85 [83c] Cybele, Sardis, 128; of Asclepius, Epi-
Temenos, 1273; Greek 102 [130A]; Roman, dauros [106B]; old temple of Athena,
188 Athens, 133 [103B, 104c]; of Athena,
Tempietto at S. Pietro in Montorio, Rome, Syracuse, 262 [268c]; of Athena Polias,
673, 701 [692A, 700A—C] Priene, 128, 131, 155 [127F, 132G—M]
Temple, The, London, 885; aerial view, of Concord, Agrigentum, 112; of
1938 [8894] Demeter, Paestum, III, 115 [113B]; of
Temple, Chinese garden [1204M] Dionysos, Teos, 128; the Erechtheion,
Temple Bar, London (now at Theobald’s Athens, 137, 140 (i) [103B, IO4A, 134,
Park), 928 [924D, 925W] 135A, 136]; of Hephaestus, Athens, see
Temple Church, London, 265, 305, 390 Theseion; of Hera, Olympia, 112 [105B,
[388]; arches of, 496 [388B]; nave and II4C, F]; of Hera, Samos, 107, 128; of
aisles, 393, 5873; piers of, 505; vaulting Hera Lacinia, Agrigentum, 112; on the
rib [507L] Tlissus, Athens, 108, 129, 131-3 [109D,
Temple Dinsley (Hertfordshire), 1007 127B, 132A-F, 160C]; at Miletus, see
[1004c] Apollo, Didyma; of Nemesis, Rhamnus,
Temple Pyramid, Xochicalco, 1128 [1129] 108 [109A]; of Niké Apteros, Athens,
Temple of the Scottish Rite, Washington, 128, 129, 133, 143 [103B, I04B, 135B,
II51 [1149D] 142H]
Temple-shaped tombs, 217, 218, 221 the Parthenon, Athens, 119, 121-3,
Temples in the Americas, 1125 247 (i), 1151 [103, 104, IIOA, B, I13F, 122,
San Juan Teotihuacan, 1128 [1129p]; 144B]; the Philippeion, Olympia, 108
Tenayuca, 1128 [1129B]; Xochicalco, [109F]; of Poseidon, Paestum, 111, 115
1128 [1129] [113C, II4A, B, D, G, 119]; of Poseidon,
Temples, Chinese, 1202, 1209 Sunium, 112; at Segesta, Sicily, 112; at
of Agriculture, Peking, 1202 [1204p]; Selinus, Temple ‘B’, 108 [109c]; Temple
Anhui, 1198; Confucian, Kuo Tzu Chien, ‘C’, 112; Temple G.T., 108, 112 [1091];
Peking, 1202 [1204P]; of Heaven, Peking, the Theseion, Athens, 108, 119 [109],
1201, 1202; of Honan, Canton, 1202 118B]; of Zeus, Olympia, 119 [105B,
[1204N]; Sacrificial Hall of Yung Lo, 118A]; of Zeus Olympius, Agrigentum,
Peking, 1202; of Sleeping Buddha, Pe- 107, 108, 115 [109G, 114J-L]; of Zeus
king, 1202, 1205 [12034] Olympius (Olympieion), Athens, 107,
Temples, Egyptian, 5, 7, 17-18, 23, 36-49, 108, 139, 140, 155 [109H, 146A, 162A]
50; 152, 371 Temples, Indian and Pakistani, 1179, 1183-
Abu-Simbel, rock temples at, 18, 44 1193
bis [37E, 45]; of Ammon (Great Temple), Amber, 1188 [1186c]; of the Sikhs,
Karnak, 17 bis, 18, 39 [6, 40, 41A]; of Amritsar, 1187; Baroli, 1187 [1190c];
Ammon, Luxor, 18, 43 [42B]; of Aten, Bellur, 1188 [1198B, 1194J]; Bhuvanesh-
Tell el-Amarna, 18; Gerf-Hosein, rock war, 1187 bis [1186B]; Birla, New Delhi,
temple at, 44 [37C]; of Hathor, Dendera, 1188; Brindaban [1194G—-H]; Chandra-
49 [48B]; of Hatshepsut, Dér el-Bahari, vati, 1187; Conjeeveram, 1191; Ele-
20, 36, 39, 182 [37A, 42A]; of Horus, phanta, 1175, 1191, 1195 [1185B]; Ellora,
Edfu, 49, 51 bis [37G]5 of Isis, Philae, 44 1175, 1180, 1188 [1185a]; Sas Bahu,
[46, 47]; of Khons, Karnak, 36, 39 [38E]; Gwalior, 1187 [1189]; Hallabid, 1188
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1355
Temples, Indian and Pakistani (cont.) PCG Minor), Temple of Dionysos at,
[1194C, D]; Jhaulian, 1179, 1195; Kana- 12
rak, 1187 [1194C, D]; Karli, 1180 [1181]; Tepidarium, 202, 205, 283, 1273 [203B,
Khajuraho, 1187 bis [1190D]; Madura, 204A, B]
119i [1190A]; Mamallapuram, 1188; Terheun House, Hackensack, N.J., 1132
Mount Abu, 1183, 1195 [1184A]; in Terra-cotta, 983 bis, 989, 990, 991, 999,
Orissa, 1187 [1186B]; Pattadakal, 1187; 1007, 1055, 1061, 1086, I112, 1273; Eng-
Puri, 1187; Ranpur, 1183; Somnathpur, lish, 380, 463, 864; Etruscan, 174,
1188; Srirangam, r19I [1194F]; Tanjore, 180 bis, 183 [181H]; Greek, 155; Indian,
1191 [1193B]; Tarputry, 1180; Tinne- I 1753 Italian, 600, 603, 604, 613; Roman,
velly, 1191; Udaipur, 1187 I
Temples, Japanese, 1213, 1219, 1220 Terraced houses, 948, 949
of Hommonji, Tokyo, 1214; at Terragni, Giuseppe (archt.), 1094
Horiuji, 1214; of Kaniji-Yama, Isé, 1214 Tertiaire period of French Gothic, 534
[1220]; Kurodani, Kidéto, 1214 [1215A]; Tetbury Church (Glos.), 950 [953B]
Miyo-Jin-Kanda, Tokyo, 1214 [1216]; Tetrastyle, 107, 108, 137, 1273 [109C, D,
at Nara, 12133 at Nikk6, 1213 [1221] 377A]; Corinthian, 151; Ionic, 131, 133
Temples, Roman, 6, 169, 170, 175, 184-201 Tewkesbury Abbey, 390, 398; chantry
of Agrippa, Rome, 197; at Alatri, 180 chapels, 473
[r81L]; of Antoninus and Faustina, Theatine Church, Munich, 817 [8168]
Rome, 188 [189D, E, F, 246J]; of Bacchus, Theatre:
Baalbek [193A, C, E, G]; of Castor and Aspendus, 210; Champs Elysée, Paris,
Pollux, Rome, 187-8, 244 (ii) [191]; of 1093 [1106B]; Delphi, 147 [106A]; of
Concord, Rome, 187 [182B]; of Diana, Dionysos, Athens, 147, 148, 210 [104c,
Nimes, 188, 240 (ii) [192F-L]; of Fortuna 144A]; Epidauros, 143, 147 [144C, 145A,
Virilis, Rome, 187 [160D, 172A, I89A—C]; B]; Fiesole, 210; Frangais, Paris, 1063;
of Hercules, Cora, 112, 244 (ii) [160B] of Marcellus, Rome, 209, 213, 914 [165N,
of Juno, Rome, 225; of Juno Sospita, 208A]; New, Berlin, 817; Odeion of
Lanuvium, 180 [181H, J]; of Jupiter, Herodes Atticus, Athens, 148, 210
Baalbek, 194, 283 [193A, B, F]; of Jupiter, [103B, 104c]; Olympia, 147 [105B];
Pompeii [2268]; of Jupiter, Rome, 225; Orange, 149 [145D-G]; Ostia, 210 [2088];
of Jupiter, Spalato, 194, 229 [231D]; of Pompeii, 210 [145c]; Syracuse, 147, 2103
Jupiter Capitolinus, Rome, 140, 180 Taormina, 210; Timgad, 210; Verulam-
[I71B, 182A]; of Jupiter Stator, Rome ium, 210
[232E]; of Jupiter Victor, Rome Theatres: Georgian, 956; Greek, 143-7,
[232E] 152; Roman, 8, 170, 187, 209-10
Maison Carrée, Nimes, 188 [190E-G]; [145D-G, 2084]
of Mars Ultor, Rome, 187 [182B, 190]; Thebes (Egypt): Ramesseum, 18, 36, 44
Great Temple of the Sun, Palmyra, 194; [37D]; Tombs of the Kings, 18 7s, 35-6
the Pantheon, Rome, 197-8, 290, 855 [32L-Q]; Tutankhamen’s tomb, 18 [59]
[196, 199]; of Portunus, Rome, 199 Theobald’s Park (Herts.), Temple Bar at,
[172A]; of Saturn, Rome, 188 [182B, 928
189G, H, J]; of Trajan, Rome, 184 Theodoric, Tomb of, Ravenna, 297 [267R,
[1828]; of Venus, Baalbek, 198 [195G—J]; 296K-M, 299C]
of Venus Genetrix, Rome [182B]; of Theotokos, Church of the, Constantinople,
Venus and Rome, Rome, 187, 261 290
[192A-E]; of Vespasian, Rome, 188, 244 Thermae, Roman, 8, 148, 170, 187, 202-9,
(ii) [165M, T, 182B]; of Vesta, Rome, 194 215, 229 [249B]
[195A-C]; of Vesta, Tivoli, 194, 955 of Agrippa, Rome, 206; of Caracalla,
[195D-F] ay Rome, 176, 202, 205-6, 283 [177K, L,
Temples, West Asiatic, 62, 66, 69-70, 73, 203-4]; of Diocletian, in Rome, 176, 178
753 78 793 81-2 bis, 202, 205, 206, 714 [177M; 207];
Bishapur, 79; Boghazkéy, 81 [83E]; frescoes in, 247 (ii), 371 [2498]; Pompeii,
Feruz-abad, 79; Ishchali, 70 [678]; 206; Timgad, 206; of Titus, Rome, 206,
Khafaje, 69 [674A]; of Marduk, Babylon, 707; 751, 752 [249B]; of Trajan, Rome,
206
70; of Nabu, Khorsabad, 73; Naksh-i-
Thersilion, at Megalopolis, 147
Rustam, 78 [77c]; Nimroud, 73 [714]; Theseion, Athens, 108, 119 [109J, 118B];
Ur, 69 [68B]; White, Warka, 69 [68a];
Doric work in, III, 112, 155 [I13E, 120,
Yazilikaya, 82 [83D] 160A]; peristyle ceiling of, 243 (i)
Tenayuca (Mexico), Pyramid Temple, 1128 Thessalonica, see Salonica
[11298] Thetford (Norfolk), motte at, 437
Tengbom, Ivar (archt.), 1068, 1080 Thi, Mastaba of, SakkAra, 26 [24F, G]
Tenno-ji Pagoda, Osaka, 1214 [1216G]
Thiene, Palazzo, Vicenza, 738
Tenochtitlan (Mexico), 1131 [1129F]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1356 INDEX

Thienen, Jakob van (archt.), 577 Timber roofs (cont.)

Tholos: Delphi, 139; Epidauros, 108, 139 433, 434 [435B, E]; trussed-rafter, 433
[106B, IO9E, 138H]; Olympia (Philip- ter, 447, 451 [435A];types of English
peion), 139 church, 433-4, 437 [435]; types of Eng-
Thomas, Sir Percy (archt.), 1035 lish secular [500]
Thomas of Canterbury, S., chapel dedi- Time and Life Building, Rockefeller
cated to, Toledo, 643 Centre, New York, 1156 [11544]
Thomson, Alexander (archt.), 987, 988, Timgad (N. Africa), 183; basilica at, 202
IOII forum at, 184; four-sided arch at, 225;
Thoresby House (Notts.), 872 houses in, 235; theatre at, 210; Thermae
Thornbury Castle (Glocs.), 444 at, 206
Thornhill, Sir James (painter), 906, 9743 Timur (‘Tamerlane’), 1235
building designed by, 932 T’ing type of Chinese building, 1202, 1206,
Thornton, Dr. William (archt.), 1147, 1148 1208, 1209
Thorpe, John (archt.), 870; drawings col- Tinnevelly (India), Hindu Temple, 1191
lected by, 869, 870 Tiryns (Greece), Palace at, 98, 101 [99C]
Thorpe, Thomas (chief mason), 870, 881 Tithe barns, 483 [488A, B]
Thorpe Hall (Northants.), 905, 937, 964 Titus: Arch of, Rome, 222, 247 (ii), 963
[907D, 964M] [223A—-G]; Thermae of, 206, 707, 751, 752
Thorwaldsen Museum, Copenhagen, 1085
Threekingham (Lincs.), capital at [503M]
[2498]
Tivoli (Italy):
i
‘Teatro Marittimo’ [241D];
Throne: Aegean alabaster, 98 [99D]; Temple of Vesta, 194, 955 [195D-F];
bishop’s, 258, 421, 509, 653 [255E, 332A, Villa d’Este, 713 [693A, 715A]; Villa of
5I7E, 915A]; Greek priest’s, 147 [144A]; Hadrian, 235 [241D]
S. Peter’s, Rome, 719 Todi (Italy), S. Maria della Consolazione,
Throne Hall, Persepolis, 78 [76a] 702 [704]
Thumb, Peter (archt.), 823 Tokyo (Japan), Palaces of the Shoguns,
Tiahuanaco (Bolivia), Caen of the Sun, 1217; Temple of Miyo-Jin-Kanda,
1131 [1129C] 1214 [1216A]; tombs of the Shoguns,
Tiberius, Arch of: Orange, 221-2 [226a]; 1214 bis
Pompeii, 225 Toledo (Spain), 636, 648
Tie-bars, 627, 671, 677, 1273 Alcazar, 846, 851, 855 [848A, 854A];
Tie-beam roofs, 329, 433-4, 627 [435B, E] bridge at, 239; Cathedral, 640, 643, 617
Tierceron ribs, 397-8, 502, 1273 [634B, 638B, 642B, 649D]; Puente de Al-
Tijou, Jean (metal worker), 463, 906 cantara, 644; Puerta del Sol, 647 [646H];
Tilbrook Church (Hunts.) [5165] S. Cristo de la Luz, 1233; S. Juan de los
Tile Hill, Coventry, church at, 1019 Reyes, 644 [638c, 641D]; Sinagoga del
[1017B] Transito, 640; Tavera Hospital, 851
Tile ribs, 209 [849A, B]
Tiles: Greek, 155; ‘mathematical’, 938; Tolsa, Manuel (archt.), 1135
Roman, 197, 209 Tom Tower, Oxford, 914 [925s]
Tilework, British, 999, 1000, IOII, 1035, Tomb at: Cnidos, 151 [1503]; Dougga, 151
10543; Spanish, 643, 855, 862 [220R]; Mylasa, 151 [220A—D]; Rolls
Timber buildings: Burmese, 1175 ; Chinese, Chapel, London, 380
1208-9; Indian, 1175; Japanese, 1217; Tomb of (see also Mausoleum):
Turkish, 1238 ‘Agamemnon’, at Mycenae, see Trea-
Timber domes, 289 sury of Atreus; the Alcove, Cerveteri,
Timber forms in stone architecture, 94, 183; Altamsh, 1238; Annia Regilla,
T2125 Rome, 218 [219A]; Bishop Bridport, at
Timber-framed houses, 791, 983 Salisbury, 509 [472B]; Cardinal D’Am-
Timber roofs, 66, 85, 86 boise, Rouen [789B]; Caecilia Metella,
aisle, 433, 437 [4356, J]; arch-braced, Rome, 217 [220J]; Cecrops, Athens, 133;
433, 434, 502 bis [442B]; Byzantine, 280; Charlemagne, Aix-la-Chapelle, 357, 3873
collar-braced, 433, 434 [467B]; double Chaucer, Westminster, 473 [472K];
hammer-beam, 437. [435L]; Early Chihl Duktaran, Damghan, 1235; ‘Cly-
Christian, 265, 297; English, 421, 430, temnestra’, at Mycenae, 102; Constantia,
433-4) 437 447, 479 [435, 478F, 560]; Rome, 297; Culpepper, at Goudhurst,
French, 565 (i); Gothic, 662 (i) [369c, Els3 878, 974 [976c]; Cyrus, at Pasargadae,
Greek, 94, 107, 148, 152, 243 (i) bis; 1S
open, 430, 433, 502, 662 (i); hammer- Darius I, at Naksh-i-Rustam, 78, 86
beam, 430, 433, 434, 437, 502 ter, 1265 [77B]; Ferdinand and Isabella, Granada,
[435F, H, L]; Renaissance, 662 (ii);
855; Edward the Confessor, 427 [424D,
Roman, 187, 201; Romanesque, 316,
4253]; Eleanor (Queen), Westminster
319, 320, 324, 329, 348, 363; tie-beam, Abbey [5§18a-c]; Elizabeth of York, 427,
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1357
Tomb of (cont.) Tombs (cont.)
881; El Khasne, at Petra, 221 [220N]; 218; rock-hewn, see Rock-hewn tombs;
Galla Placidia, Ravenna, 258, 297, 298 Roman, 215, 217-21, 293 [219-20, 237B,
“TP
[277B, 296F-J]; Gens Cornelia, Rome, c]; S. Paul’s Crypt, 906; of the Shoguns,
217 Tokyo, 1214 bis; Spanish, 653, 855 bis,
Henry III, Westminster [472M]; 856 [651D-L]; Street of the, Pompeii,
Henry VII, Westminster, 427, 490, 868, 217; temple-shaped, 151, 217, 218, 221;
881 [424D, 428, 879A]; Honorius, Rome Westminster Abbey, 974 [424D]
[259c]; Humayiin, Delhi, 1242 [1240]; Tomé, Narciso (archt.), 845, 852
Teyasu, Nikk6, 1214; Imam Riza, Mash- Tonbridge (Kent), house at, 469 [464c]
had, 1235; the Julii, at S. Rémy, 221 Tonbridge School, 474
[220H]; Khnemhetep, at Beni Hasan, 35; Tontine Crescent, Boston (Mass.), 1143
Khudabanda Khan, Sultaniya, 1235; Toorak (Australia), Church of S. John the
Landgrave Henri, at Marburg, 597 Evangelist, 1059
[596K]; Lord Burghley, Stamford, 974 Topsfield, Mass., Capen House, 1131
[976E]; Louis XII, S. Denis, 791 [11334] ;
[789c] Toranas (ceremonial gateways), 1180, 1201,
Mary of Burgundy, Bruges, 582; Mas- 1205
tino II of the Scaligers, 633 [6298]; Torcello (Italy): campanile, 262 [270];
Medici, Florence, 714 [716A]; Muham- Cathedral, 262 [268, 270]; parapet panel
mad Ghaus, Gwalior, 1242; Mumine at [300H]; S. Fosca, 262, 290 [270]
Khatun, Nakhshewan, 1235; Naevoleia Torii, 1219; Japanese, 1180
Tyche, Pompeii [220m]; Napoleon, Paris Toronto (Ontario): City Hall, 1151; Uni-
[800A]; Pancratii, Rome, 218 [219C]; versity College, 1148
Philibert le Beau, Brou [567F]; Pietro Torrazzo, the, Cremona, 608
Riario, Rome [754k]; Pir-i-Alamdar, Torre: Asinelli, Bologna, 317, 323; del
Damghan,1235; Rameses III, IV and IX, Clavero, Salamanca, 644; del Commune,
Thebes, 36; Regolini-Galassi, at Cerve- Verona, 608 [628D]; Garisenda, Bologna,
teri, 183 323
S. Agnese, Rome, 262; S. Antonio, Torre Tagle Palace, Lima, Peru, 1135
Padua [630c]; S. Peter Martyr, Milan Torrigiani, Pietro (sculptor), 380, 385,
[631A]; Salim Chishti, Fatehpur-Sikri, 881
1242; Sayyid Mubarak, Ahmadabad, Torus moulding, 128, 129, 133, 156, 1273
1241; Sayyid Usman, Ahmadabad, 1241; [164L, 165H, S]
the Secundini, near Tréves, 221; Seti I, Toscanella (Tuscany): S. Maria Maggiore
at Thebes, 36; Shah Zinda, Samarkand, [332c]; S. Pietro [332K]
1235; Sher Shah, Sahsaram, 1241; the Toulouse (France), Church of the Corde-
Shields and Spears, Cerveteri, 183; the liers, 549; Hotel d’Assezat, 779-80
Stucco Reliefs, Cerveteri, 183; Sultan [778c]; S. Sernin, 340, 549, 640, 647, 648
Barkik, Cairo, 1230 [1251] [341A, B, 351D] :
Theodoric, at Ravenna, 297 [267R, Tournai Cathedral, 573, 574; choir, 5745
296K-M, 299C]; Tutankhamen, at nave, 574; towers, 574; transepts, 574
Thebes, 18 [59]; the Valerii, Rome, 218 [s80B]; S. Piat Chapel, 574 [5816]
[219B]; the Weepers, Sidon, 151 [150K]; Tournus (France), S. Philibert, 344
Young, John, in Rolls Chapel, London, Touro Synagogue, Newport, Rhode Island,
380; Yung-ho, Peking, 1205; Yusuf ibn- 1136
Kutayyir, Nakhshewan, 1235 Tower:
Tomb-mosques, 1224, 1246 ‘of Babel’, 70; Bodleian Library, Ox-
Tombs, 19 ford, 897 [895A]; Devenish (N. Ireland),
Aegean, 101-2; Belgian and Dutch, 527 [528c]; Earls Barton [387A-c];
578, 582 [581G]; Byzantine, 293, 297 Huby’s, Fountains Abbey, 429 [432c];
[296F—-M]; Chinese, 1205-6; cruciform, Kilree (Co. Kilkenny), 527 [528J]; King
375 [296G]; Doge’s, Venice, 607; Charles’s, Chester, 489 [4878]; Morton’s,
Egyptian, 18, 23-36 [30L-Q]; English Lambeth Palace, 394; Peace, Ottawa,
Mediaeval [472K—M]; Etruscan, 174, 180, 1151; Pemberton, Chester, 489 [487C];
183 [181F, G]; French, 791 [789B-C, Pisa’s ‘leaning’, 319 [313A, 314A; D]; S.
800A]; Greek, 148-51, 152 [135C, 149, Edward’s, Westminster Cathedral, 1011;
150]; Italian, 633, 714 [629B, 630C, 631A, S. Sernin, Toulouse, 340; Sompting
716A] ‘ [387D, E]; Tom, Christ Church, Oxford,
Japanese, 1214-15; of the Kings, 914 [9258]; Verona, 323 [325A]; Victoria,
Westminster, 1020; of the Winds,
Thebes (Egypt), 33-6 [30L-Q]; of the
Athens, 139, 140, 152, 950 [138], 141F-H,
Ming Dynasty, 205; monumental, 217-
218; Ostia, 217; Persian, 77 [77B]; pre- 162B, C]
217, Tower Block, Harlow New Town, 1008
historic, 3; pyramidal, Roman,
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1358 INDEX

Tower-houses, 444 ter Town walls, see Walls (city and town)
Tower-keeps, 438 [440A] Townsend, C. H. (archt.), 992, 1026
Tower of London, 380, 438 [436]; Bloody Trabeated style, 9, 23, 155, 1273; Greek,
Tower [436H]; Byward Tower [436F]; 93-4, 97, 240 (i), 243 (i), 367; Roman
Keep, 390, 438; S. John’s Chapel, adoption of, 174, 240 (ii), 367
see S. John’s Chapel; White Tower Tracery, 329, 371, 1273
[436D, E,G] ‘bar and plate’, 496, 562; Belgian and
Tower of the Winds, Athens, 1020 Dutch, §78 ter; British, 996, 1012, 1026;
Towers: : double, 594; English, 381, 393, 496, 501,
Anglo-Saxon [387B-E, G, J]; battle- 510 [499]; Flamboyant, 522, 559, 562 (i);
mented, 10253 bell, 1025, see Bell tower; French, 792 bis; German, 593, 594, 8115
British, 996, 1008, 1012 [1015B]; burial, Italian, 608 bis, 614 bis; Spanish, 640 brs,
Bolivia, 1125, 1131; campanili, see Cam- 647 bis, 648, 633
panile; cathedral western, 376; Chinese, Trachelion, 111, 115, 1273
1201; clock, 1042; English Mediaeval, Tragic Poet, House of the, Pompeii, 233
394, 438, 489 bis, 562 (ii) [487B, C; 492] Trajan:
Gothic, 340, 375, 661 (i); Belgian and Arch of, Ancona, 222 [224]]; Arch of,
Dutch, 573, 574; 577, 5783; French, 537 Beneventum, 222 [377D]; Column of,
bis, 541 bis, 542 bis, 562 (1); German, 587, Rome, 184, 201, 227, 719 [182B, 200B,
588 bis, 593; Irish, 527; Italian, 609, 624; 228A-F]; Forum of, Rome, 178, 184, 201
Scottish, 521, 522; Spanish, 636, 640, [182B, 185A—C, 186B, 246M]; Markets of,
643, 647 ‘ : Rome, 184 [185D-F, 186]; Temple of,
leaning, 319, 323; Perpendicular period, Rome, 184 [182B]; Thermae of, Rome,
394; polygonal, 363, 647 206
Renaissance, 661 (ii); French, 773, Trajan’s Basilica, Rome, 201 [182B, 200A,
779, 792; German, 811, 817 bis, 818; B]; libraries adjoining, 184, 201
Spanish, 852, 855, 856 [200B
Romanesque, 306, 309; French, 343, Trani Cathedral (Italy) [332pD]
347 bis; German, 358 bis, 363; Italian, Transepts, 258, 306, 308-9, 375, 1273
323, 329 ; [43IC, D]
staircase, 773 [771C]; Swedish, 1093; Belgian and Dutch, 574 ter [580B];
watch, 811; West Asiatic [74A, B, D] British, 1011 bis, 1042; English, 405, 421,
Town gateways and archways, Roman, 506, 559 (ii) [422B]; French, 559 (i)
225 [531A]; German, 587; Italian, 319; Span-
Town Hall: ish, 640, 643, 855, 1080 [637B, 641A,
Abingdon, 928 [927F]; Antwerp, 570, 10824]
831, 832 bis [829A]; Audenarde, 577, 582 Transoms, 501, 1273
[579A, 580E]; Bergen-op-Zoom, 582; Transverse ribs, 307, 397; 401 [373C]
Bruges, 570, 577 [579F]; Brunswick, Travellers’ Club, London, 707, 956, 996,
593; Brussels, 577 [579E]; Colchester, IOIg [102TA, B]
1026 [1029c]; Cologne, 593; Congleton Travertine stone, 168, 175, 187, 198, 210,
(Cheshire), 1025 [1029B]; Copenhagen, 217 bis, 312, 719
1086 [1091B]; Courtrai, 570, 582 [580D]; Treasuries, 108, 128; Delphi, 131 [106];
Damme, 577; Enkhuizen, 835 [826a]; Parthenon, 121
Ghent, 570, 577 [576A]; Gouda, 570; Treasury: of Atreus, Mycenae, 93, 101-2,
Groningen, 835; Guildford, 928 [971C]; 240 (i), §27 [100]; of Darius, Persepolis,
Halberstadt, 593; Hildesheim, 593; 78; of Minyas, Orchomenos, 102; Toledo
Hilversum, 1094 [1098B]; Leyden, 832 Cathedral, 643
[839D, G]; Lierre, 832 [833D]; Louvain, Treasury Buildings: Melbourne, 1059;
579, 577 [579G, 580A] Maca D.C., 1148; Whitehall,
Manchester, 1025 [1028A]; Manchester 95
old, 877; Middelburg, 570, 577; Mon- Trematon Castle (Cornwall), 438
mouth, 955 [927E]; Miinster, 593; New Tremblay, Henri (archt.), 1160
Orleans, 1139 [1138c]; Northampton, Treéves (Germany), see Trier
1025; Prague, 594 [592H]; Regensburg, Trevi, Fontana di, Rome, 729, 752 [730B,
593 [592G]; Ulm, 593; Veere, 570, 5773
Ypres, 570
tsal be
Trevigi, Girolamo Da (archt.), 385
Town halls, 463, 593, 955 [592G, H]; Triangulation of roofs, 93, 155, 176
Italian, 608 tae churches, 358 bis, 363, 573, 5935
Town houses: Elizabethan, 885; French 04
Gothic, 559 [552A, 554A, 557B, 558]; Tribunals, Roman, 201 [2008]
Georgian, 948-9 ; Jacobean, 897 Tribune Tower, Chicago, 1156
Town Planning, 995, 1000, 1007, 1036; ia 229, 233, 752, 1273 [232D, E,
Italian, 607, 623 [611D] 753)
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1359
Trier (Germany), 183 Tulip Hill, Anne Arundel County (Mary-
basilica at, 202; Cathedral, 358 [361a, land), 1135
364]; Igel Monument near, 221 [2201]; Tumuli, 3, 174, 183, 217
Liebfrauenkirche, 363, 587 [364, 589a, Tunis (N. Africa), Mosque of Zaytunah,
B]; Porta Nigra, 225 [216F]; S. Paulin, 1233
818 [822B] Tunnel vault, see Barrel vault
Triforium, 340, 348, 363, 573, 574, 640, Turbine factory, Berlin, 1104 [1107A]
1273; English Mediaeval, 393 bis, 493 bis Turin (Italy), 666
[424a, B]; French Gothic, 537 [544k]; campanile, 695 [694A]; Exhibition
Gothic, 375 Hall, rr1z [11r10c]; Palazzo Carignano,
Triglyphs, 94, 1273 [95B, 110A]; Doric, 695 [694B]; S. Lorenzo, 691; S. Sindone
III, 125,244 Chapel, 691 [693E]; Superga, the, 695,
Trilithon, the, Baalbek, 194 729 [6944]
Trinité, La, Caen, see Abbaye-aux-Dames Turkestan, Muslim architecture, 1234-7
Trinité, La, Falaise, 791 Turkey, Muslim architecture in, 1237-8
Trinity Almshouses: Mile End, London, Turner, Richard (archt.), 1041
956; Salisbury, 956 Turrets, 357 bis, 1273
Trinity Church: Boston (Mass.), 1147 angle, 525 bis, 780; Belgian and Dutch,
[1142A]; Ely, gor; New York, 1144; 578; British, 1012, 1025; domed, 1025;
Worcester, 479 English, 489 [971A]; French, 773, 7803
Trinity College, Cambridge, 473 [475B, German, 811; Gothic, 375; Italian, 608
922A] [628D]; Spanish, 640
Library, 714, 914 [92IF, 922A, 925z]; Tuscan Order, the, 96, 173, 174, 183, 244
Nevile’s Court, 882 [9224] (4; 11), 656, 812 [972]; columns, 174, 225;
Trinity College, Dublin, 963 English, 898; pilasters, 688
Trinity College, Oxford, 473; Chapel, 914 Tutankhamen, tomb of, Thebes, 18
[9228]; Garden Quadrangle, 914 [59]
Trinity Hall, Cambridge, 473 [475B] Twickenham (Middx.), Strawberry Hill,
Trinity Hospital, Castle Rising, 897 875, 876, 938, 948 [944A]
Trinity Hospital, Greenwich, 897 Twin Pen Pagodas, Soochow, 1205
Trippenhuis, the, Amsterdam, 835 [833E] Tympanum, 129, 1273
Triptychs, English Mediaeval, 509 [519B];
German,
597 [596c]
Tripylon at Persepolis, 78 [76c, 774] Udaipur (India), Hindu temple, 1187
Tristyle-in-Antis temples, Greek, 107 Udayagiri (India), Jain viharas, 1187
Triumphal arches, Roman, 221-2, 289, 770; Ulm (Germany): Cathedral, 588, 593, 594
785, 791 [223-4, 226A] [586D]; Town Hall, 593
Troja Palace, Prague, 812 [814A] Ulu Jami (Great Mosque’), Brusa, 1237
- Troyes (France): Cathedral, 541, 562 (i) bis Ulugh Beg, Mosque of, Samarkand,
[548c]; S. Urbain, 542 [5645] 1235
Trunch Church (Norfolk): gable cross Unas, Pyramid of, Sakkara, 17
[512D]; ornamented mouldings [508x, Unctuaria, 202
511K]; roof, 434 [435F] Undercrofts, 448, 1274
Truro Cathedral (Cornwall), 402, 1011 Unité d’ Habitation, Marseilles, 1079 [1078]
[ro10aA] United Nations Headquarters, New York,
Trussed-rafter roofs, 433 ter, 447, 451 1163 [11654]
[4354] : ; United Service Club, London, 956
Tsienchowfu (China), Bridge of 10,000 United States Capitol, Washington, D.C.,
Times Peace, 1207 1147 [1146aA]
Tuberculosis Sanatorium, Paimio, 1094 United University Club, London, 956
[r099C] _ Unity Temple, Oak Park (Illinois), 1147
Tudor architecture, 385, 389, 394, 987, 988, University: see Alcala, Antigua, Cambridge,
996, 1273 Harvard, Oxford, Salamanca, University
castles, 444; columns, 505; flying but- of London, University of Virginia
tress, 496 [497P]; manor houses, 452, University City (Mexico), 1160 [1161A]
459-63, 881; mouldings, 506; openings, University City, Rio de Janeiro, 1160
501; ornament, 510; plans, 490; vault- University College, London, 877, 963-4
ing, 401; walls, 493, 496 4 [9618]
Tudor rose ornament, 509, 510, 565 (ii) University College, Oxford, 473 [4754]
[508w, 511J] University College, Toronto, 1148
Tufa stone, 168, 175, 187, 198, 312, 336 University Hall, Brown University, Provi-
Tugendhat House, Brno, 1075 [1076] dence, R.I., 1140
Tuileries, Palais des, Paris, 774, 779 [775E University Library, old, Cambridge, 963
7773] [962B]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 1360 INDEX

University Museum, Oxford, 1020 [1024A, Vaulting (cont.)

B pean, III5; cross, 176, 307, 375, 3975
University of London, Senate House, 1035 501, 640, 751, 836 [3734-D]; domical,
resghlony nie
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va.,
. 792, 799, 818; Egyptian, 23
English Mediaeval, 306, 390, 393, 394,
1148 397-401, 565 (ii) [399, 400, 426B-E];
Unwin, Sir Raymond (archt.), 995 Anglo-Saxon period, 397, 501; Decor-
Upjohn, Richard (archt.), 1144 ated period, 393, 398, 502; Early English
Upmeads, Stafford, 1007 [1001E] period, 390, 397-8; Norman period, 390,
Uppingham School (Rutland), 885 397, 501; Perpendicular period, 393,
Upton S. Leonards (Glos.), nail-head 398; Tudor period, 401
moulding [508B] evolution of Gothic, 368, 371, 304,
Upwell S. Peter (Norfolk), lectern [518] 397-401 [370, 373, 399]; fan, 393, 398,
Ur (Iraq), ziggurat and precinct at, 69-70 427, 502 bis, 565 (ii) [399H, 426B-E]
68 B Gothic, 202, 368, 371, 662 (i) [369C, F,
Urbino (Italy), Ducal Palace, 695 [675B] 373]; Belgian and Dutch, 573, 578 [580F];
Urcel Church (France), font in [566G] French, 565 (i); German, 594; Italian,
Urnammu, Ziggurat of, Ur, 69 [688] 604, 627; Spanish, 648
Utrecht (Netherlands) : Cathedral, 573,574, glass and iron, 1064; groined, 343; in-
582. [575A, 839H]; S. Peter, 573, 582; filling of [373C, D]; intersecting, 10, 176
‘Zoudenbalch House’, 577 [370C, D]; octagonal, 647; open work,
Uxmal (Mexico), House of the Dwarf, 1128 852, 1042; parabolic, 1066, 1068, 1080;
pendant, 4o1 bis, 427, 502 [426C]; quadri-
partite, 307; raking, 213, 751
Val de Grace, Church of the, Paris, 792 Renaissance, 662 (ii); French, 785;
[7974] he German, 812, 818 bis; Italian, 751
Valencia: Audiencia, 856; Cathedral, 644, Roman, 176-8, 179 bis, 187, 202, 205,
647; La Lonja, 647 [646D]; Palace of the 213, 222, 229, 235, 243 (ii) [192D, 3734]
Marqués de Dos Aguas, 852 [857B]; Romanesque, 276, 307, 309, 329, 348,
Puerta de Serranos, 647 [646F] 357s 371 [310A, 370C, D, 373B]; English,
Valerii, Tomb of the, Rome, 218 [219B] 307; French, 348, 367 [310A]; German,
Valladolid (Spain), 636, 641, 643 bis, 647 307, 3573 Italian, 329
[642c, 650H]; Cathedral, 855 [859D]; _semicircular, 176; sexpartite, 307, 344
Churrigueresque style in, 846; Collegio bis, 501, 537 bis [370E]; shell, 1068, 1115;
de San Gregorio, 846; University, 852 stalactite, 324, 329; stellar, 393, 398 bis,
[850B] 502 bis, 565 (ii) [399G]; ‘stilted’, 307,
‘Valley Building’, near Pyramids, 26, 34, 309; Swiss, 1058
34-5, 39, 50 [24L, 314] See also Barrel-vaults, Ribbed vault-
Valmarana, Palazzo, Vicenza, 738 [742D] ing, Rib and panel, Roofs
Vanbrugh, Sir John (archt.), 872-3, 875, Vaults, tomb, 218 bis
928, 931 bis, 9325 9375 949 Vauvert (France), monastery at, 305
Vanderbilt Mansion, New York, 1143 Vaux-le-Vicomte, Chateau de, 780
Van Nelle Factory, Rotterdam, 1067, 1104— Vecchio, Palazzo, Florence, 623 [610¢,
1111 [I 109A] 750A]
Vanvitelli, Luigi (archt.), 206, 714 Veere (Netherlands): Church, 574; Guild
Vardy, John (archt.), 874, 938 Houses, 570; ‘Het Lammetje’, 577;
Vasanzio, Giovanni (archt.), 725 bis Town Hall, 570, 577
Vasari, Giorgio (archt. and author), 367, Velarium, 914, 1274 [212B]
624, 656, 708 Velde, Henri van de (archt.), 1065 bis, 1093
Vases, 802 (ii) [788D, E, 804C] Vence (France), carving at [351F]
Vasquez, F. Manuel (archt.), 855 Vendramin Monument, Venice [758]]
Vatican, the, Rome, 717 [720A] Vendramini, Palazzo, Venice, 731 [734D-G]
antiquities in, 206, 227; Cortili of S. ‘Venetian’ window, 932 [970Cc]
Damaso and Belvedere, 701 [720A, 721]; Venice (Italy):
gardens, 713; Giardino della Pigna of, angle window [229c]; balcony, 627
227, 701 [692C]; Loggie of, 707; rebuild- [612E]; brick and terra-cotta churches,
ing of, 696; Sistine Chapel, 633, 687, 713, 607; Bridge of Sighs, 731 [733D]; Ba-
752 [754G]; Stanze of, 707 roque in, 674, 747; Byzantine architec-
Vaulting: ture in, 271, 303, 312; Ca d’Oro, 608
arched, 1042; British, 989, 1019, 1042; [612c]; Colleoni Monument, 752 [606a,
comparative diagrams of [373]; com- 7576]; columns, 751; cortili, 608, 674,
partment, 320, 368, 371 [370F, G, 373C]; 731 [733B, F]; Dogana, 747; Doge’s
concrete, 176, 179; construction of Palace, 289, 603, 607-8, 624, 731 [611,
Roman [177E, H-N]; Continental Euro- 628B, 631J, 733, 757J]; Early Renaissance
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1361

Venice (Italy) (cont.) Verrocchio, Andrea del (sculptor), 752

in, 674, 731-2; Fondaco dei Turchi, 324 Versailles (France): Palace, 762, 769, 780,
.*
*
[326A]; High Renaissance and Proto- 785 [783, 784A, 804C]; Petit Trianon, 785
Baroque in, 674, 732, 737-8, 7473 [788A, 789A]
Library of S. Mark, 702, 737 [740]; Log- Vertue, Robert and William (archts.), 427
getta, the, 737 [757H]; monuments, 752 Verulamium, S. Albans (Herts.), Roman
[7576; 758D, J]; mouldings (Renaissance), theatre at, 210, 389
© 752; Museum, 266 [267K]; openings
fregredin
Vespasian, Temple of, Rome, 188, 244 (ii)
(Renaissance), 751; ornament (Renais- [165M, T, 182B]
sance), 752 Vesta, Temple of: Rome, 170, 194, 197, 230
Palazzo: Contarini-Fasan, 608; Cor- [195A-C] ; Tivoli, 194, 955 [195D-F]
naro [757F]; Corner della Ca’ Grande, Vestibule, 1274
737> 747 bis [734C]; Corner Spinelli, 731 Vettii, House of the, Pompeii, 233 [234D, F]
[734B]; Farsetti, 324; Foscari, 608; Vézelay (France), S. Madeleine, 343, 348
Grimani, 737 [745]; Loredan, 324; Pes- [33743B,349B] \
aro, 747 [734A] ;Regio [757D]; Rezzonico, Via Appia, Rome, 217 bis
747 [7468]; Vendramini, 731 [734D-G] Via Latina, Rome, tombs on, 218 [219B, C]
Piazza of San Marco, 289; plans (Re- Vicenza (N. Italy), 874
naissance), 748; Redentore, Il, 747 Basilica, 691, 738 [741]; brick and
[743F-J]; Renaissance in, 666, 667, 669— terra-cotta churches, 607; Casa del
670, 674, 731-2, 737-8; 747 [733-6A, 739- Diavolo, 738 [742G]; Palazzo Barbarano,
740, 743, 745]; Rialto Bridge [757]; 738; Palazzo Capitanio, 738; Palazzo
roofs (Renaissance), 751 Chiericati, 738; Palazzo Thiene, 738;
S. Giobbe, 732; S. Giorgio dei Greci, Palazzo Valmarana, 738 [742D]; Teatro
732 [735F-H]; S. Giorgio Maggiore, 738 Olimpico, 691, 738 [693B]; Villa Capra,
[736A, 743A-£]; SS. Giovanni e Paolo, 607 738, 938 bis [724A-C]
[606A, C, 758]] ;S.MariaGloriosa dei Frari, Victor Emanuel I] Monument, Rome, 1086
600, 603,607 [628E-G, 758D] ; S. Maria dei [10924]
Miracoli, 731, 732 [735, 758B, E, H]; S. Victoria & Albert Museum, London, an-
Maria della Salute, 677, 747, 748 [7394, tiquities in, 227, 364, 509, 885 [976H,
B]; S. Mark, 289, 290 67s, 323, 340, 608, 9778] ‘
702 [288A-C, 291-2, 611A, D, 733F, 758F]3 Victoria Tower, Westminster New Palace,
S. Salvatore, 732 [757A]; S. Zaccaria, 1020
731, 732 [757A]; Scuola di San Marco, Victorian architecture, 987-92, 1020
731, 732 [739C]; traceried windows, 627 Vieille Boucherie, Antwerp, 577
[612B, C, 629C]; walls (Renaissance), Vienna (Austria):
748; well head from, 301 [300G]; window Belvedere, 817 [816A]; Funfhaus Parish
(7th century) in [267P]; Zecca, the, 737 Church, 1079; International Exhibition
Vennecool, Stevin (archt.), 835 (1873), 1064; Karlskirche, 818 [820B];
Venus, Temple of, Baalbek, 198 [195G-]] Kinsky Palace, 812 [813F]; Majolica
Venus and Rome, Temple of, Rome, 187, House, 1072 [1070A]; Ministry of
188, 261 [182B, I92A-E] Finance, 812; Ministry of the Interior,
Veramin (Iran), Friday Mosque, 1235 812; Palace of the Hungarian Guard, 812
Vercelli (N. Italy), S. Andrea, 607 [825B]; Post Office Savings Bank, 1093
Verneuil-sur-Oise, Chateau de (France), [1095B]; S. Stephen’s Cathedral, 588,
774 593 ter [374], 591]; Schwarzenberg
Verona (N. Italy): Palace, 812; Steiner House, 1072 [1073C];
amphitheatre, 213 [214]; campanile, Votivkirche, 1079 [1081Cc]
323 bis, 608 [325A, 628D]; gateways of, Vienne Cathedral (France), 347
732 [746A]; Gran Guardia Vecchia, 737 Vierzehnheiligen church (Germany), 823
[744D-F]; openings, 751; Palazzo Bevi- [818c, D]
lacqua, 732 [744J]; Palazzo del Com- Vigevano, Castle of (Italy), 696
mune, 608 [628D]; Palazzo del Consiglio, Vignola, Giacomo da (archt.), 9, 1755 6075
664 Gi), 732 [744H]; Palazzo dei Dia- ae 673 bis, 708, 713, 714, 717, 762, 802
manti, 737 [744G]; Palazzo Franchini il
[7578]; Palazzo Pompeii, 737 [744A-c]; Vignon, Pierre-Alexandre, Paris, 770, 799
Ponte di Castel Vecchio, 608 [6328]; S. Vihara, 1183; Bhaja, 1183; Mingaora,
Anastasia, 607 [610A]; S. Zeno Maggiore, 1183; Takht-i-Bhai, 1183 [1182B]; Tax-
309, 323 [325, 326C, 330J]; Tomb of the ila, 1183; Udayagiri, 1187
Scaligers, 633 [629B]; Torre del Com- Villa, 169, 230, 235
mune, 608 [628D]; towers at, 329, 608, Cambiaso, Albaro [759G, K]; Capra,
624 [325A, 628D]; walls of, 691 Vicenza, 738, 938 bis [742A-C]; d’Este,
Veronese, Paolo (painter), 731 Tivoli, 713 [693A, 715A]; Farnesina,
Verrio, Antonio (painter), 974 Rome, 7or [710H]; Gamberaia, Setti-
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1362 INDEX

Villa (cont.) Wagner, Otto (archt.), 1065, 1072, 1093

gnano, 673 [712B]; Hadrian’s, Tivoli, 235 Wahlman, L. I. (archt.), 1080
[241D]; Lante, Bagnaia, 708 [709B, Cc]; Wainwright Building, S. Louis, Mo., 1155
Les Terraces, Garches, 1075 [10744]; [1150F]
Madama, Rome, 707 [710J]; Medici, Wakefield (Yorks.): Bridge, 489; Cathedral,
Rome, 713 [246G, 706E]; Pia, Rome, 713 402; School, 885
[715B, 721]; of Pope Julius, Rome, 180, Waldstein Palace, Prague, 812 [810B]
183 [181L]; Savoye, Poissy, 1075 [1074B] Walhalla, Regensburg, 817
Villard Houses, New York, 1143 Wall:
Villas: Renaissance, 672-3, 708, 738 bis, angles, Gothic and Renaissance, 6613
967; Roman, in Britain, 235 arcades, 319, 347 [350C]; -board, 10123;
Villers (Luxemburg), Abbey Church, 574 niches, 179, 197, 209 [199B]; paintings,
Vimana (Hindu sanctuary), 1179 73, 125 [71B, 126F]; ribs, 397, 398, 401
Vincenzo, Antonio di (archt.), 607 [373C]; sculpture, 43, 63 [56]; slabs
Vincidor, Tommaso (archt.), 831 [72B, 84a]; tablets, 878, 974, 979 [976G,
Vine ornament, 505, 509, 510 [508N, s] J]; tombs, 401
Vingboons, J. (archt.), 835 bis Wall of Hadrian, England, 389
Viollet-le-Duc, Eugéne E. (archt. and Walls:
writer), 5375 549 bis, 1064, 1079 Aegean, 93 [99G]; in the Americas,
Virginia, University, Charlottesville, 1148 II52, 1164, 1166; Anglo-Saxon, 490;
Viriconium (Wroxeter, Shropshire), Roman British, 1000, 1007, IOI9, 1035 bis, 1052;
buildings at, 389 Byzantine, 280, 297 [177A—G]; Chinese,
Vischer, Peter (shrine designer), 597 12083; curtain, 1066, 1085, I094, IIIT,
Visconti, Giovanni (archt.), 604 bis 1114; Egyptian, 22-3, 53 [56]; English
Visconti and Lefuel (archts.), 779, 1071 Mediaeval, 490, 493-4, 562 (ii);
Vitellozzi, Annibale (archt.), 1103 Etruscan, 174; glass, 1007, 1094
Viterbo (Cen. Italy): Fonte Gatteschi, 633 Gothic, 367-8, 371, 661 (i) [3698];
[629A]; Gothic house at, 623 [612G]; Belgian and Dutch, 578; English, 490,
Oratorio degli Avvocati [630A]; S. Fran- 493-4, 562 (ii); French, 562 (i); German,
cesco [631C] 593; Italian, 624, 627; Spanish, 636, 647
Vitré, Chateau de, Caen, 791 [793Cc] granite, 851; Greek, 66, 94, 133, 140,
Vitruvius (architectural writer), 9 152, 240 (i) [76c]; Greek and Roman
basilica of, Fano, 176; on Corinthian compared, 240; Indian, 1192; Japanese,
capital, 139; on Olympieion, 107, 140; on 1219, 1220; load-bearing, 1152 ter, 11553
Orders of Architecture, 973; on Temple metal-and-glass, 1035, 1036, 1052; metal
of Juno Sospita, 180; on Tuscan Order, framed, 1041; Muslim, 1246 [12314,
174-5; Treatise of Architecture, 655, 865 1232B, 1243A-B, 1248N]; Persian, 66
Vizcainas (formerly Colegio de San Ig- Renaissance, 661 (ii); Belgian and
nacio), Mexico City, 1139 Dutch, 836; English, 967; French, 801
Vlugt, L. C. van der (archt.), 1067, 1104 (ii); German, 823; Italian, 748, 801 (i);
Volterra (Italy): Castle, 623 [625A]; Palazzo Spanish, 855-6 i
dei Priori, 623 [612F]; Porta all’Arco, Roman, 168, 175-6, 201, 235, 240 (ii),
173, 180 367 [3694]
Volute, the Ionic, 125, 128, 1274 [126, Romanesque, 309; French, 347; Ger-
I65D]; angle, 244 (i); canted, 187; man, 363; Italian, 312, 329
methods of setting out [126P, Q, R, S, 128] West Asiatic, 85-6
Vondelschool, Hilversum, 1094 [1098p] Walls (city and town), 425
Votivkirche, Vienna, 1079 [1081c] Arezzo, 173; Avignon, 549 [552B];
Voussoirs, 1274 Boghazkoy, 81 [83a, B]; Canterbury,
Voysey, C. F. A. (archt.), 992, 1000, 1007, 483; Carcassonne, 549 [551A, B]; Chep-
1055 stow, 489; Chester, 489 [487a-c];
Vreeland House, Englewood, N.J., 1132 Chichester, 489; Colchester, 383, 483;
Vriendt, de, see Floris English, 483, 489; French, 549; Glou-
Vries, Hans Vredeman de (writer), 831 bis, cester, 489; Khorsabad, 73; Lincoln, 383;
835, 836 London, 383; Mont S. Michel, 549;
Vulci (Italy), necropolis at, 183 [181D] Perugia, 180; Roman, 225; Rothenburg,
588; Southampton, 489; Spanish, 640,
647; Tebessa, 225; Verona, 691; Win-
Wach and Roskotten (archts.), 1085 chester, 489; York, 225, 383, 489 [487D-G]
Wadham College, Oxford, 897 [891C] Walmer Castle (Kent), 444
Wadi Halfa (Egypt), fort and temple at, 20 Walmgate Bar, York, 489
Waggon vaults (see also Barrel vaults), 176 Walpole, Horace, his Gothic experiment,
[370A-C] 875, 938 [944A]
Waghemakere, D. van (archt.), 574, 577 Walsoken (Norfolk), gable cross at [5128]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1363
Walter, Thomas Ustick (archt.), 1148 bis Wells Cathedral (cont.)
Waltham Abbey (Essex), 381, 390, 496 412J, 512G]; cloisters of, 402 [412]];
[499A]; capital at, 505 [503E]; mouldings doorway, 562 (ii); model of [407A]; old
at [507D]; roof, 506 foundation, one of the, 402; ornamented
Walton, George (archt.), 992 moulding [508R]; plan of [412J]; sculp-
Walton Bridge (Surrey), 964 ture, 565 (ii); transepts of, 405, 421;
Wanamaker’s Store (A. T. Stewart Store), vaulting of, 398; west front of, 405, 421,
New York, 1152 509, 562 (ii) [403B]; windows of, 501
Wandsworth, London, Alton Estate, 1008 Wells (Somerset), Bishop’s Palace, 452
[1006D] Welwyn Garden City (Herts.), 1007;
War Memorial Chapel, Charterhouse, Pentley Park Primary School, 1035
School (Surrey), 1012 [1016B] [1033C]
Ward, B. R. (archt.), 995, 1007 Wentworth Woodhouse (Yorks.), 932
Wardell, W. W. (archt.), 1059 Werkbund associations, 1065
Wardour Castle (Wilts.), 937 Wernickel, W. (archt.), 812
Ware, Isaac (archt.), 874, 938, 948 West Asiatic architecture, 60-88
Warehouse, Jamaica Street, Glasgow, 1042 analysis of, 85-7; character of, 65-6;
10444] columns, 66, 78, 86; monumental, 23;
Warka (Iraq), White Temple at, 69 [68a] mouldings, 86; openings, 86; ornament,
Warkworth Bridge (Northumberland), 489 86 [84]; plans, 85; roofs, 85, 86; walls,
Warkworth Castle (Northumberland), 444 85-6; see also Assyrian, Babylonian, Hit-
[445A-F]; chapel in keep, 444 [445A, F]5 tite, Persian, Seleucid and Syrian
church in, 444 [4455] West Church, Amsterdam, 835-6
Warmington Church (Northants.), taber- West Point, Chapel and Post Headquarters,
nacle in [515]] U.S. Military Academy, 1151 [1149B]
Warnford Manor House (Hants.), 448 West Walton (Norfolk), mouldings at
Warren (Mich.), General Motors Technical [507]] _
Institute, 1160 [1162B] Westerleigh (Somerset), S. James [511F]
Warren, Russell (archt.), 1151 Westminster: Methodist Central Hall,
Warren and Wetmore (archts.), 1156 1026; S. John, 949; S. Margaret, 393; S.
Warwick: Beauchamp chapel, 394 bis, 469 Stephen’s Chapel, 469, 542 [560c];
[470B]; Leycester’s Hospital, 479 [481]; School, 476
S. Mary, 394 [470B, 4824] Westminster Abbey, 381, 423-9, 644 [422,
Washington (D.C.): 424-6, 663A]
Lincoln Memorial, 1151 [11494]; arches of, 496, 502, 661 (i); boss in
Patent Office, 1148; Smithsonian Insti- [512K]; buttress at, 562 (ii) [4977];
tution, 1148; Temple of Scottish Rite, cathedral church (1540-5), 402; choir,
I151 [1149D]; Treasury Building, 1148; 647; Chapel of the Pyx, 397, 423 [424D];
United States Capitol, 1147 [1146a]; Chapter House, 405, 423 [422c, 424D,
Washington Monument, 1148; White 426A]; cloisters of, 393 ter, 661 (i) [424D,
House, 1140 [1138D] 425A]; Confessor’s Shrine, 427 [424D,
Waterhouse, Alfred (archt.), 991, 992, 1025 425J]; Coronation chair, 427 [519a];
Waterloo Bridge, London, 964 French influence, 427 bis, 559 (ii);
Watson, W. (archt.), 956 Henry V’s Chantry, 427 [425G]; Henry
Wave moulding, 506, 1274 VII’s Chapel, 393, 394, 398, 401, 427,
Waverley Abbey (Surrey), 382 469, 490, 493, 496 bis, 501, 509-10, 510
Wawne (Yorks.): arch at [507A]; window [377H, 424D, 426, 428, 497P, 508W,
[4991] 517F, K]
Wayland (Mass.), houses at, 1159 metalwork in [518A—C, P]; monastic
Wayzata (Minn.), R. S. Davis House, 1159 origin of, 304, 308; monuments in, 974,
Weatherings to offsets of buttresses, 562, 979 [424D, 980J]; nave, 427 [424D, 425A,
1274 B, E, F]; north transept, 427 [422B,
Webb, Sir Aston (archt.), 988 425B]; ornament in, 509; piers of, 505
Webb, John (archt.), 871, 898 bis, 905, 928 [503K, L]; ring of chapels, 376, 538
Webb, Philip (archt.), 991, 992, 999 [424D, 426A]; tombs in, 427, 473, 868,
Weekley Hospital (Northants.), 897 881 [424D, 425], 472K-M, 518A-C, 879A];
Weighhouses, 577 towers, 427, 719, 8733; triforium, 493
Welch, Cachemaille-Day and Lander [424A, B]; vaulting of, 393, 397, 398 bis
(archts.), 1012 [399D, 426B-E]; windows of, 496 bis,
Well-head at Venice, 301 [300G] 562 (ii) [425B, D]
Wellington College (Berks.), 985 Westminster (R.C.) Cathedral, London,
Wells Cathedral (Somerset), 308, 393, 421 279, 992, 1011 [1013B, C]
[403B] Westminster Hall, 394, 1020; timber roof
Chapter House, 393, 405, 421 [377], of, 437, 451, 502, 662 (i) [500E]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1364 INDEX

Westminster New Palace, London, 987, Winchester Cathedral (Hants.) (cont.)

989, 1019-20 [1022D] 495L, MJ]; piers of [503c, G]; plan :
Westover, Charles City County (Va.), 1132 [410c]; poppy-head ornament [517B
[1133C] reredos, 510 [420G]; vaulting of, 39%
Westwood Park (Worcester), 881 west front, 394 [420A]; windows o
Whaplode Church (Lincs.), pier [503B] 501
Wheel window, 309, 319, 323, 324, 329, Winchester College (Hants.), 385, 47:
1274; French, 537, 538; Italian, 696 aerial view [477B]
[628A]; see alsoRose window - Wind-braces, 433
Whipple House, Ipswich, Mass., 1132 Windows:
Whitby Abbey (Yorks.), mouldings at aedicule, 1019 bis, 1041; Angle
[507L, M] Saxon [387B, G, J]; arcaded, 1054; ba»
White, Stamford (archt.), 1143, 1168 1026; bow, 1000; British, 984, 988, 98
White, Thomas (archt.), 964 996, I000, IOI2, IOI9, 1025, 1054, 105:
White Castle, Louisiana, Belle Grove, 1085, I1I1; Byzantine, 272,279, 284, 29¢
1143 298 [300K]; casement, 1000 bis, 1007 bi
White House, Washington, D.C., 1140 1054; circular, 640, 643, 792, 851; cleai
[1138p] story, see Clear-story; Continental Eurc
White Pagoda, Foochow, 1205 pean, 1114; dormer, 479, 593, 769, IOI:
White Temple, Warka, 69 [68a] 1086 [788B, Cc, 803G, 804D]; Earl
White Tower, Tower of London [436D, E, Christian, 254, 265 [267L, P]; Englis
G] Mediaeval, 401, 405, 447-8, 496 quatei
Whitechapel Art Gallery, London, 1026 501 bis, 509, 510 bis, 562 (ii) [442D,
[1030D] 446H, 450D, 507D, K;, S, T, X]; glass, 23:
Whitehall, London: Banqueting House, 298, 309
867, 898, 973 [896B, 899]; Palace of, 866, Gothic: Belgian and Dutch, 570, 57:
898 [899] 574, 578 bis; English, 501 bis, 562 (ii)
Whitgift Hospital, Croydon, 897 French, 530, 534, 562 (i); German, 594
Whitman House, Farmington, Conn., 1132 Italian, 627; and Renaissance comparec
Wickham Church (Berks.), 390 662; Spanish, 648
Wiley Church (Wilts.), window of [499c] Greek, 107, 133, 1553; Greek an:
Wilkins, William (archt.), 877, 956, 963 ter Roman compared, 243; Irish unglazec
William and Mary College, Williamsburg, 527; lancet-shaped, 401, 496, 522
Va., 1139 marble, 320; metal-and-glass, 1007
William of Sens (master-mason), 382, 406, 1036, 1054; oriel, 452, 459 bis, 463, 501
501 886 [450D, 460F]; Palladian, 1041; Per
William of Wykeham, 382 pendicular, 393
Williams, Edwin (archt.), 1036 Renaissance, 662 (ii); Belgian am
Williams, Sir Owen (archt.), 1048 Dutch, 836; English, 968; French, 80
Williams Deacons Bank, Manchester, 1041 (ii); German, 823; Italian, 748, 751
[1039C] 801 (i); Spanish, 856
Williamsburg (Va.): Bruton Parish Church, ribbon, 1035, 1075; Roman, 202, 209
1136 [1137E]; Capitol, 1140 [1141a]; 233, 243 (ii)
Governor’s Palace, 1140; William and Romanesque, 309, 343; French, 34!
Mary College, 1139 [350G], German, 358, 363 [362H, M]
eee? House, Highland Park, Illinois, Italian, 312
1144 rose, see Rose window, also wheel (0:
Wilton House (Wilts.), 874, g05 [903A]; rose) below; slot, 1012; square-headec
archway, 974 [980D]; covered bridge, mullioned, 394; stained glass, see Stainec
905, 932, 979 [902D-F] glass; tracery in, see Traceried windows
Willow Tearooms, Glasgow, 1047 transom, 996, I000, 1047; transom-and-
Wimbotsham Church (Norfolk), roof mullion, 769, 812, 823, 836, 1054
[435C] : ‘Venetian’, 932 [970C]; wheel (or rose)
Winchelsea (Sussex), pier base at [503s] 309, 319, 323, 324, 329, 537, 538
Winchester (Hants.): Castle Hall window Winds, Tower of the, Athens, 139, 14¢
[499D]; Palace, 928 [925F]; Perpendicu- [138], 141F-H]
lar work at, 382; S. Cross Hospital, 479 Windsor (Australia), S. Matthew’s Church.
[478A-D]; walls of, 489; Wolvesey 1058
Palace, 968 [971H] Windsor Castle (Berks.), 906; aerial view
Winchester Cathedral (Hants.), 309, 376 [439A]; S. George’s Chapel, 381, 394,
bis, 390, 421, 648 [420] 401, 469, 493, 50I [377K, 471G-K:
Lady Chapel, 469; model of [4085]; 499M]; shell-keep at, 438
monastic foundation of, 402; mouldings Wingfield Castle (Derbyshire), 444
[508A]; nave of, 394, 421, 661 (i) [420H, Winslow House, River Forest, Illinois, 1143
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
 INDEX 1365

Wispers, Midhurst, 999 Wren (cont.)

Witham (Somerset), monastery at, 382 QI8E-H, 919, 920B, D, 921A, C, E, 924A,
Withdrawing-room: English Mediaeval, 925-6; Gothic versions by, 875; Great
451 bis; English Renaissance, 882 [887A, Fire and, 10, 869, 871 bis; Hampton
9754] Court work by, 459, 463 [460B, G, H]; in-
Wittersham (Kent), arch at [507N] fluence on American Colonial architec-
Wivelsfield (Sussex), window at [499B] ture, 1139; Portland stone used by, 864,
. Wolborough Church (Devon) [5041] 872; secular work by, 714, 871-2, 914,
Wolfenbiittel (Germany), Marienkirche, 928, 956, 963 [925, 959C]; steeples by,
817 973 [925]; tomb of, 906; William and
er Hall (Notts.), 870, 881, 964 [8834, Mary College, Va., 1139; work on S.
965C Paul’s, 871, 906
Wolseley Building (mow Barclays Bank), Wrest Park (Beds.), stone vase and sundial
Piccadilly, London, 1047 [940B, C]
Wolsey, Cardinal, 385, 421, 459, 502 [460a, Wrestler figures, Herculaneum [249A, C]
G Wright, Frank Lloyd (archt.), 1127, 1143,
Wolvesey Palace, Winchester, 968 [971H] II44 ter, 1147, I1§2, 1155, 1156, 1167
Wood, Edgar (archt.), 992, 1007 bis, 1168
Wood, John (sr. and jr., archts.), 874, 9325 Wright, P. B. (archt.), 1148
948, 955 bis Wright, Stephen (archt.), 963
Wood, T. (archt.), 914 Wright, Thomas (archt.), 938
Wood-and-glass roofs, 989 Wright (David J.) House, nr. Phoenix, Ari-
Woodbridge (Suffolk), Bell Inn, 483 zona, I156
[484c] ven Wrotham Park, South Mimms (Herts.), 938
Woodward, Benjamin (archt.), 1020 Wrought iron, 855, 856, 989, 995, 1042,
Woodwork: English Mediaeval, 509, 510 1064
[508s, X, 516, 517, 519]; French, 541, Wroxeter (Salop), Roman remains at, 389
802 (ii); German, 818, 823 Wiirzburg (Germany), Neumiinster, 818
Woolpit (Suffolk), church [491Q] [815B]
Woolworth Building, New York, II55 Wyatt, B. D. (archt.), 956
[1153E] : Wyatt, James (archt.), 876, 937, 948 bis,
Worcester: Berkeley Hospital, 897; Guesten 956, 963, 990
Hall, 479 [485a-c]; Guildhall, 964 Wyatt, Sir M. D. (archt.), 999, 1042
[962c]; Trinity Church, 479; Westwood Wykeham’s Chantry, Winchester [420]]
Park, 881 Wymondham Church (Norfolk), roof, 434
Worcester Cathedral, 376, 402, 423, 469 [435]
[404A, B]
Chantry, 423, 473, 510 [472D-F]; Xanthos (Asia Minor), Nereid Monument
Chapter House, 405 [411A]; Lady
in, 148 [135C]
Chapel, 469 [411A]; model of [407c];
Xerxes: Gatehouse of, Persepolis, 75, 87
pier in [503K]; plan of [411A]; Prince [76c]; Palace of, Persepolis, 78 [76c]
Arthur’s Chantry, 473 [472D-F]; tran-
Xochicalco (Mexico), Temple Pyramid,
septs of, 405 1128 [1129]
Worcester College, Oxford, 963; Palladio’s Xystus (garden) [238A]
book in, 738
Workers’ houses, Hook of Holland, 1075
[1069E] Yakushiji (Japan), Pagoda, 1214
Working drawings, mediaeval, 372 Yale University, New Haven, Conn., 1140
World’s Columbian Exposition, 1127 Yangtze River Bridge, 1207
Worms (Germany): S. Martin [362R]; S. Yarmouth, Great (Norfolk): Fishmongers
Paul [596A] Almshouses, 956, 974; oak frieze, 974
Worms Cathedral (Germany), 358, 363 [977E]
[356]; vaulting at, 307 Yasaka (Japan), Pagoda, 1214 [1215B]
Wornum, G. Grey (archt.), 1035 Yasilikaya (Anatolia), sanctuary at, 82 [83D]
Worstead Church (Norfolk) [4915] Yeni Valide, Istanbul, 1237
Worth Church (Sussex), 390, 489, 496 Yeovil Church (Somerset), lectern in [518F]
[387H, L, 491C] Yesil Jami (“Green Mosque’), Brusa, 1237
Worthington, Thomas (archt.), 1025 Yevele, Henry (archt.-craftsman), 372, 3945
Wren, Sir Christopher (archt.), 429, 7925 406, 427
7995 828, 836 bis, 870, 871-2, 949, 1251 Yilderim Jami, Brusa, 1237
buildings attributed to, 928 [925-6], York: Assembly Rooms, the, 956 [958c],
buildings by, 898, 906-14, 928, 950, 956, Guildhall, 483; S. Mary the Younger
963 [959c]; City churches rebuilt by, [387G]; school at, 4743 walls of, 225, 383
871, 873, 913-14 [9I5C, D, 916, 917; [487D-G]
For explanation of symbols used see p. 1275
1366 INDEX

York Cathedral (or Minster), 376, 381, 393 Zecca, the, Venice, 737
bis, 402, 423 [487G] Zen Buddhism, influence on Japanese
Chapter House, 405, 421, 423 [410B]; architecture, 1218
choir, 394, 423 [512H]; ‘Five Sisters’ Zeughaus, Danzig, 812 [813A]
windows, 496, 509; Lady Chapel, 376, Zeus: Altar of, at Pergamon, 156; Temple
469 [410B]; model of [408B]; nave, 423, of, Olympia, 119 [105B, 118A]
501; old foundation, one of the, 402; Zeus Olympius, Temple of: Agrigentum,
plan of [4108] ;tower of, 405, 423, 562 (ii) 107, 108, 115 [109G, 144J-L]; Athens
[408B]; windows, 496, 509 bis (Olympieion), 107, 108, 139, 140, 155
York Water-Gate, London, 898 [902A-c] [I09H, 146A, 162A]
Yorke, F.R. S. (archt.), 995 Ziggurats (temple-towers), 66, 69~70, 85,
Ypres (Belgium): Cloth Hall, 577 [5768]; _1274 [68, 74G, H]
Guild Houses, 570; Town Hall, 570 Zig-zag ornament, 352, 505
Yuian Ming Yiian Pagoda, Peking, 1205 Zisa, La, Palermo, 324 [327D]
Yung-lo, Tomb of, Peking, 1205 Zoological Society, London, 1048 [1050C]
Yusuf ibn-Kutayyir, Tomb of, Nakh- Zoophorus, 1274
shewan, 1235 Zoroastrian temple, Jhaulian, Taxila, 1179
Zoser, ‘Step’ Pyramid of, Sakkara, 17, 26,
27-30; 57 [28-9]
Zadar (Yugoslavia), S. Donato, 320 ‘Zoudenbalch House’, Utrecht, 577
Zaltbommel (Netherlands), Palais de Jus- Zuidbroek (Netherlands), church, 577
tice [838K] Zwinger, Dresden, 817 [814B]
Zaytunah, Mosque of, Tunis, 1233 Zwolle (Netherlands), S. Michael, 574

For explanation of symbols used see p. 1272

THEOLOGY LIBRARY
CLAREMONT, CALIF.

Paget’
 17940

NA Fletcher, Sir Banister Flight, 1866-1953.

200 A history of architecture on the comparative method.
17th ed., rev. by R. A. Cordingley. New York, Scribner,
F63
1961.
1961
1366 p. illus. 25 cm.

“General reference books": p. (1253-1254.

1. Architecture—Hist. I. Title.

NA200.F63 1961 .<m, 720.9 61—65079 }

i CCSC/els
Library of Congress Y (62f5, —-
eeae ee ea
x
|

l2P

~
IM.

MRoy seu DIAM,

13 —~-kc
KIM.

1M.
PeIMIAP
 |
Mheee ; oe. ne
aie ea(SMSedrat!
rasrwt|
tas ShOLS a aici Ceara oe es are d0¢ W9f=———— ——= : far
kK
{ Peal
‘WVI0%Z -— Lape
3{ PENAL SIU ope Ce BC eee OES aN oatooeees
WIG Of besagihisas alin SUN as eyurety ae OMHee ES Cet 4