Skip to main content

Full text of "A text-book of the history of architecture"

See other formats











By John C. Van Dyke, the Editor of the Series. With 
Frontispiece and no Illustrations, Bibliographies, and 
Index. Crown 8vo, $1.50. 

By Alfred D. F. Hamlin, A.M.. Adjunct Professor of 
Architecture. Columbia College. New York. With 
Frontispiece and 2^9 Illustrations and Diagrams, Bibli- 
ographies, Glossary- Index of Architects, and a General 
Index. Crown 8vo, $2.00. 


By Allan Marquand. Ph.D.. L.H.D.. and Artmir L. 
Frothingham, Jr., Ph.D.. Professors of Archseology 
and the History of Art in Princeton University. With 
Frontispiece and 112 Illustrations. Crown 8vo, fi.jc 

M = 



History of Architecture 

A. D. F. HAMLIN, A.M. 


/ 6>5b 



I C R C O 

: : : .*. .*. . ; 

*::: : .v. : : : 

CoFYKIGHT, 189$. BT 

AH rigktt retervta. 

Fnurr Fnmow. Mavh, i9. 

KrisTrt. Ann Kiivif.ii>. Iirrmmi, imn 

11 III II IWS (Ririmi)). 

it, l00 <Rviir>>. 

i>' man 190* (Rkvikeo). 

Strmio, 19M, Jink. 1Mb <Rsrtau. 

Ittor FUce. N* Vorli 




The aim of this work has been to sketch the various 
periods and styles of architecture with the broadest possi- 
ble strokes, and to mention, with such brief characterization 
as seemed permissible or necessary, the most important 
works of each period or style. Extreme condensation 
in presenting the leading facts of architectural history 
has been necessary, and much that would rightly claim 
place in a larger work has been omitted here. The dan- 
ger was felt to be rather in the direction of too much 
detail than of too little. While the book is intended 
primarily to meet the special requirements of the college 
student, those of the general reader have not been lost 
sight of. The majority of the technical terms used are 
defined or explained in the context, and the small remain- 
der in a glossary at the end of the work. Extended criti- 
cism and minute description were out of the question, and 
discussion of controverted points has been in consequence 
as far as possible avoided. 

The illustrations have been carefully prepared with a 
view to elucidating the text, rather than for pictorial 
effect. With the exception of some fifteen cuts repro- 
duced from Liibke's Geschichte der Architektur (by kind per- 
mission of Messrs. Seemann, of Leipzig), the illustrations 
are almost all entirely new. A large number are from 


original drawings made by myself, or under my direction, 
and the remainder are, with a few exceptions, half-tone 
reproductions prepared specially for this work from photo- 
graphs in my possession. Acknowledgments are due to 
Messrs. H. W. Buemming, H. D. Bultman, and A. E. 
Weidinger for valued assistance in preparing original draw- 
ings ; and to Professor W. R. Ware, to Professor W. H. 
Thomson, M.D., and to the Editor of the Series for much 
helpful criticism and suggestion. 

It is hoped that the lists of monuments appended to the 
history of each period down to the present century may 
prove useful for reference, both to the student and the 
general reader, as a supplement to the body of the text. 

A. D. F. 

Columbia College, New York, 
January 20, 1896. 



Preface v 

List of Illustrations xi 

General Bibliography xix 

Introduction . xxi 


Primitive and Prehistoric Architecture . . i 


Egyptian Architecture 6 


Egyptian Architecture, Continued 16 

Chaldean and Assyrian Architecture ..... 28 

Persian, Lycian, and Jewish Architecture .... 35 

\ / 
- Greek Architecture .... 




Greek Architecture, Continued 60 

Roman Architecture 74 

Roman Architecture, Continued -88 


Early Christian Ar< iiiii.< 11 ke 1 ic 


Byzantine Architecture 120 



Early Mrdlcval Archito n re in Italy and Fran . 155 



AND MAIN .......... wi 

GOTHK Architecture r2 

Gothic Architecture in 1 



Gothic Architecture in Great Britain .... 218 


x/<3othic Architecture in Germany, the Netherlands, and 

Spain 237 

x/Gothic Architecture in Italy 254 

Early Renaissance Architecture in Italy .... 2^0 



Renaissance Architecture in Italy The Advanced Renais- 
sance and Decline 288 

Renaissance Architecture in France . . . . . 308 


Renaissance Architecture in Great Britain and the 

Netherlands 326 

Renaissance Architecture in Germany, Spain, and Portu- 
gal 338 

^ T MPTfj P VVTr 
Tie Classic Revivals in Europe . _^D .... 354 



Rkcent Architecture in Europe 368 

LllAl'lllk .IM4L 
Architecture in the United States . ^. . . .383 

Oriental Architecture India, China, and Japan . . 401 

Glossary 427 

Index of Architects 419 

Index 423 


The authorship of the original drawings is indicated by the in tials 
affixed : A. = drawings by the author ; B. = H. \V. Buemming ; Bn. = II. 
1). Bultman ; Ch. ss Chateau, L Architecture en France ; G. = drawings 
adapted from Gwilt's Encyclopaedia of Architecture , L. = Ltibke's Ge- 
schichte der Arckitektur ; W. = A. E. Weidinger. All other illustra- 
tions are from photographs. 

Frontispiece. The Parthenon Restored (from model in Metro- 
politan Museum, New York) 
i Section of Great Pyramid (A.) 

2 Section of King's Chamber (A.) 

3 Plan of Sphinx Temple (A.) 

4 Ruins of Sphinx Temple (A.) 

5 Tomb at Abydos (A.) 

6 Tomb at Beni-Hassan (A.) *. 

7 Section and Half-plan of same (A.) 

8 Plan of the Ramesseum (A.) 

9 Temple of Edfou. Plan (B.) 
io Temple of Edfou. Section (B.) . 

11 Temple of Karnak. Plan (L.) . 

12 Central Portion of Hypostyle Hall at Karnak (from model in Met 

ropolitan Museum, New York) 

13 Great Temple of Ipsamboul 

14 Edfou. Front of Hypostyle Hall 

15 Osirid Pier (Medinet Abou) (A.) 

16 Types of Column (A.) 

17 Egyptian Floral Ornament-Forms (A.) 

18 Palace of Sargon at Khorsabad. Plan (L.) 

19 Gate, Khorsabad (A.) 

20 Assyrian Ornament (A.) 

21 Column from Persepolis (B.) 

22 Lion Gate at Mycenae (A.) 








23 Polygonal Masonry, Mycenae (A.) 

24 Tholos of Atreus ; Plan and Section (A.) . 

25 Tholos of Atreus, Doorway (after Clarke) (A. 1 

26 Greek Doric Order (A.) .... 

27 Doric Order of the Parthenon. (From cast in 

seum, New York) .... 

28 Greek Ionic Order, Miletus (A.) 

29 Side View of Ionic Capital (B.) . 

30 Greek Corinthian Order (A.) 

31 Types of Greek Temple Plans (A.) . 

32 Carved Anthemion Ornament, Athens 

33 Temple of Zeus, Agrigentum ; Plan (A.) . 

34 Ruins of the Parthenon .... 

35 Plan of the Erechtheum (A.) 

36 West End of the Erechtheum (A.) 

37 Propylaea at Athens. Plan ((J.) 

38 Choragic Monument of Lysicrates. (From model in 

tan Museum, New York) 

39 Temple of Olympian Zeus, Athens. Plan (A.) 

40 Plan < if (i reek Theatre (A.) 

41 Mausoleum at 1 lalicarnassus ( A. ) 

42 Roman Doric Order from Theatre of Manellus. 

Metropolitan Museum, New York) 

43 Roman Ionic Order (A.) .... 

44 Roman Corinthian Order. (FrOB model in 

seum, New York) .... 

45 Roman Arcade with Engaged Columns (A ) 
40 liarrel Vault (A.) 

>ined Vault (A.) 
48 Roman Wall Masonry (P.) 
40. Roman Carved Ornament (Lnteraa Moaeum) 

JO Roman Ceiling Panels (A.) 

-1 I emple of Tort una Yirilis. Plan 

-2 1 ircular Temple. Tivoli (A.) 

53 Temple of Venus anil Rome. Plan (A.) . 

54 Plan of the Pantheon ( P. 1 . 

55 Interior of the Pantheon .... 

56 Exterior of the Pantheon. (Model in Metro 

New York) ..... 

-rum and Basilica of Trajan (A.) 

Metropolitan Mu 



(Model i 

etropolitan Mu 




Rome ( 

58 BasiHca of Constantine. Plan (G.) 

59 Ruins of Basilica of Constantine 

60 Central Block, Therma; of Caracalla. Plan (G 

61 Roman Theatre, Herculanum 

62 Colosseum at Rome. Half Plan (A.) 

63 Arch of Constantine. (Model in Metropolitan Museum 


64 Palace of Diocletian, Spalato. Plan (G.) . 

65 Plan of House of Pansa, Pompeii (A.) 

66 Plan of Santa Costanza, Rome (A.) . 

67 Plan of the Basilica of St. Paul-beyond-the-Wall 

68 St. Paul-beyond-the-Walls. Interior 

69 Church at Kalb Louzeh (A.) 

70 Cathedral at Bozrah. Plan (A.) 

71 Diagram of Pendentives (A.) . 

72 Spandril, Hagia Sophia .... 

73 Capital with Impost-Block, S. Vitale 

74 Plan of St. Sergius, Constantinople (A.) 

75 Plan of Hagia Sophia, Constantinople (A.) 

76 Section of Hagia Sophia (A.) 

77 Interior of Hagia Sophia (full page) . 

78 Plan of St. Mark's, Venice (A.) . 

79 Interior of St. Mark's .... 

80 Mosque of Sultan Hassan, Cairo. Sanctuary 

81 Mosque of Kaid Bey, Cairo 

82 Moorish Detail, Alhambra 

83 Interior of Great Mosque, Cordova . 

84 Plan of the Alhambra (A.) . . 

85 Tomb of Mahmud, Bijapur. Section (A.) . 

86 The Taj Mahal, Agra .... 

87 Mosque of Mehmet II., Constantinople. Plan (L.) 
S8 Exterior of Ahmediyeh Mosque, Constantinople 

89 Interior of Suleimaniyeh Mosque, Constantinople 

90 Interior of San Ambrogio, Milan 

91 West Front and Campanile, Cathedral of Piacenza 

92 Baptistery, Cathedral, and Leaning Tower, Pisa 

93 Interior of Pisa Cathedral .... 

94 Plan of St. Front, Perigueux (G.) 

95 Interior of St. Front (P.) . ... 

96 Plan of Notre Dame du Port, Clermont (Ch.) 














97 Section of same (Ch.) ..... 

98 A Six-part Ribbed Vault (A.) 

99 Plan of Minster at Worms (G.) . . . 

100 One Bay, Cathedral oi Spires (L.) . . 

101 East End, Church of the Apostles, Cologne . 
X02 Plan of Durham Cathedral (Bn.) 

103 One Bay, Transept of Winchester Cathedral (G.) 

104 Front of Iffley Church (A.) .... 

105 Constructive System of Gothic Church (A.) 

106 Plan of Sainte Chapelle, Paris (Bn.) 
i<>7 Early Gothic Flying Buttress (Bn.) 

108 Ribbed Vault, English Type (Bn. after Bebcock) 

109 Penetrations and Intersections of Vaults (Bn.) . 

110 Plate Tracery, Charlton-on-Oxmore 

111 Bar Tracer), St. Michael's, Warfield (W.) 

112 Rose Window from St. Ouen, Rouen (G.) 

113 Flamboyant Detail, Strasburg 

114 Early Gothic Carving (A.) .... 

115 Carving, Decorated Period, from Southwell Minster 

116 Plan of Notre Dame, Paris (L.) 

117 Interior of Notre Dame .... 

118 Interior of I. e Mans Cathedral 

1 1 > Vaulting with Zigzag Kidge Joints (A.) . 
190 One Bay, Abbey of St. Denis (G.) 

121 The Sainte Chapelle, Paris. Exterior 

122 Amiens Cathedral ; Plan (G.) 

123 Alby Cathedral. Plan (A. after I.iibke) . 

124 West Front of Notre Dame, Paris . 

125 West Front of St M.kIou, Kouen . 

ij'. French Gothic Capitate (A.) .... 

127 House of |;i< ijiics ( 11 tir, BourgCS (L.) 

128 Plan of Salisbury Cath ed r al (Bn.) . 

129 Ribbed Vaulting, Choir of Fxeter Cathedral 
1 ; . I iemc Vaulting, Tewkesbury Ablwy 

131 Vault of Chapter Mouse, Wells 

132 Cloister* of SalJaboty Ca thed r a l 

133 Perpendicular . Windsor 

134 West Front, Lichfield < etbedral 

135 Choir, Lichfield Cathedral {A ) 

136 Pan Vaulting, Henry VIL's Chapel 



137 Eastern Part, Westminster Abbey Plan (L.) 

138 Roof of Nave, .St. Mary's, Westonzoyland (W.) 

139 One Bay, Cathedral of St. George, Limburg (L. 

140 Section of St. Elizabeth, Marburg (Bn.) 

141 Cologne Cathedral, Plan (('..) 

142 Church of Our Lady, Treves (L.) 

143 Plan of Ulm Cathedral (L.) . 

144 Town Hall, Louvain . 

145 Facade of Burgos Cathedral 

146 Detail from S. Gregorio, Valladolid 

147 Duomo at Florence, Plan (G.) 

148 Duomo at Florence. Nave 

149 One Bay, Cathedral of S. Martino, Lucca (L. ) 

150 Interior of Sienna Cathedral 

151 Facade of Sienna Cathedral 

152 Exterior of the Certosa, Pavia 

153 Plan of the Certosa, Pavia 

154 Upper Part of Campanile, Florence 

155 Upper Part of Palazzo Vecchio, Florence 

156 Loggia dei Lanzi, Florence 

157 West Front of Doge's Palace, Venice 

158 Capital, Palazzo Zorzi, Venice 

159 Section of Dome, Duomo of Florence (Bn.) 

160 Exterior of Dome, Duomo of Florence 

161 Interior of S. Spirito, Florence 

162 Court of Riccardi Palace, Florence 

163 Facade of Strozzi Palace, Florence 

164 Tomb of Pietro di Noceto, Lucca 

165 Vendramini Palace, Venice 

166 Facade of Giraud Palace, Rome (L.) 

167 Plan of Farnese Palace, Rome (L.) 

168 Court of Farnese Palace, Rome 

169 Bramante's Plan for St. Peter's, Rome (L.) 

1 70 Plan of St. Peter's, Rome, as now standing (Bn 

171 Interior of St. Peter's (full page) 

172 Library of St. Mark, Venice . 

173 Interior of San Severo, Naples 

174 Church of Santa Maria della Salute, Napl 

175 Court Facade, East Wing of Blois . 

176 Staircase Tower, Blois 

after G.) 



177 Plan of Chateau of Chambord (A.) 

178 Upper Part of Chateau of Chambord 

179 Detail of Court of Louvre, southwest portion 

180 The Luxemburg Palace, Paris 

181 Colonnade of the Louvre 

182 Dome of the Invalides, Paris . 

183 Facade of St. Sulpice, Paris 

184 Burghley House 
1S5 Whitehall Palace. The Banqueting Hall 

186 Plan of St. Paul's Cathedral, London (G.) 

187 Exterior of St. Paul's Cathedral 

188 Plan of Blenheim (G.) . 

189 St. Martin's-in-the-Fields, London . 

190 Renaissance Houses, Bntndl 

191 The Castle, Hamelschenburg 

192 The Friedrichsbau, Heidelberg Castle 

193 Pavilion of Zwinger Palace, Dresden 
104 Marienkirche, Dresden 
t-h Portal of University, Salamanca 

196 Court (Patio) of Casa de Zaporta 

197 Palace of Charles V. , Granada 

1 cade of British Museum, London 
St George's Hall, Liverpool . 
200 The Old Museum. Berlin 
I he Propylcea, Munich 

202 Plan of the Pantheon, 1 

203 Exterior of the Pantheon 

204 Arch of Triumph of I'Etoile, Paris 

! he Madeleine, P . 

>r of Kcole des Beaux-Art 1 
. Isaac's Cathedral, St. Petersburg 
208 Plan of Ixmvre and Tuik-ric- 
\ilion Richelieu, Louvre 

210 Grand Stain I 'jx-ra HottM 

211 fountain of I.ongchampN. Marseilles 

.'ii'-ra Museum. Paris . 
val Theatre, Dresden 

214 Maria- Theresienhof. Vienna 

215 Houses of Parliament. London 

OOrtS, Manchester 



217 Natural History Museum, South Kensington .... 381 

21 8 Christ Church, Philadelphia 386 

219 Craigie House, Cambridge (Mass.) 387 

220 National Capitol, Washington ....... 389 

221 Custom House, New York ...".... 390 

222 Trinity Church, Boston 394 

223 Public Library, Woburn (Mass.) 395 

224 Times Building, New York 396 

225 Country House (Mass.) 398 

226 Porch of Temple of Vimalah Sah, Mount Abu .... 406 

227 Tower of Victory, Chittore 407 

228 Double Temple at Hullabid : Detail 410 

229 Shrine of Soubramanya, Tanjore 412 


(This includes the leading architectural works treating of more than 
one period or style. The reader should consult also the special references 
at the head of each chapter. Valuable material is also contained in the 
leading architectural periodicals and in monographs too numerous to 

Dictionaries and Encyclopedias. 

Agincourt, History of Art by its Monuments ; London. 

Architectural Publication Society, Dictionary of Architecture; 

Bosc, Dictionnaire raisonne d 'architecture ; Paris. 

Durm and others, Handbuch der Architektur ; Stuttgart. 
(This is an encyclopedic compendium of architectural knowl- 
edge in many volumes ; the series not yet complete. It is 
referred to as the Hdbuch. d. Arch.) 

Gwilt, Encyclopedia of Architecture ; London. 

Longfellow and Frothingham, Cyclopedia of A rchitecture in 
Italy and the Levant ; New York. 

Planat, Encyclope'die d' architecture ; Paris. 

Sturgis, Dictionary of Architecture and Building ; New York. 

General Handbooks and Histories. 

Biihlmann, Die Architektur des klassischen Alterthums und 
der Renaissance ; Stuttgart. (Also in English, published in New 

Choisy, Histoire de I' 'architecture ; Paris. 

Durand, Recueil et parallele d 'edifices de tous genres ; Paris. 

Fergusson, History of Architecture in All Countries ; London. 

Fletcher and Fletcher, A History of Architecture ; London. 



Gaflhaband, L' Architecture du Vine, an XVI lime. Steele; 
Paris. Monuments anciens et modernes ; Paris. 

Kugler, Gcschichte der Baukunst; Stuttgart. 

Longfellow, The Column and the Arch ; New York. 

Liibke, Gcschichte der Architektur ; Leipzig. History of 
Art, tr. and rev. by R. Sturgis ; New York. 

Perry, Chronology of Mediaeval and Renaissance A rchitecturt ; 

Reynaud, Traits d 'architecture ; Paris. 

Rosengarten, Handbook of Architectural Styles ; Ixmdon and 
New York. 

Simpson, A History of Architectural Development; Jondon. 

Spiers, Architecture East and West; I<ondon. 

Stratham, Architecture for General Readers ; London. 

Sturgis, European Architecture ; New York. 

Transactions of the Royal Institute of British Architects ; 

Viollet-le-Duc, Discourses on Architecture ; Boston. 

Theory, the OxonSj Etc 

Chambers, A Treatise on Civil Architecture ; Ixjndon. 

Daviler, Cours d' 'architecture de Vignole ; Paris. 

l.vjuie, Traiti itimentaire d' architecture ; Paris. /* 

(iuadet, Thiorie de I 'architecture ; Paris. , 

Robinson, Principles of Architectural Composition; New ,. 

Ruskin, The Seven Lamps of Architecture ; I/>ndon. ^ 

StalgM, //,>,-< to Judge Architecture ; New York. 

Tuckerman, Vi\ r nola, the Five Orders of Architecture ; New 

Yan Brunt, Greek Lines and Other Essays ; Boston. 

Yan Pelt, A Discussion of Composition. 

Ware, The American Vignola ; Sr ran ton. 



A history of architecture is a record of man's efforts to 
build beautifully. The erection of structures devoid of 
beauty is mere building, a trade and not an art. Edifices 
in which strength and stability alone are sought, and in 
designing which only utilitarian considerations have been 
followed, are properly works of engineering. Only when 
the idea of beauty is added to that of use does a structure 
take its place among works of architecture. We may, then, 
define architecture as the art which seeks to harmonize in a 
building the requirements of utility and of beauty. It is 
^ the most useful of the fine arts and the noblest of the use- 
' ful arts. It touches the life of man at every point. It is 
s^ concerned not only in sheltering his person and ministering 
to his comfort, but also in providing him with places for 
Xl worship, amusement, and business ; with tombs, memorials, 
embellishments for his cities, and other structures for the 
varied needs of a complex civilization. It engages the ser- 
vices of a larger portion of the community and involves 
greater outlays of money than any other occupation except 
agriculture. Everyone at some point comes in contact 
with the work of the architect, and from this universal con- 
tact architecture derives its significance as an index of the 
civilization of an age, a race, or a people. 



It is the function of the historian of architecture to trace 
the origin, growth, and decline of the architectural styles 
which have prevailed in different lands and ages, and to 
show how they have reflected the great movements of civil- 
ization. The migrations, the conquests, the commercial, 
social, and religious changes among different peoples have 
all manifested themselves in the changes of their architect- 
ure, and it is the historian's function to show this. It is 
also his function to explain the principles of the styles, 
their characteristic forms and decoration, and to describe 
the great masterpieces of each style and period. 

STYLE is a quality ; the "historic styles " are phases of 
development. Style is character expressive of definite con- 
ceptions, as of grandeur, gaiety, or solemnity. An historic 
style is the particular phase, the characteristic manner of 
design, which prevails at a given time and place. It is not 
the result of mere accident or caprice, but of intellectual, 
moral, social, religious, and even politicai conditions. 
Gothic architecture could never have been invented by the 
Greeks, nor could the Egyptian styles have grown up in 
Italy. Each style is based upon some fundamental principle 
springing from its surrounding civilization, which under- 
goes successive developments until it either reaches perfec- 
tion or its possibilities are exhausted, after which a period 
of decline usually sets in. This is followed either by a re- 
action and the introduction of some radically new principle 
leading to the evolution of a new style, or by the final de- 
cay and extinction of the civilization and its replacement 
by some younger and more virile element. Thus the his- 
tory of architecture appears as a connected chain of causes 
and effects succeeding each other without break, each style 
growing out of that which preceded it, or springing out of 
the fecundating contact of a higher with a lower civiliza- 
tion. To study architectural styles is therefore to study a 
branch of the history of civilization. 


Technically, architectural styles are identified by the 
means they employ to cover enclosed spaces, by the char- 
acteristic forms of the supports and other members (piers 
columns, arches, mouldings, traceries, etc.), and by their 
decoration. The plan should receive special attention, since 
it shows the arrangement of the points of support, and 
hence the nature of the structural design. A comparison, 
for example, of the plans of the Hypostyle Hall at Karnak 
(Fig. ii,//) and of the Basilica of Constantine (Fig. 58) 
shows at once a radical difference in constructive principle 
between the two edifices, and hence a difference of style. 

STRUCTURAL PRINCIPLES. All architecture is based on one 
or more of three fundamental structural principles ; that of 
the lintel, of the arch or vault, and of the truss. The princi- 
ple of the lintel is that of resistance to transverse strains, 
and appears in all construction in which a cross-piece or 
beam rests on two or more vertical supports. The arch or 
vault makes use of several pieces to span an opening be- 
tween two supports. These pieces are in compression and 
exert lateral pressures or thrusts which are transmitted to the 
supports or abutments. The thrust must be resisted either 
by the massiveness of the abutments or by the opposition to 
it of counter-thrusts from other arches or vaults. Roman 
builders used the first, Gothic builders the second of these 
means of resistance. The truss is a framework so composed 
of several pieces of wood or metal that each shall best resist 
the particular strain, whether of tension or compression, to 
which it is subjected, the whole forming a compound beam 
or arch. It is especially applicable to very wide spans, and 
is the most characteristic feature of modern construction. 
How the adoption of one or another of these principles 
affected the forms and even the decoration of the various 
styles, will be shown in the succeeding chapters. 

HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT. Geographically and chronolog- 
ically, architecture appears to have originated in the Nile 


valley. A second centre of development is found in the 
valley of the Tigris and Euphrates, not uninfluenced by the 
older Egyptian art. Through various channels the Greeks 
inherited from both Egyptian and Assyrian art, the two 
influences being discernible even through the strongly origi- 
nal aspect of Greek architecture. The Romans in turn, 
adopting the external details of Greek architecture, trans- 
formed its substance by substituting the Etruscan arch for 
the Greek construction of columns and lintels. They de- 
veloped a complete and original system of construction and 
decoration and spread it over the civilized world, which has 
never wholly outgrown or abandoned it. 

With the fall of Rome and the rise of Constantinople 
these forms underwent in the East another transformation, 
called the Byzantine, in the development of Christian domi- 
cal church architecture. In the North and West, mean- 
while, under the growing institutions of the papacy and of 
the monastic orders and the emergence of a feudal civiliza- 
tion out of the chaos of the Dark Ages, the constant pre- 
occupation of architecture was to evolve from the basilica 
type of church a vaulted structure, and to adorn it through- 
out with an appropriate dress of constructive and symbolic 
ornament Gothic architecture was the outcome of this 
preoccupation, and it prevailed throughout northern and 
n Europe until nearly or quite the close of the fif- 
teenth century. 

During this fifteenth century the Renaissance style ma- 
t tired in Italy, where it speedily triumphed over ( rOthic fash- 
ions and produced a marvellous series of civic monuments, 
palaces, and churches, adorned with forms borrowed or 
imitated from classic Roman art. This influence spread 
through Europe in the sixteenth century, and ran a Course 
of two centuries, after which a period of servile classicism 
was followed by a rapid decline in taste. I 'o this succeeded 
the eclecticism and confusion of the nineteenth century, to 


which the rapid growth of new requirements and develop- 
ment of new resources have largely contributed. 

In Eastern lands three great schools of architecture have 
grown up contemporaneously with the above phases of 
Western art ; one under the influence of Mohammedan 
civilization, another in the Brahman and Buddhist archi- 
tecture of India, and the third in China and Japan. The 
first of these is the richest and most important. Primarily 
inspired from Byzantine art, always stronger on the decora- 
tive than on the constructive side, it has given to the world 
the mosques and palaces of Northern Africa, Moorish Spain, 
Persia, Turkey, and India. The other two schools seem to 
be wholly unrelated to the first, and have no affinity with 
the architecture of Western lands. 

Of- Mexican, Central American, and South American 
architecture so little is known, and that little is so remote 
in history and spirit from the styles above enumerated, that 
it belongs rather to archaeology than to architectural his 
tory, and will not be considered in this work. 

Note. The reader's attention is called to the Appendix 
to this volume, in which are gathered some of the results of 
recent investigations and of the architectural progress of the 
last few years which could not readily be introduced into 
the text of this edition. The General Bibliography and the 
lists of books recommended have been revised and brought 
up to date. 



Books' Recommended : Desor, Les constructions lacustres 
du lac de Neufchatel. Fergusson, Rude Stone Monuments. 
R. C. Hoare, Ancient Wiltshire. Lyell, The Antiquity of 
Man. Lubbock, Prehistoric Times. Nadaillac, Prehistoric 
America. Rougemont, L'age du Bronze. Tylor, Primitive 

EARLY BEGINNINGS. It is impossible to trace the early 
stages of the process by which true architecture grew out 
of the first rude attempts of man at building. The oldest 
existing monuments of architecture those of Chaldaea and 
Egypt belong to an advanced civilization. The rude and 
elementary structures built by savage and barbarous peo- 
ples, like the Hottentots or the tribes of Central Africa, 
are not in themselves works of architecture, nor is any in- 
stance known of the evolution of a civilized art from such 
beginnings. So far as the monuments testify, no savage 
people ever raised itself to civilization, and no primitive 
method of building was ever developed into genuine archi- 
tecture, except by contact with some existing civilization 
of which it appropriated the spirit, the processes, and the 
forms. How the earliest architecture came into existence 
is as yet an unsolved problem. 

PRIMITIVE ARCHITECTURE is therefore a subject for the ar- 
chaeologist rather than the historian of art, and needs here 
only the briefest mention. If we may judge of the condi- 
tion of the primitive races of antiquity by that of the sav- 
age and barbarous peoples of our own time, they required 


only the simplest kinds of buildings, though the purposes 
which they served were the same as those of later times in 
civilized communities. A hut or house for shelter, a shrine 
of some sort for worship, a stockade for defence, a cairn or 
mound over the grave of the chief or hero, were provided 
out of the simplest materials, and these often of a perish- 
able nature. Poles supplied the framework ; wattles, skins, 
or mud the walls ; thatching or stamped earth the roof. 
Only the simplest tools were needed for such elementa- 
ry construction. There was ingenuity and patient labor 
in work of this kind ; but there was no planning, no fit- 
ting together into a complex organism of varied materials 
shaped with art and handled with science. Above all, 
there was no progression toward higher ideals of fitness 
and beauty. Rudimentary art displayed itself mainly in 
objects of worship, or in carvings on canoes and weapons, 
executed as talismans to ward off misfortune or to charm 
the unseen powers; but even this art was sterile and never 
grew of itself into civilized and progressive art. 

Yet there must have been at some point in the remote 
past an exception to this rule. Somewhere and somehow 
the people of Egypt must have developed from crude be- 
ginnings the architectural knowledge and resource which 
meet us in the oldest monuments, though every vestige of 
that early age has apparently perished. But although 
nothing has come down to us of the actual work of the 
builders who wrought in the primitive ages of mankind, 
there exist throughout Europe and Asia almost countless 
monuments of a primitive character belonging to relatively 
recent times, but executed before the advent of historic 
civilization to the regions where they are found. A gen- 
eral resemblance among them suggests a common heritage 
of traditions from the hoariest antiquity, and throws light 
on the probable character of the transition from barbaric 
to civilized architecture. 


prehistoric MONUMENTS. These monuments vary widely 
in age as well as in excellence ; some of them belong to 
Roman or even Christian times ; others to a much remoter 
period. They are divided into two principal classes, the 
megalithic structures and lake dwellings. The latter class 
may be dismissed with the briefest mention. It comprises 
a considerable number of very primitive houses or huts 
built on wooden piles in the lakes of Switzerland and sev- 
eral other countries in both hemispheres, and forming in 
some cases villages of no mean size. Such villages, built 
over the water for protection from attack, are mentioned 
by the writers of antiquity and portrayed on Assyrian re- 
liefs. The objects found in them reveal an incipient but 
almost stationary civilization, extending back from three 
thousand to five thousand years or more, and lasting 
through the ages of stone and bronze down into historic 

The megalithic remains of Europe and Asia are far more 
important. They are very widely distributed, and consist 
in most cases of great blocks of stone arranged in rows, 
circles, or avenues, sometimes with huge lintels resting 
upon them. Upright stones without lintels are called w^- 
liirs %-/stand'mg in pairs with lintels they are known as dol- 
mens ; the circles are called cromlechs. Some of the stones 
are of gigantic size, some roughly hewn into shape ; others 
left as when quarried. Their age and purpose have been 
much discussed without reaching positive results. It is 
probable that, like the lake dwellings, they cover a long 
range of time, reaching from the dawn of recorded history 
some thousands of years back into the unknown past, and 
that they were erected by races which have disappeared 
before the migrations to which Europe owes her present 
populations. That most of them were in some way con- 
nected with the worship of these prehistoric peoples is gen- 
erally admitted ; but whether as temples, tombs, or memo- 


rials of historical or mythical events cannot, in all cases, be 
positively asserted. They were not dwellings or palaces, and 
very few were even enclosed buildings. They are imposing 
by the size and number of their immense stones, but show 
no sign of advanced, art, or of conscious striving after beauty 
of design. The small number of " carved stones," bearing 
singular ornamental patterns, symbolic or mystical rather 
than decorative in intention, really tends to prove this 
statement rather than to controvert it It is not impossi- 
ble that the dolmens were generally intended to be covered 
by mounds of earth. This would group them with the 
tumuli referred to below, and point to a sepulchral purpose 
in their erection. Some antiquaries, Fergusson among 
them, contend that many of the European circles and 
avenues were intended as battle-monuments or trophies. 

There are also walls of great antiquity in various parts 
of Europe, intended for fortification ; the most important 
of these in Greece and Italy will be referred to in later 
chapters. They belong to a more advanced art, some of 
them even deserving to be classed among works of archaic: 

The tumuli, or burial mounds, which form so large a part 
of the prehistoric remains of both continents, are interest* 
ing to the architect only as revealing the prototypes of the 
pyramids of Egypt and the subterranean tombs of Mv< rn,r 
and other early Greek centres. The piling of huge cairns 
or commemorative heaps of stone is known from the Script- 
I and other ancient writings to have been a custom of 
the greatest antiquity. The pyramids and the Mausoleum 
at Halicarnassus are the most imposing and elaborate out- 
growths of this pra< ti< v, of which the prehistoric tumuli are 
the simpler manifestations. 

These crude and elementary products of undeveloped 

civilizations have no place-, however, in any list of genuine 
architectural works. They belong rather to the domain of 


archaeology and ethnology; and have received this brief 
mention only as revealing the beginnings of the builder's 
art, and the wide gap that separates them from that gen- 
uine architecture which forms the subject of the following 

MONUMENTS : The most celebrated in England are at Avebury, an 
avenue, large and small circles, barrows, and the great tumuli of Bartlow 
and Silbury " Hills ;" at Stonehenge, on Salisbury Plain, great megalithic 
circles and many barrows; " Sarsen stones" at Ashdown ; tumuli, dol- 
mens, chambers, and circles in Derbyshire. In Ireland, many cairns and 
circles. In Scotland, circles and barrows in the Orkney Islands. In 
France, Carnac and Lokmariaker in Brittany are especially rich in dol- 
mens, circles, and avenues. In Scandinavia, Germany, and Italy, in In- 
dia and in Africa, are many similar remains. 


Books Recommended : Champollion, Monuments de P Egypte 
et de la Nubie. Choisy, Hart de bdlir chez les Egyptiens. 
Flinders-Petrie, History of Egypt ; Ten Years Digging in Egypt, 
1 881-91. Jomard, Description de P Egypte, Antiquites. Lep- 

sius, Denkmaler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien. Mariette, Mon- 
uments of Upper Egypt. Maspero, Egyptian Arc/neology. Vcx- 
rot and Chipiez, History of Art in Ancient Egypt. I'risse 
d'Avennes, Histoire de Part egyptien. Reber, History of 
Ancient Art. Rossellini, Monumenti del Egitto. Wilkinson, 
Manners and Customs of Ancient Egyptians. 

land and people. As long ago as 5000 B.C., the Egyptians 
were a people already highly civilized, and skilled in the arts of 
peace and war. The narrow valley of the Nile, fertilized by the 
periodic overflow of the river, was flanked by rocky heights, 
nearly vertical in many places, which afforded abundance 
of excellent building stone, while they both isolated the 
Egyptians and protected them from foreign aggression. 
At the Delta, however, the valley widened out, with the 
falling away of these heights, into broad lowlands, from 
which there was access to the outer world. 

The art history of Egypt may be divided into five pe- 
riods as follows : 

I. The Ancient EMPIRE (< ir. 4500 ?-}ooo B.C.). compris- 
ing the first ten dynasties, with Memphis as the capital. 

II The First Thebam Monarchy or Middle Empire 

(3000-2100 B.C.) comprising the eleventh, twelfth, and thir 
teenth dynasties rjignmg at Thebes 


The Hyksos invasion, or incursion of the Shepherd Kings, 
interrupted the current of Egyptian art history for a period of 
unknown length, probably not less than four or five centuries. 

III. The Second Theban Monarchy (i7oo?-iooo b.c), 
comprising the eighteenth to twentieth dynasties inclusive, 
was the great period of Egyptian history ; the age of con- 
quests and of vast edifices. 

IV. The Decadence or Saitic Period (1000-324 b.c), 
comprising the dynasties twenty-one to thirty (Saitic, Bu- 
bastid, Ethiopic, etc.), reigning at Sais, Tanis, and Bubastis, 
and the Persian conquest ; a period almost barren of im- 
portant monuments. 

(Periods III. and IV. constitute together the period of 
the New Empire, if we omit the Persian dominion.) 

V. The Revival (from 324 b.c. to cir. 330 a.d.) comprises 
the Ptolemaic or Macedonian and Roman dominations. 

of this period are almost exclusively sepulchral, and include 
the most ancient buildings of which we have any remains. 
While there is little of strictly architectural art, the over- 
whelming size and majesty of the Pyramids, and the audac- 
ity and skill shown in their construction, entitle them to the 
first place in any sketch of this period. They number over 
a hundred, scattered in six groups, from Abu-Roash in the 
north to Meidoum in the south, and are of various shapes 
and sizes. They are all royal tombs and belong to the first 
twelve dynasties ; each contains a sepulchral chamber, and 
each at one time possessed a small chapel adjacent to it, 
but this has, in almost every case, perished. 

Three pyramids surpass all the rest by their prodigious 
size ; these are at Ghizeh and belong to the fourth dynasty. 
They are known by the names of their builders ; the oldest 
and greatest being that of Cheops, or Khufu ; * the second, 

* The Egyptian names known to antiquity are given here first in the 
more familiar classic form, and then in the Egyptian form. 



that of Chephren, or Khafra ; and the third, that of Myceri- 
nus, or Menkhara. Other smaller ones stand at the feet of 
these giants. 

The base of the " Great Pyramid " measures 764 feet on 
a side ; its height is 482 feet, and its volume must have 
originally been nearly three and one-half million cubic 
yards (Fig. 1). It is constructed of limestone upon a pla- 
teau of rock levelled to receive it, and was finished exter- 





, Kintfs Chamber; b. Queen's Chamber ; c, Chamber cut in Rock. 

nally, like its two neighbors, with a coating of polished 

stone, supposed by >omc to have been dispose! in bands of 
different colored granites, but of which it was long ago 
led. It contained three principal chambers and an 
elaborate system of inclined passages, all executed in 
finely cut granite and limestone. The sarcophagus was in 
the uppermost chamber, above which the superincumbent 
weight was relieved by open Spaces and a species of rudi- 
mentary arch of A -shape (Fig. 2). The other two pyra- 
mids differ from that of Cheops in the details of their 
gemenl and in size, not in the principle of their con- 
struction. Chephren is 454 feet high, with a base 717 


feet square. Mvcerinus, which still retains its casing of 
pink granite, is but 218 feet in height, with a 'base 253 feet 
on a side. 

Among the other pyramids there is considerable variety 
both of type and material. At 
Sakkarah is one 190 feet high, 
constructed in six unequal steps 
on a slightly oblong base measur- 
ing nearly 400 X 357 feet. It was 
attributed by Mariette to Ouene- 
phes, of the first dynasty, though 
now more generally ascribed to 
Senefrou of the third. At Abu- 
Seir and Meidoum are other 
stepped pyramids ; at Dashour is 
one having a broken slope, the 
lower part steeper than the up- 
per. Several at Meroe with un- 
usually steep slopes belong to 
the Ethiopian dynasties of the 
Decadence. A number of 
pyramids are built of brick. 

TOMBS. The Ancient Em- 
pire has also left us a great 
number of tombs of the type 
known as Mastabas. These 
are oblong rectangular struct- 
ures of stone or brick with 
slightly inclined sides and flat 
ceilings. They uniformly face 
the east, and are internally di- 
vided into three parts ; the 
chamber or chapel, the senlab, 

and the well. In the first of these, next the entrance, were 
placed the offerings made to the Ka or " double," for whom 





also scones of festivity or worship were carved and painted 
on its walls to minister to his happiness in his incorporeal 
life. The serdabs, or secret inner chambers, of which there 
were several in each mastaba, contained statues of the de- 
funct, by which the existence and identity of the Ka were 
preserved. Finally came the well, leading to the mum- 
my chamber, deep underground, which contained the sar- 
cophagus. The sarcophagi, both of this and later ages, 
are good examples of the minor architecture of Egypt ; 
many of them are panelled in imitation of wooden con- 
struction and richly decorated with color, symbols, and 

OTHER MONUMENTS. Two other monuments of the An- 
cient Empire also claim attention : the Sphinx and the adja- 
cent so-called " Sphinx 
temple " at (ihizeh. The 
first of these, a huge sculp- 
ture carved from the rock, 
represents Harmachis in 
the form of a human- 
headed lion. It is ordina- 
rily partly buried in the 
sand ; is 70 feet long by 66 
feet high, and forms one of the most striking monuments of 
Egyptian art. Close to it lie the nearly buried ruins of the tem- 
ple once supposed to be that of the Sphinx, but now proved 
by ivtric to have been erected in connection with the second 
pyramid. The plan and present aspect of this venerable 
edifice arc shown in Pigs. 3 and 4. The hall was roofed with 
stone lintels carried on sixteen square monolithic piers of 
alabaster. The whole was buried in a rectangular mass of 
:ry and revetted internally with alabaster, but was 
wholly destitute internally as well as externally of d< 
tion or even of moulding* With the exception of scanty 
remains of a few of the pyramid-temples or chapels, and the 





temple discovered by Petrie in Meidoum, it is the only sur- 
vival from the temple architecture of that early age. 

THE MIDDLE EMPIRE : TOMBS. The monuments of this 
period, as of the pre- 
ceding, are almost whol- 
ly sepulchral. We now 
encounter two types of 
tombs. One, structural 
and pyramidal, is repre- 
sented by many exam- 
ples at Abydos, the most 
venerated of all the bur- 
ial grounds of Egypt 
(Fig. 5). All of these are 
buifTof Jrrick, arlcTare of 
moderate size and little artistic interest. The second type 

is that oftombs cut in the vertical cliffs of the west bank 
of the Nile Valley. The entrance to these faces eastward 

as required by tradi- 
tion ; the remoter end 
of the excavation point- 
ing toward the land of 
the Sun of Night. But 
such tunnels only be- 
come works of archi- 
tecture when, in addi- 
tion to the customary 
mural paintings, they 
receive a decorative 
treatment in the design 
of their structural forms. Such a treatment appears in 
several tombs at Beni-Hassan, in which columns are re- 
served in cutting away the rock, both in the chapel- 
chambers and in the vestibules or porches which precede 
them. These columns are polygonal in some cases, clustered 




in others. The former type, with eight, sixteen, or thirty- 
two sides (in these last the arrises or edges are emphasized 
by a slight concavity in each face, like embryonic fluting), 
have a square abacus, suggesting the Greek Doric order, 
and giving rise to the name proto- Doric (Fig. 6). Col- 
umns of this type are also found at Karnak, Kalabsh^, 
Amada, and Abydos. A reminiscence of primitive wood 
construction is seen in the dentils over the plain architrave 
of the entrance, which in other respects recalls the tripie 

' ** 

''\^r'''"'" j '"''''' / ''""" / '" / '"'' / ""'""''' / ' // "'"'"'" 




entrances to certain mastabas of the Old Empire. These 
dentils are imitations of the ends of rafters, and to some 
an iMBOlogista suggest a wooden origin for the whole system 
of Columnar design. but these rock-COt shafts and heavy 
architraves in no respect resemble wooden prototypes, 
but point rather to an imitation cot in the nuk of a well- 
developed, pre-existing system Of stone const nut ion, some 
of whose details, however, were undoubtedly derived from 
early methods of building in wood. The vault was below 
the chapel and reached by a separate entrance. The 

serdab .i- replaced by a niche in which was the figure ol 
the defunct carved from the native rock. Some of the 


tombs employed in the chapel-chamber columns of quatrefoil 
section with capitals like clustered buds (Fig. 7), and this 
type became in the next period one of the most character- 
istic forms of Egyptian architecture. 

TEMPLES. Of the temples of this period only two have 
left any remains of importance. Both belong to the twelfth 
dynasty (cir. 2200 B.C.). Of one of these many badly shat- 
tered fragments have been found in the ruins of Bubastis; 
these show the clustered type of lotus-bud column men- 
tioned above. The other, of which a few columns have 
been identified among the ruins of the Great Temple at 
Karnak, constituted the oldest part of that vast agglomera- 
tion of religious edifices, and employed columns of the so- 
called proto-Doric type. From these remains it appears 
that structural stone columns as well as those cut in the 
rock were used at this early period (2200 B.C.). Indeed, it 
is probable that the whole architectural system of the New 
Empire was based on models developed in the age we are 
considering ; that the use of multiplied columns of various 
types and the building of temples of complex plan adorned 
with colossal statues, obelisks, and painted reliefs, were 
perfectly understood and practised in this period. But the 
works it produced have perished, having been most prob- 
ably demolished to make way for the more sumptuous edi- 
fices of later times. 

THE NEW EMPIRE. This was the grand age of Egyptian ar- 
chitecture and history. An extraordinary series of mighty 
men ruled the empire during a long period following the 
expulsion of the Hyksos usurpers. The names of Thoth- 
mes, Amenophis, Hatasu, Seti, and Rameses made glorious 
the eighteenth and nineteenth dynasties. Foreign con- 
quests in Ethiopia, Syria, and Assyria enlarged the terri- 
tory and increased the splendor of the empire. The major- 
ity of the most impressive ruins of Egypt belong to this 
period, and it was in these buildings that the characteristic 






elements of Egyptian architecture were brought to perfec- 
tion and carried out on the grandest scale. 

TOMBS OF THE NEW EMPIRE. Some of these are stria -Aural, 
others excavated ; both types displaying considerable vari- 
ety in arrangement and detail. The 
rock-cut tombs of Bab-el-Molouk, 
among which are twenty-five royal 
sepulchres, are striking both by 
the simplicity of their openings 
and the depth and complexity of 
their shafts, tunnels, and chambers. 
From the pipe-like length of their 
tunnels they have since the time of 
Herodotus been known by the name 
syrinx. Every precaution was taken 
to lead astray and baffle the Intend- 
ing violator of their sanctity. They 

penetrated hundreds of feet [n to the 

rOCk ; their chambers, often formed 
with columns and vault-like roots, 

wen- resplendent with colored reliefs 

and ornament destined to solace 
and sustain the shadowy Ka until 
the soul itself, the Ma, should arrive 
before the tribunal of Osiris, the 

Sun of Night. Most impressively 

df) these brilliant pictures,* intend- 
ed to be forever shut away from human eyes, attest the 

erity of the Egyptian belief and the conscientious^ 

of the art which it inspired. 

While the tomb of the private citizen was complete in it- 
self, containing the Ka-statues and often the chapel, as 
well as the mummy, the royal tomb demanded something 
more elaborate in stale and arrangement. In some cases 
* See Van lake's History of Tainting, Figure I. 



, Satuluary : i, Hyfiottylf 

1 1 .ill : ,, Scnntf court : </, 
Mmtrnncr lourf ; e, I'ylont. 


external structures of temple-form took the place of the 
underground chapel and serdab. The royal effigy, many 
times repeated in painting and sculpture throughout this 
temple-like edifice, and flanking its gateways with colos- 
sal seated figures, made buried Ka-statues unnecessary. 
Of these sepulchral temples three are of the first magni- 
tude. They are that of Queen Hatasu (XVIIIth dynasty) 
at Deir-el-Bahari ; that of Rameses II. (XlXth dynasty), 
the Ramesseum, near by to the southwest ; and that 
of Rameses III. (XXth dynasty) at Medinet Abou still 
further to the southwest. Like the tombs, these were all 
on the west side of the Nile ; so also was the sepulchral 
temple of Amenophis III (XVIIIth dynasty), the Ameno- 
pheum, of which hardly a trace remains except the two 
seated colossi which, rising from the Theban plain, have 
astonished travellers from the times of Pausanias and 
Strabo down to our own. These mutilated figures, one of 
which has been known ever since classic times as the 
" vocal Memnon," are 56 feet high, and once flanked the 
entrance to the forecourt of the temple of Amenophis. 
The plan of the Ramesseum, with its sanctuary, hypostyle 
hall, and forecourts, its pylons and obelisks, is shown in 
Figure 8, and may be compared with those of other temples . 
given on pp. 17 and 18. That of Medinet Abou resembles 
it closely. The Ramesseum occupies a rectangle of 590 x 
182 feet; the temple of Medinet Abou measures 500 x 160 
feet, not counting the extreme width of the entrance pylons. 
The temple of Hatasu at Deir-el-Bahari is partly excavated 
and partly structural, a model which is also followed on a 
smaller scale in several lesser tombs. Such an edifice is 
called a hemispeos. 



Books Recommended : Same as for Chapter II. 

TEMPLES. The surpassing glory of the New Empire was its 
great temples. Some of them were among the most stupen- 
dous creations of structural art. To temples rather than pal- 
aces were the resources and energies of the kings devoted, 
and successive monarchs found no more splendid outlet for 
their piety and ambition than the founding of new temples 
or the extension and adornment of those already existing. 
By the forced labor of thousands of fellaheen (tin- system is 
in force to this day and is known as the C0rv&) architectural 
piles of vast extent could be erected within the lifetime of 
a monarch. As in the tombs the internal walls bore pict- 
ures for the contemplation of the Ka, so in the temples 

the external walls, for the glory of the king and the de- 
lectation of the people, were covered with colored reliefs 
reciting the.- monarch's glorious deeds. Internally the 
worship and attributes of the gods were represented in a 
similar manner, in endless iteration. 

THE TEMPLE SCHEME. This is admirably shown in the 
temple of Khonsu, at Karnak, built by Rameses MI. (XXth 
dynasty), and in the temple of Edfou (Fitfs. 9 and 10), though 
this belong! to the Roman period. It comprised a sanctu- 
ary hyOOStyle (columnar) hall, known as the "hall 
of assembly," and a forecourt preceded by a double pylon or 



gateway. Each of these parts 
might be made more or less com- 
plex in different temples, but the 
essential features are encountered 
everywhere under all changes of 
form. The building of a temple 
began with the sanctuary, which 
contained the sacred chamber and 
the shrine of the god, with sub- 
ordinate rooms for the priests and 
for various rites and functions. 
These chambers were low, dark, 
mysterious, accessible only to the 
priests and king. They were given 
a certain dignity by being raised 
upon a sort of platform above the 
general level, and reached by a 
few steps. They were sumptu- 
ously decorated internally with 
ritual pictures in relief. The 
hall was sometimes loftier, but 

set on a slightly lower level ; its massive columns sup- 
ported a roof of stone lintels, and light was admitted either 
through clearstory windows under the roof of a central 
portion higher than the sides, as at Karnak, or over a low 
screen-wall built between the columns of the front row, as 
at Edfou and Denderah. This method was peculiar to the 
Ptolemaic and Roman periods. The court was usually sur- 





rounded by a single or double colonnade ; sometimes, how- 
ever, this colonnade only flanked the sides or fronted the 
hall, or again was wholly wanting. The pylons were twin 
buttress-like masses flanking the entrance gate of the court. 
They were shaped like oblong truncated pyramids, crowned 
by flaring cornices, and were decorated on the outer face 
with masts carrying banners, with obelisks, or with seated 
colossal figures of the royal builder. An avenue of sphinxes 
formed the approach to the entrance, and the whole tem- 


pie precinct was surrounded by a wall, usually of crude 
brick, pierced by one or more gates with or without 
pylons. The piety of successive monarehs was displayed 
in the addition of new hypostyle halls, courts, pylons, or 
obelisks, by which the temple was successively extended 
in length, and sometimes also in width, by the increased 
dimensions of the new courts. The great Temple of Kar- 
nak most strikingly illustrates this growth. Begun by 
Osourtesen (Xllth dynasty) more than 2000 years B.C, 
it was not completed in its present form until the time of 
the Ptolemies, when the last of the pylons and external 
gates were erected. 

The variations in the details of this general type were 
numerous. Thus, at Kl Kab, the temple of Amenophis III. 


has the sekos and hall but no forecourt. At Deir-el- 
Medineh the hall of the Ptolemaic Hathor-temple is a mere 
porch in two parts, while the enclosure within the circuit 
wall takes the place of the forecourt. At Karnak all the 
parts were repeated several times, and under Amenophis 
III. (XVIIIth dynasty) a wing was built at a nearly right 
angle to the main structure. At Luxor, to a complete typi- 
cal temple were added three aisles of an unfinished hypo- 
style hall, and an elaborate forecourt, whose axis is inclined 
to that of the other buildings, owing to a bend of the river 
at that point. At Abydos a complex sanctuary of many 
chambers extends southeast at right angles to the general 
mass, and the first court is without columns. But in all 
these structures a certain unity of effect is produced by the 
lofty pylons, the flat roofs diminishing in height over suc- 
cessive portions from the front to the sanctuary, the sloping 
windowless walls covered with carved and painted pictures, 
and the dim and massive interiors of the columnar halls. 

TEMPLES OF KARNAK. Of these various temples that of 
Amen-Ra is incomparably the largest and most imposing. 
Its construction extended through the whole duration of 
the New Empire, of whose architecture it is a splendid 
rteum'e (Fig. 11). Its extreme length is 1,215 feet, and its 
greatest width 376 feet. The sanctuary and its accessories, 
mainly built by Thothmes I. and Thothmes III., cover an 
area nearly 456 X 290 feet in extent, and comprise two hypo- 
style halls and countless smaller halls and chambers. It is 
preceded by a narrow columnar vestibule and two pylons en- 
closing a columnar atrium and two obelisks. This is entered 
from the Great Hypostyle Hall (// in Fig. 11 ; Fig. 12), the 
noblest single work of Egyptian architecture, measuring 340 
X 170 feet, and containing 134 columns in sixteen rows, sup- 
porting a massive stone roof. The central columns with bell- 
capitals are 70 feet high and nearly 12 feet in diameter ; the 
others are smaller and lower, with lotus-bud capitals, sup- 


porting a roof lower than that over the three central aisles 

A clearstory of stone-crated windows makes up the differ- 
ence in height between these two root's. The interior, thus 
lighted, was splendid with painted reliefs, which helped not 
only to adorn the hall but to give scale to its massive parts. 
The whole stupendous creation was the work of three kings 
Kameses I., Seti I., and Rameses II. (XlXth dynasty). 
In front of it was the great court, Hanked by columns, 


(From mode! in Metropolitan Mtiwum, New York.) 

and still showing the ruins of a central avenue of colossal 
pillars begun, but never completed, by the Bubastid kings 
of the XXI Id dynasty. One or two smaller Structures and 
the curious lateral wing built by Amenophis III., interrupt 
the otherwise orderly ami symmetrical advance of this 
plan from the sanctuary to the huge first pylon (last in 
point of date) erected by the Ptolen 

The smaller temple of Khonsu, south of that of Amen- 
Ra, has already been alluded to as a typical example of 
templar design. Next to Karnak in importance comes the 
Temple of Luxor in its immediate neighborhood. It has 
two forecourts adorned with double-aisled colonnades and 



connected by what seems to be an unfinished hypostyle 
hall. The Ramesseum and the temples of Medinet Abou 
and Deir-El-Bahari have already been mentioned (p. 15). 
At Gournah and Abydos are the next most celebrated 
temples of this period ; the first famous for its rich clus- 
tered lotus-columns, the latter for its beautiful sanctuary 


chambers, dedicated each to a different deity, and covered 
with delicate painted reliefs of the time of Seti I. 

GROTTO TEMPLES. Two other styles of temple remain to 
be noticed. The first is the subterranean or grotto temple, 
of which the two most famous, at Ipsamboul (Abou-simbel). 
were excavated by Rameses II. They are truly colossal 
conceptions, reproducing in the native rock the main feat- 
ures of structural temples, the court being represented bv 
the larger of two chambers in the Greater Temple (Fig. 13) 


Their facades are adorned with colossal seated figures of 
the builder ; the smaller has also two effigies of Nefert- 
Ari, his consort. Nothing more striking and boldly impres- 
sive is to be met with in Egypt than these singular rock-cut 
facades. Other rock-cut temples of more modest dimen- 
sions are at Addeh, Feraig, Beni-Hassan (the " Speos Arte- 
midos"), Beit-el - Wali, and Silsileh. At Gherf-Hossein, 
Asseboua, and Derri are temples partly excavated and partly 

PEKIPTERAL TEMPLES. The last type of temple to be 
noticed is represented by only three or four structures of 
moderate size ; it is the peripteral, in which a small cham- 
ber is surrounded by columns, usually mounted on a terrace 
with vertical walls. They were mere chapels, but are among 
the most graceful of existing ruins. At Philae are two 
structures, one by Nectanebo, the other Ptolemaic, resem- 
bling peripteral temples, but without cella-chamber^ or 
roofs. They may have been waiting-courts for the adjoin- 
ing temples. That at Elephantine (Amenophis III.) has 
square piers at the sides, and columns only at the ends. 
Another by Thothmes II., at Medinet Abou, formed only a 
part (the seko> ?) of a larger plan. At Edfou is another, 
belonging to the Ptolemaic period. 

LATER TEMPLES. After the architectural inaction of the 
me a marvellous recrudescence of splendor 
under the Ptolemies, whose Hellenic origin and sympathies 
did not lead them into the mistaken effort to imp 
models upon Egyptian art. The temples cici ted under 
their dominion, and later under Roman rule, vied with the 
grandest works of the Ran Uld surpassed them in 

the rich elaboration and variety of their architectural de- 
tails. The temple at Edfou (Pigs. 9, 10, 14) is the most per- 
fectly preserved, and conforms most closely to the typical 
plan ; that of I-i->, at Philae, is the most elaborate and 
orriate. Denderuh also possesses a group of admirably 



preserved temples of the same. period. At Esneh, and at 
Kalabshe and Kardassy or Ghertashi in Nubia are others 
In all these one notes innovations of detail and a striving 
for effect quite different from the simpler majesty of the 
preceding age (Fig. 14). One peculiar feature is the use 
of screen walls built into the front rows of columns of the 
hypostyle hall. Light was admitted above these walls, 
which measured about half the height of the columns and 


were interrupted at the centre by a curious doorway cut 
through their whole height and without any lintel. Long 
disused types of capital were revived and others greatly 
elaborated ; and the wall-reliefs were arranged in bands 
and panels with a regularity and symmetry rather Greek 
than Egyptian. -?*" 

ARCHITECTUBAL DETAILS. With the exception of a few 
purely utilitarian vaulted structures, all Egyptian architect- 
ure was based on the principle of the lintel. Artistic splen- 
dor depended upon the use of painted and carved pictures, 
and the decorative treatment of the very simple supports 



employed. Piers and columns sustained the root., of such 
chambers as were too wide for single lintels, and produced, 
in halls like those of Karnak, of the Ramesseum, or of 
Denderah, a stupendous effect by their height, massiveness, 
number, and colored decoration. The 
simplest piers were plain square 
shafts ; others, more elaborate, had 
lotus stalks and (lowers or heads of 
Hathor carved upon them. The 
most striking were those against 
whose front faces were carved co- 
lossal figures of Osiris, as at Luxor, 
Medinet Abou, and Karnak (Fig. 15). 
The columns, which were seldom 
over six diameters in height, were 
treated with greater variety ; the 
shafts, slightly tapering upward, were 
either round or clustered in section, 
and usually contracted at the base 
The capitals with which they were 
crowned were usually of one of the five chief types descrrcx <1 
below. Besides round and clustered shafts, the Middle 
Empire and a few of the earlier monuments of the New Em- 
pire employed polygonal or slightly (luted shafts (see p. n), 
as at Beni Hassan and Karnak ; these had a plain square 
abacus, with sometimes a cushion-like echinus beneath it. 
A round plinth served as a base t'nv most of the columns. 

capitals. The ft\c chief types of capita] were: a, the 

plain lotus bud, as at Karnak (Great Hall) ; />, the clustered 
lotus bud (Beni-Hassan, Karnak. I. uxor, (iournah, etc) 
the tdmpiiniform or inverted bell (central aisles at Karnak, 
I. uxor, the Ramesseum); </, the palm-capital, frequent in 
the Liter temples; and <\ the Hathor-headed, in which 
heads of Hathor adorn (he four fares of a cubical ma 
surmounted by a model of a shrine (Scdinga, Edfou, Den- 

PMi 15. OSIKII) f'IP.K (ME- 
DMBT ai. 



derail, Esneh). These types were richly embellished and 
varied by the Ptolemaic architects, who gave a clustered 
or quatrefoil plan to the bell-capital, or adorned its surface 
with palm leaves. A few other forms are met with as ex- 
ceptions. The first four are shown in Fig. 16. 

Every part of the column was richly decorated in color. 
Lotus- leaves or petals swathed the swelling lower part of 
the shaft, which was elsewhere covered with successive 
bands of carved pictures and of hieroglyphics. The capi- 
tal was similarly covered with carved and painted orna- 
ment, usually of lotus-flowers or leaves, or alternate stalks 
of lotus and papyrus. 

The lintels were plain and square in section, and often 
of prodigious size. Where they appeared externally they 
were crowned with a simple cavetto cornice, its curved sur- 
face covered with col- 
ored flutings alternating 
with cartouches of hie- 
roglyphics. Sometimes, 
esnecially on the screen 
walls of the Ptolemaic 
age, this was surmount- 
ed by a cresting of ad- 
ders or uraei in closely 
serried rank. No other 
form of cornice or crest- 
ing is met with. Mould- 
ings as a means of archi- 
tectural effect were singularly lacking in Egyptian archi- 
tecture. The only moulding known is the clustered torus 
{torus = a convex moulding of semicircular profile), which 
resembles a bundle of reeds tied together with cords or 
ribbons. It forms an astragal under the cavetto cornice 
and runs down the angles of the pylons and walls. 

POLYCHROMY AND ORNAMENT. Color was absolutely es- 


, Campaniform ; d, Clustered Lotus-Column . 
c, Simple Lotus-Column ; d, Palm-Column. 


sential to the decorative scheme. In the vast and dim in- 
teriors, as well as in the blinding glare of the sun, mere 
sculpture or relief would have been wasted. The applica- 
tion of brilliant color to pictorial forms cut in low relief, 
or outlined by deep incision with the 
edges of the figures delicately rounded 
[intaglio rilievd) was the most appropriate 
treatment possible. The walls and col- 
umns were covered with pictures treat- 
ed in this way, and the ceilings and 
lintels were embellished with symbolic 
forms in the same manner. All the 
ornaments, as distinguished from the 
,LORAL paintings, were symbolical, at least in 


their origin. Over the gateway was the 
solar disk or globe with wide-spread wings, the symbol of 
the sun winging its way to the conquest of night ; upon 
the ceiling were sacred vultures, zodiacs, or stars spangled 
on a blue ground. Externally the temples presented only 
masses of unbroken wall ; but these, as. well as the pylons, 
were covered with huge pictures of a historical character. 
Only in the tombs do we find painted ornament of a purely 
conventional sort (Fig. 17). Rosettes, diaper patterns, 
spirals, and checkers are to be met with in them ; but many 
of these can be traced to symbolic origins.* 

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE. The only remains of palaces 
are the pavilion of Rameses III. at Medinet Abon, and 
another at Scmneh. The Royal Labyrinth has so com- 
pletely perished that even its site is uncertain. The Egyp- 
tians lived so much out of doors that the house was a less 
important edifice than in colder climates. Egyptian dwell- 
ing! were probably in most cases built of wood or crude 

*See Oioodyear's Grammar of tht Lotus for an elaborate and ingen- 
ious presentation of the theory of a common lotus-origin for all the conven- 
tional forms occurring in Egyptian ornament. 


brick, and their disappearance is thus easily explained. Re- 
lief pictures on the monuments indicate the use of wooden 
framing for the walls, which were probably filled in with 
crude brick or panels of wood. The architecture was ex- 
tremely simple. Gateways like those of the temples on a 
smaller scale, the cavetto cornice on the walls, and here 
and there a porch with carved columns of wood or stone, 
were the only details pretending to elegance. The ground- 
plans of many houses in ruined cities, as at Tel-el-Amarna 
and a nameless city of Amenophis IV., are discernible in the 
ruins ; but the superstructures are wholly wanting. It was 
in religious and sepulchral architecture that the construc- 
tive and artistic genius of the Egyptians was most fully 

MONUMENTS : The principal necropolis regions of Egypt are centred 
about Ghizeh and ancient Memphis for the Old Empire (pyramids and 
mastabas), Thebes for the Middle Empire (Silsileh, Beni Hassan), and 
Thebes (Vale- of the Kings, Vale of the Queens) and Abydos for the New 

The Old Empire has also left us the Sphinx, Sphinx temple, and the 
temple at Meidoum. 

The most important temples of the New Empire were those of Karnak 
(the great temple, the southern or temple of Khonsu), of Luxor, Medinet 
Abou (great temple of Rameses III., lesser temples of Thothmes II. and 
III. with peripteral sekos ; also Pavilion of Rameses III.) ; of Abydos ; 
of Gournah ; of Eilithyia (Amenophis III.) ; of Soleb and Sesebi in Nubia ; 
of Elephantine (peripteral) ; the tomb temple of Deir-el-Bahari, the 
Ramesseum, the Amenopheum ; hemispeos at Gherf Hbssein ; two grotto 
temples at Ipsamboul. 

At Meroe are pyramids of the Ethiopic kings of the Decadence. 

Temples of the Ptolemaic period ; Philae, Denderah. 

Temples of the Roman period : Koum Ombos, Edfou ; Kalabshe, 
Kardassy and Dandour in Nubia ; Esneh, 



Books RECOMMENDED : As before, Reber. Also, Bab- 
elon, Manual of Oriental Antiquities. Botta and Eland in, 
Monuments tic Ninivc. Layard, Discoveries in Nineveh ; Xin- 
ereli and its Remains. Loft us, Vnnc/s and Researches in 
Chaldira and Susiana. Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art in 
Chaldaa and Assyria. Peters, Nippur. Place, Ninive et 

SITUATION; HISTORIC PERIODS. The Tigro-Euphrates val- 
ley was the seat of a civilization nearly or quite as old as that 
of the Nile, though inferior in its monumental art. The 
kingdoms of Chaldssa and Assyria which ruled in this val- 
ley, sometimes as rivals and sometimes as subjects one of 
the other, differed considerably in character and culture. 
But the scarcity of timber and the lack of good building- 
stone except in the limestone table-lands and more distant 
mountains of upper Mesopotamia, the abundance of clay, 
and the flatness of the country, imposed upon the builders 
of both nations similar restrictions of conception, form, 
and material. 'Both peoples, moreover, were probably, in 
part at least, of Semitic race.* The Chalda-ans attained 
Civilisation as early as 4000 ?.(., and had for Centuries main- 
tained fixed institutions and practised the arts and sciences 
when the Assyrians began their career a- a nation of con- 
querors by reducing Chaldssa to subjection. 

* This is denied by tome recent writers, so far as the < h.ild xatU are con- 
cerned, and is not intended here to apply to the. Accadians and Summer- 
ians of primitive ChSfcfara. 


The history of Chakheo- Assyrian art may be divided into 
three main periods, as follows : 

1. The Early Chai.d.kan, 4000 to 1250 n.c 

2. The Assyrian, 1250 to 6c6 B.C. 

3. The Barylonian, 606 to 538 b.c. 

In 538 the empire fell before the Persians. 

at Nippur (Niffer), the sacred city of Chaldaea, have uncov- 
ered ruins older than the Pyramids. Though of slight 
importance architecturally, they reveal the early knowledge 
of the arch and the possession of an advanced culture. The 
poverty of the building materials of this region afforded 
only the most limited resources for architectural effect. 
Owing to the flatness of the country and the impracticabil- 
ity of building lofty structures with sun-dried bricks, ele- 
vation above the plain could be secured only by erecting 
buildings of moderate height upon enormous mounds or 
terraces, built of crude brick and faced with hard brick or 
stone. This led to the development of the stepped pyra- 
mid as the typical form of Chalda^o-Assyrian architecture. 
Thick walls weFe necessary both for stability and for pro- 
tection from the burning heat of that climate. The lack of 
stone for columns and the difficulty of procuring heavy 
beams for long spans made broad halls and chambers im- 
possible. The plans of Assyrian palaces look like assem- 
blages of long corridors and small cells (Fig. 18). Neither 
the wooden post nor the column played any part in this 
architecture except for window-mullions and subordinate 
members* It is probable that the vault was used for roof- 
ng many of the halls ; the arch was certainly employed 
for doors and the barrel-vault for the drainage-tunnels 

* See Fergusson, Palaces of Nineveh and Persepolis, for an ingenious 
but unsubstantiated argument for the use of columns in Assyrian palaces. 



under the terraces, made necessary by the heavy rainfall. 
What these structures lacked in durability and height was 
made up in decorative magnificence. The interior walls 
were wainscoted to a height of eight or nine feet with 
alabaster slabs covered with those low-relief pictures of 

l8.--PAI.ACB OF SAR<.<>N AT K Hi .K-.AHA1). 

hunting scenes, battles, and gods, whieh now enrich the 

museums of London, Paris, and other modern < it its. Else- 
where painted plaster or more durable enamelled tile in brill- 
iant colors embellished the walls, and, doubtless, rugs and 

tapestries added their riehness to this an liitei tural splendor. 

CHALDJEAN AECHITECTURE. The ruins at Mugheir (the 

Biblical Ur), dating, perhaps, from 2200 B.C., belong to the 

two-storied terrace or platform of a temple to Sin or Hurki. 


The wall of sun-dried brick is faced with enamelled tile. 
The shrine, which was probably small, has wholly disap- 
peared from the summit of the mound. At Warka (the an- 
cient Erech) are two terrace-walls of palaces, one of which 
is ornamented with convex flutings and with a species of 
mosaic in checker patterns and zigzags, formed by terra-cotta 
cones or spikes driven into the clay, their exposed bases 
being enamelled in the desired colors. The other shows a 
system of long, narrow panels, in a style suggesting the 
influence of Egyptian models through some as yet unknown 
channel. This panelling became a common feature of the 
later Assyrian art (see Fig. 19). At Birs-Nimroud are the 
ruins of a stepped pyramid surmounted by a small shrine. 
Its seven stages are said to have been originally faced with 
glazed tile of the seven planetary colors, gold, silver, yellow, 
red, blue, white, and black. The ruins at Nippur, which 
comprise temples, altars, and dwellings dating from 4000 B.C., 
have been alluded to. Babylon, the later capital of Chaldaea, 
to which the shapeless mounds of Mujelibeh and Kasr seem 
to have belonged, has left no other recognizable vestige of 
its ancient magnificence. 

ASSYRIAN ARCHITECTURE. Abundant ruins exist of Nine- 
veh, the Assyrian capital, and its adjacent palace-sites. 
Excavations at Koyunjik, Khorsabad, and Nimroud have 
laid bare a number of these royal dwellings. Among them 
are the palace of Assur-nazir-pal (885 b.c.) and two palaces 
of Shalmaneser II. (850 b.c) at Nimroud ; the great palace 
of Sargon at Khorsabad (721 b.c.) ; that of Sennacherib at 
Koyunjik (704 b.c.) ; of Esarhaddon at Nimroud (650 b.c) ; 
and of Assur-bani-pal at Koyunjik (660 B.C.). All of these 
paiaces are designed on the same general principle, best 
shown by the plan (Fig. 18) of the palace of Sargon at 
Khorsabad, excavated by Botta and Place. 

In this palace two large and several smaller courts are 
surrounded by a complex series of long, narrow halls and 

3 2 


small, square chambers. One court probably belonged to 
the harem, another to the kind's apartments, others to de- 
pendents and to the service of the palace. The crude brick 
walls are immensely thick and without windows, the only 
openings being for doors. The absence of columns made 
wide halls impossible, and great size could only be attained 
in the direction of length. A terraced pyramid supported 
an altar or shrine to the southwest of the palace ; at the 

fig. 19. <;ate, KIIDKSAHAP. 

west corner was a temple, the substructure of which was 
crowned by a cavetto cornice showing plainly the influence 

of Egyptian models. The whole palace stood upon a stu- 
pendous platform faced with cut stone, an unaccustomed 

extravagance in Assyria. 

ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS There is no evidence that the 
Assyrians ever used eolmnnar supports except in minor or 
accessory details. There are few halls in any of the ruins 
too wide to be spanned by gOOd Syrian Cedar beams or 
palm timbers, and these few > in to have had vaulted 

Ceilings. So clumsy a feature as the central wall in the 
great hall of Ksarhaddon's palace at Nimroud would never 
have been resorted to for the Support of the ceiling, had 


the Assyrians been familiar with the use of columns. That 
they understood the arch and vault is proved by their 
admirable terrace-drains and the fine arched gate in the 
walls of Khorsabad (Fig. 19), as well as by bas-reliefs rep- 
resenting dwellings with domes of various forms. More- 
over, a few vaulted chambers of moderate size, and fallen 
fragments of crude brick vaulting of larger span, have 
been found in several of the Assyrian ruins. 

The construction was extremely simple. The heavy clay 
walls were faced with alabaster, burned brick, or enamelled 
tiles. The roofs were probably covered with stamped 
earth, and sometimes paved on top with tiles or slabs of 
alabaster to form terraces. Light was introduced most 
probably through windows immediately under the roof and 
divided by small columns forming mullions, as suggested by 
certain relief pictures. No other system seems consistent 
with the windowless walls of the ruins. It is possible that 
many rooms depended wholly on artificial light or on the 
scant rays coming through open doors. To this day, in the 
hot season the population of Mosul takes refuge from the 
torrid heats of summer in windowless basements lighted 
only by lamps. 

ORNAMENT. The only structural decorations seem to 
have been the panelling of exterior walls in a manner re- 
sembling the Chaldaean terrace-walls, and a form of par- 
apet like a stepped cresting. There were no character- 
istic mouldings, architraves, capitals, or cornices. Nearly 
all the ornament was of the sort called applied, i.e., added 
after the completion of the structure itself. Pictures in 
low relief covered the alabaster revetment. They depicted 
hunting-scenes, battles, deities, and other mythological sub- 
jects, and are interesting to the architect mainly for their 
occasional representations of buildings and details of con- 
struction. Above this wainscot were friezes of enamelled 
brick ornamented with symbolic forms used as decorative 



* I . << ZZT 


motives; winged bulls, the " sacred tree" and mytholog- 
ical monsters, with rosettes, palmettes, lotus-flowers, and 
guillochcs (ornaments of interlacing bands winding about 
regularly spaced buttons or eyes). These ornaments were 
also used on the archivolts around the great arches of 
palace gates. The most singular adornments of these gates 

were the carved " portal guardi- 
ans " set into the deep jambs 
colossal monsters with the bodies 
of bulls, the wings of eagles, and 
human heads of terrible counte- 
nance. Of mighty bulk, they were 
yet minutely wrought in every 
detaij of head-dress, beard, feath- 
ers, curly hair, and anatomy. 

The purely conventional or- 
naments mentioned above the 
rosette, guilloche, and lotus-flower, and probably also the 
palmette, were derived from Egyptian originals. They 
were treated, however, in a quite new spirit and adapted 
to the special materials and uses of their environment. 
Thus the form of the palmette, even if derived, as is not 
unlikely, from the Egyptian lotus-motive, was assimilated 
to the more familiar palm-forms of Assyria (Fig. 20). 

Assyrian architecture never rivalled the Egyptian in 
grandeur or constructive power, in seriousness, or the 
higher artistic qualities. It did, however, produce impos- 
ing results with the poorest resources, and in its use of the 
arch and its development of ornamental forms it furnished 
trototypes for some of the most characteristic features of 
iter Asiatic art, which profoundly influenced both Greek 
and Byzantine architecture. 

MONUMENTS: The most Imp ort a nt Chaldaeaa and Assyrian monuments 

of which there are extant remains, have already been enumerated in the 
text. It is therefore unnecessary to duplicate the list here. 



Books Recommended : As before, Babelon ; Bliss, Exca- 
vations at Jerusalem. Reber. Also Dieulafoy, L Art antique 
de la Perse. Fellows, Account of Discoveries in Lycia. Fer- 
gusson, The Temple at Jerusalem. Flandin et Coste, Perse 
ancienne. Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art in 'Persia; His- 
tory of Art in Phrygia, Lydia, Caria, ana' Lycia ; History of 
Art in Sardinia and Judcea. Texier, L 1 Armlnie et la Perse ; 
L'Asie Mineure. De Vogii, Le Temple de Jerusalem . 

PERSIAN ARCHITECT USE. With the Persians, who under 
Cyrus (536 b.c.) and Cambyses (525 B.C.) became the masters 
of the Orient, the Aryan race superseded the Semitic, and 
assimilated in new combinations the forms it borrowed from 
the Assyrian civilization. Under the Achaemenidae (536 to 
330 b.c) palaces were built in Persepolis and Susa of a 
splendor and majesty impossible in Mesopotamia, and rival- 
ling the marvels in the Nile Valley. The conquering nation 
of warriors who had overthrown the Egyptians and As- 
syrians was in turn conquered by the arts of its vanquished 
foes, and speedily became the most luxurious of all nations. 
The Persians were not great innovators in art ; but inhabit- 
ing aland of excellent building resources, they were able to 
combine the Egyptian system of interior columns with de- 
tails borrowed from Assyrian art, and suggestions, derived 
most probably from the general use in Persia and Central 
Asia, of wooden posts or columns as intermediate supports. 
Out of these elements they evolved an architecture which 


has only become fully known to us since the excavations of 
M. and Mme. Dieulafoy at Susa in 1882. 

both crude and baked bricks, the latter far more freely than 
was practicable in Assyria, owing to the greater abundance 
of fuel. Walls when built of the weaker material were 
faced with baked brick enamelled in brilliant colors, or both 
moulded and enamelled, to form colored pictures in relief. 
Stone was employed for walls and columns, and, in con- 
junction with brick, for the jambs and lintels of doors and 
windows. Architraves and ceiling-beams were of wood. 
The palaces were erected, as in Assyria, upon broad plat- 
forms, partly cut in the rock and partly structural, ap- 
proached by imposing flights of steps. These palaces were 
composed of detached buildings, propylaea or gates of 
honor, vast audience-halls open on one or two sides, and 
chambers or dwellings partly enclosing or flanking these 
halls, or grouped in separate buildings. Temples appear to 
have been of small importance, perhaps owing to habits of 
out-of-door worship of fire and sun. There are few struct- 
ural tombs, but there are a number of imposing royal sep- 
ulchres cut in the rock at Naksh-i-Roustam. 

ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS. The Persians, like the Egyp- 
tians, used the column as an internal feature in hvpostvle 
halls of great size, and externally to form porches, and per- 
haps, also, open kiosks without walls. The great Hall of 
Xerxes at Persepolis coven 100,000 square feet more 
than double the area of the Hypostyle Hall at Karnak. 
But the Persian column was derived from wooden proto- 
types and used with irooden architraves, permitting a wider 
spacing than is possible with stone. In the present in- 
stance thirty-six columns sufficed for an area which in the 
Karnak hall contained one hundred and thirty-four. The 
shafts being slender and finely fluted instead of painted or 
carved, the effect prouueed was totally different from that 


sought by the Egyptians. The most striking peculiarity of 
the column was the capital, which was forked (Fig. 21) 
In one of the two principal types the fork, formed b) 
the coupled fore-parts of bulls or 
symbolic monsters, rested directly 
on the top of the shaft. In the 
other, two singular members were 
interposed between the fork and the 
shaft ; the lower, a sort of double 
bell or bell-and-palm capital, and 
above it, just beneath the fork, a cu- 
rious combination of vertical scrolls 
or volutes, resembling certain orna- 
ments seen in Assyrian furniture. 
The transverse architrave rested in 
the fork ; the longitudinal archi- 
trave was supported on the heads 
of the monsters. A rich moulded 
base, rather high and in some cases 
adorned with carved leaves or flut- 
ings, supported the columns, which 
in the Hall of Xerxes were over 66 
feet high and 6 feet in diameter. 
The architraves have perished, but 
the rock - cut tomb of Darius at 
Naksh-i-Roustam reproduces in its 

facade a palace-front, showing a banded architrave with 
dentils an obvious imitation of the ends of wooden rafters 
on a lintel built up of several beams. 

These features of the architrave, as well as the fine flut- 
ings and moulded bases of the columns, are found in Ionic 
architecture, and in part, at least, in Lycian tombs. As all 
these examples date from nearly the same period, the origin 
of these forms and their mutual relations have not been 
fully determined. The Persian capitals, however, are 



unique, and so far as known, without direct prototypes or 
derivatives. Their constituent elements may have been 
borrowed from various sources. One can hardly help see- 
ing the Egyptian palm-capital in the lower member of the 
compound type (Fig. 21). 

The doors and windows had banded architraves or trims 
and cavetto cornices very Egyptian in character. The por- 
tals were flanked, as in Assyria, by winged monsters ; but 
these were built up in several courses of stone, not carved 
from single blocks like their prototypes. Plaster or, as at 
Susa, enamelled bricks, replaced as a wall-finish the As- 
syrian alabaster wainscot. These bricks, splendid in color, 
and moulded into relief pictures covering large surfaces, 
are the oldest examples of the skill of the Persians in a 
branch of ceramic art in which they have always excelled 
down to our own day. 

LYCIAN AECHITECTUEE. The architecture of those Asiatic 
peoples which served as intermediaries between the ancienr 
civilizations of Egypt and Assyria on the one hand and oi 
the Greeks on the other, need occupy us only a moment in 
passing. None of them developed a complete and inde- 
pendent style or produced monuments of the first rank. 
Those chiefly concerned in the transmission of ideas were 
the Cypriotes, Phoenicians, and I.yeians. The part played 
by other Asiatic nations is too slight to be considered here. 
Prom Cyprus the (Greeks could have learned little beyond a 
few elementary notions regarding sculpture and pottery, 
although it is possible that the volute-form in Ionic archi- 
tecture was originally derived from patterns on Cypriote 
pottery and from certain Cypriote steles, where it appears 
as a modified lotus motive. The Phoenicians were the 
World's traders from a very early age down to the Persian 
conquest They ttOt only distributed through the Mediter- 
ranean lands the manufactures <>f Egypt and Assyria, but 
also counterfeited them anil adopted their forms in deco- 


rating their own wares. But they have bequeathed us not 
a single architectural ruin of importance, either of temples 
or palaces, nor are the few tombs still extant of sufficient 
artistic interest to deserve even brief mention in a work of 
this scope. 

In Lycia, however, there arose a system of tomb-design 
which came near creating a new architectural style, and 
which doubtless influenced both Persia and the Ionian col- 
onies. The tombs were mostly cut in the rock, though a 
few are free-standing monolithic monuments, resembling 
sarcophagi or small shrines mounted on a high base or 

In all of these tombs we recognize a manifest copying in 
stone of framed wooden structures. The walls are pan- 
elled, or imitate open structures framed of squared timbers. 
The roofs are often gabled, sometimes in the form of a 
pointed arch ; they generally show a banded architrave, 
dentils, and a raking cornice, or else an imitation of broadly 
projecting eaves with small round rafters. There are sev- 
eral with porches of Ionic columns ; of these, some are of 
late date and evidently copied from Asiatic Greek models. 
Others, and notably one at Telmissus, seem to be examples 
of a primitive Ionic, and may indeed have been early steps 
in the development of that splendid style which the Ionic 
Greeks, both in Asia Minor and in Attica, carried to such 

JEWISH ARCHITECTURE. The Hebrews borrowed from 
the art of every people with whom they had relations, so 
that we encounter in the few extant remains of their archi- 
tecture Egyptian, Assyrian, Phoenician, Greek, Roman, and 
Syro-Byzantine features, but nothing like an independent 
national style. Among the most interesting of these re- 
mains are tombs of various periods, principally occurring 
in the valleys near Jerusalem, and erroneously ascribed by 
popular tradition to the judges, prophets, and kings of 


Israel. Some of them are structural, some cut in the 
rock ; the former (tomb of Absalom, of Zechariah) deco- 
rated with Doric and Ionic engaged orders, were once sup- 
posed to be primitive types of these orders and of great 
antiquity. They are now recognized to be debased imita- 
tions of late Greek work of the third or second century 
B.C. They have Egyptian cavetto cornices and pyramidal 
roofs, like many Asiatic tombs. The openings of the roc k- 
cut tombs have frames or pediments carved with rich sur- 
face ornament showing a similar mixture of types Roman 
triglyphs and garlands, Syrian-Greek acanthus leaves, con- 
ventional foliage of Byzantine character, and naturalistic 
carvings of grapes and local plant-life. The carved arches 
of two of the ancient city gates (one the so-called Golden 
Gate) in Jerusalem display rich acanthus foliage somewhat 
like that of the tombs, but more vigorous and artistic. If 
of the time of Herod or even of Constantine, as claimed 
by some, they would indicate that Greek artists in Syria 
created the prototypes of Byzantine ornament. They are 
more probably, however, Byzantine restorations of the 6th 
century a.d. 

The one great achievement of Jewish architecture w;is 
the national Temple of Jehovah, represented by three suc- 
cessive edifices on Mount Moriah, the site of the present 
so-called " Mosque of Omar." The first, built by Solo- 
mon (1012 i:.( .) appears from the Biblical description* 
to have combined Egyptian conceptions (successive courts, 
lofty entrance -pylons, the Sanctuary and the sekos or 
'Holy of Holies") with Phoenician and Assyrian details 
and workmanship (cedar woodwork, empaistic decoration 
or overlaying with rrf>oitss/ metal work, the isolated brazen 
columns Jachin and Boaz). The whole stood on a mighty 
platform built up with stupendous masonry and vaulted 
chambers from the valley surrounding the rock on three 
* 1 Kings vi.-vii. ; 2 Chronicles iii.-iv. 


sides. This precinct was nearly doubled in size by Herod 
(18 B.C.) who extended it southward by a terrace-wall of 
Still more colossal masonry. Some of the stones are twen- 
ty-two feet long ; one reaches the prodigious length of 
forty feet. The "Wall of Lamentations" is a part of this 
terrace, upon which stood the Temple on a raised platform. 
As rebuilt by Herod, the Temple reproduced in part the an- 
tique design, and retained the porch of Solomon along the 
east side ; but the whole was superbly reconstructed in 
white marble with abundance of gilding. Defended by the 
Castle of Antonia on the northwest, and embellished with a 
new and imposing triple colonnade on the south, the whole 
edifice, a conglomerate of Egyptian, Assyrian, and Roman 
conceptions and forms, was one of the most singular and 
yet magnificent creations of ancient art. 

The temple of Zerubbabel (515 B.C.), intermediate be- 
tween those above described, was probably less a re-edifi- 
cation of the first, than a new design. While based on the 
scheme of the first temple, it appears to have followed 
more closely the pattern described in the vision of Ezekiel 
(chapters xl.-xlii.). It was far inferior to its predecessor 
in splendor and costliness. No vestiges of it remain. 

MONUMENTS. Persian : at Murghab, the tomb of Cyrus, known as 
Gabre-Madre-Soleiman a gabled structure on a seven-stepped pyramidal 
basement (525 B.C.). At Persepolis the palace of Darius (521 B.C.) ; the 
Propylaea of Xerxes, his palace and his harem (?) or throne-hall (480 B.C.). 
These splendid structures, several of them of vast size, resplendent with 
color and majestic with their singular and colossal columns, must have 
formed one of the most imposing architectural groups in the world. At 
various points, tower-like tombs, supposed erroneously by Fergusson to 
have been fire altars. At Naksh-i-Roustam, the tomb of Darius, cut in the 
rock. Other tombs near by at Persepolis proper and at Pasargadne. At 
the latter place remains of the palace of Cyrus. At Susa the palace of 
Xerxes and Artaxerxes (480-405 B.C.). 

There are no remains of private houses or temples. 

I.ycian : the principal Lycian monuments are found in Myra, Anti- 


phellus, and Telmissus. Some of the monolithic tombs have been re- 
moved to the British and other European museums. 

JEWISH : the temples have been mentioned above. The palace of Solo- 
mon. The rock-cut monolithic tomb of Siloam. So-called tombs of 
Absalom and Zechariah, structural ; probably of Herod's time or later. 
Rock-cut Tombs of the Kings ; of the Prophets, etc. City gates (Hero- 
dian or early Christian period). 



Books Recommended : As before, Reber. Also, Anderson 
and Spiers, Architecture of Greece and Rome. Baumeister, 
Denkmaler der Klassischen Alterthums. Botticher, Tektonik 
der Hellenen. Chipiez, Histoire critique des ordres grecs. 
Curtius, Adler and Treu, Die Ausgrabungen zu Olympia. 
Durm, Antike Baukunst (in Handbuch d. Arch). Frazer, Pau- 
sanias' Description of Greece. Hitorff, Larchitecture poly- 
chrome chez les Grecs. Michaelis, Der Parthenon. Penrose, 
An Investigation, etc., of Athenian Architecture. Perrot and 
Chipiez, History of Art in Primitive Greece ; La Grece de 
P Epopee; La Grece archaique. Stuart and Revett, Antiquities 
of Athens. Tarbell, History of Greek Art. Texier, L'Asie 
Mineure. Wilkins, Antiquities of Magna Grcecia. 

GENERAL CONSIDEBATIONS. Greek art marks the begin- 
ning of European civilization. The Hellenic race gathered 
up influences and suggestions from both Asia and Africa and 
fused them with others, whose sources are unknown, into an 
art intensely national and original, which was to influence 
the arts of many races and nations long centuries after the 
decay of the Hellenic states. The Greek mind, compared 
with the Egyptian or Assyrian, was more highly intellect- 
ual, more logical, more symmetrical, and above all more 
inquiring and analytic. Living nowhere remote from the 
sea, the Greeks became sailors, merchants, and colonizers. 
The Ionian kinsmen of the European Greeks, speaking a 
dialect of the same language, populated the coasts of Asia 
Minor and many of the islands, so that through them the 



Greeks were open to the influences of the Assyrian, Phoeni- 
cian, Persian, and Lycian civilizations. In Cyprus they en- 
countered Egyptian influences, and finally, under Psammet- 
ichus, they established in Egypt itself the Greek city of 
Naukratis. They were thus by geographical situation, by 
character, and by circumstances, peculiarly fitted to receive, 
develop, and transmit the mingled influences of the East 
and the South. 

PREHISTORIC MONUMENTS.* Authentic Greek history be- 
gins with the first Olympiad, 776 B.C. The earliest mon- 
uments of that historic 
architecture which devel- 
oped into the masterpieces 
of the Periclean and Alex- 
andrian ages, date from 
the middle of the follow- 
ing century. But there are 
a number of older build- 
ings, belonging presuma- 
bly to the so-called Heroic 
Age, which, though seem- 
ingly unconnected with 

the later historic develop- 
ment of Greek architect- 
ure, are still worthy of 
note. They are the work of a people somewhat advanced 
in civilization, probably the I'elasgi, who preceded the Dori- 
ans on Greek soil, and consist mainly of fortifications, 
walls, gates, and tombs, the most important of which are at 
Mycenae and Tiryns. At the latter place is a well-defined 
acropolis, with massive walls in which are passages Covered 

by stones successively overhanging or corbelled until they 

t. The masonry is of huge stones piled without cement. 

\t Mycena the city wall is pierced In the remarkable Lion 

Gate (Fig. 22), consisting of two jambs and a huge lintel, 

* 1- or enlargement on tbu topic Me Appeadix A. 



over which the weight is relieved by a triangular opening. 
This is filled with a sculptured group, now much defaced, 
representing two rampant lions flanking a singular column 
which tapers downward. This symbolic group has rela- 
tions with Hittite and Phrygian sculptures, and with the 
symbolism of the worship of Rhea Cybele. The masonry 
of the wall is carefully dressed but not regularly coursed. 
Other primitive walls and gates showing openings and 
embryonic arches of various forms, are found widely scat- 
tered, at Samos and Delos, at Phigaleia, Thoricus, Argos 
and many other points. The very earliest are hardly more 
than random piles of rough stone. Those which may fairly 
claim notice for their artistic 
masonry are of a later date 
and of two kinds : the coursed, 
and the polygonal or Cyclo- 
pean, so called from the tra- 
dition that they were built by 
the Cyclopes. These Cyclo- fig. 23. polygonal masonry. 
pean walls were composed of 

large, irregular polygonal blocks carefully fitted together 
and dressed to a fairly smooth face (Fig. 23). Both kinds 
were used contemporaneously, though in the course of 
time the regular coursed masonry finally superseded the 

THOLOS OF ATBEUS. All these structures present, however, 
only the rudiments of architectural art. The so-called 
Tholos (or Treasury) of Atreus, at Mycenae, on the other 
hand, shows the germs of truly artistic design (Fig. 24). It 
is in reality a tomb, and is one of a large class of prehistoric 
tombs found in almost every part of the globe, consisting 
of a circular stone-walled and stone-roofed chamber buried 
under a tumulus of earth. This one is a beehive-shaped 
construction of horizontal courses of masonry, with a stone- 
walled passage, the dromos, leading to the entrance door. 

4 6 


Though internally of domical form, its construction with 
horizontal beds in the masonry proves that the idea of the 

true dome with the beds 
of each course pitched at 
an angle always normal 
to the curve of the vault, 
was not yet grasped. A 
small sepulchral chamber 
opens from the great one, 
by a door with the cus- 
tomary relieving triangle 
over it. 

Traces of a metal lin- 
ing have been found on 
the inner surface of the 
dome and on the jambs 
of the entrance - door. 
This entrance is the most 
artistic and elaborate part 
of the edifice (Fig. 25). 
The main opening is enclosed in a three-banded frame, and 
was once flanked by columns which, as shown by fragments 
still existing and by marks on either 
side the do>r, tapered downward as in 
the sculptured column over the Lion 
(iate. Shafts, bases, and capitals 
covered with zig-zag bands or 
chevrons of fine spirals. This well- 
studied decoration, the banded jambs, 
and the curiously inverted columns 

(of which several other examples exist 

in or near Mycenae), all point to a 

fairly developed art, derived partly 

from Egyptian and partly from Asiatic sources. That 

Kgyptian influences had affected this early art is further 





proved by a fragment of carved and painted ornament on a 
ceiling in Orchomenos, imitating with remarkable closeness 
certain ceiling decorations in Egyptian tombs. 

HISTORIC monuments ; the ORDERS. It was the Dorian s 
and Ionians who developed the architecture of classic 
Greece. This fact is perpetuated in the traditional names, 
Doric and Ionic, given to the two systems of columnar de- 
sign which formed the most striking feature of that archi- S 
tecture. While in Egypt the column was used almost ex- 
clusively as an internal support and decoration, in .Greece 
it was chiefly employed to produce an imposing exterior ef- 
fect. It was the most important element in the temple 
architecture of the Greeks, and an almost indispensable 
adornment of their gateways, public squares, and temple 
enclosures. To the column the two races named above 
gave each a special and radically distinct development, and 
it was not until the Periclean age that the two forms came 
to be used in conjunction, even by the mixed Doric-Ionic 
people of Attica. Each of the two types had its own 
special shaft, capital, entablature, mouldings, and orna- 
ments, although considerable variation was allowed in the 
proportions and minor details. The general type, however, 
remained substantially unchanged from first to last. The 
earliest examples known to us of either order show it com- 
plete in all its parts, its later development being restricted 
to the refining and perfecting of its proportions and details. 
The probable origin of these orders will be separately con- 
sidered later on. 

THE DORIC. The column of the Doric order (Figs. 26, 27) 
consists of a tapering shaft rising directly from the stylo- 
bate or platform and surmounted by a capital of great sim- 
plicity and beauty. The shaft is fluted with sixteen to 
twenty shallow channellings of segmental or elliptical sec- 
tion, meeting in sharp edges or arrises. The capital is 
made up of a circular cushion or echinus adorned with fine 



grooves called annuhe, and a plain square abacus or cap 
Upon this rests a plain architrave or epistyle, with a narrow 
fillet, the taenia, running along its upper edge. The frieze 

above it is divided into square 
panels, called the metopes, sepa- 
rated by vertical triglyphs having 
each two vertical grooves and 
chamfered edges. There is a 
triglyph over each column and 
one over each intercolumniation, 
or two in rare instances where 
the columns are widely spaced. 
The cornice consists of a broadly 
projecting corona resting on a 
be J -mould of one or two simple 
mouldings. Its under surface, 
called the soffit, is adorned with 
mutules, square, flat projections 
having each eighteen guttie de- 
pending from its under side. 
Two or three small mouldings 
run along the upper edge of the 
corona, which has in addition, 

over each slope of the gable, a 
gutter-moulding or cymatium. The cornices along the 
horizontal edges of the roof have instead of the cymatium 
a row of anteji.\,r, ornaments of terra-< Otta <>r marble placed 
opposite the foot of each tile-ridge of the roofing. The 
enclosed triangular field of the gable, called the tympanum, 
was in the larger monuments adorned with sculptured 
groups resting on the shelf formed by the horizontal cor- 
nice below. Carved ornaments called acroieria commonly 
embellished the three angles of the gable or pediment. 

POLYCHBOMY. It has been fully proved, after a century 
of debate, that all this elaborate system of parts, seven 


A, Cre/idoma, or Stylobate : 
6, Column; c. Architrave ; it, 

'1 tenia : e, Frieze : f, Horizontal 
cornice: g, Raking cornice; h. 

Tympanum 0/ pediment ; h, Mt- 



and dignified in their simplicity of form, received a rich 
decoration of color. While the precise shades and tones 
employed cannot be predicated with certainty, it is well 
established that the triglyphs were painted blue and the 
metopes red, and that all the mouldings were decorated 
with leaf-ornaments, " eggs-and-darts," and frets, in red, 
green, blue, and gold. The walls and columns were also 
colored, probably with pale tints of yellow or buff, to re- 
duce the glare of the fresh marble or the whiteness of the 
fine stucco with which the surfaces of masonry of coarser 
stone were primed. In the clear Greek atmosphere and 
outlined against the brilliant sky, the Greek temple must 
have presented an aspect of rich, sparkling gayety. 

ORIGIN OP THE ORDER. It is generally believed that the 
details of the Doric frieze and cornice were reminiscences 
of a primitive wood construction. The triglyph suggests 
the chamfered ends of 
cross-beams made up of 
three planks each ; the 
mutules, the sheathing 
of the eaves ; and the 
guttae, the heads of the 
spikes or trenails by 
which the sheathing 
was secured. It is 
known that in early 
astylar temples the me- 
topes were left open 
like the spaces between 

the ends Of Ceiling-raf- fig. 27. dokic order of the Parthenon. 

ters. In the earlier 

peripteral temples, as at Selinus, the triglyph-frieze is re- 
tained around the cella-wall under the ceiling of the colon- 
nade, where it has no functional significance, as a survival 
from times antedating the adoption of the colonnade, when 


the tradition of a wooden roof-construction showing ex 
temally had not yet been forgotten. 

A similar wooden origin for the Doric column has been 
advocated by some, who point to the assertion of Pausa- 
nias that in the Doric Heraion at Olympia the original 
wooden columns had with one exception been replaced by 
stone columns as fast as they decayed. (Seep. 62.) This, 
however, only proves that wooden columns were sometimes 
used in early buildings, not that the Doric column was de- 
rived from them. Others would derive it from the Egyp- 
tian columns of Beni Hassan (p. 12), which it certainly re- 
sembles. But they do not explain how the Greeks could 
have been familiar with the Beni Hassan column long be- 
fore the opening of Egypt to them under Psammetichus ; 
nor why, granting them some knowledge of Egyptian archi- 
tecture, they should have passed over the splendors of Kar- 
nak and Luxor to copy these inconspicuous tombs perched 
high up on the cliffs of the Nile. It would seem that the 
(ireeks invented this form independently, developing it in 
buildings which have perished ; unless, indeed, they brought 
the idea with them from their primitive Aryan home in A 

THE IONIC ORDER was characterized by greater slenderness 
of proportion and elegance of detail than the Doric, and 
depended more on carving than on color for the decoration 
of its members (Fig. 28). It was adopted in the fiftii cen- 
tury BX. by the people of Attica, and used both for civic and 
religious buildings, sometimes alone and sometimes in con- 
junction with the Doric. The column was from eight to 
ten diameters in height, against four and one-third to seven 
for the Doric. It stood on a base which was usually coin- 
posed of two tori (see p. 25 for definition) separated by a 
scotia (a concave moulding of semicircular or semi-elliptical 
profile), and was sometimes provided also with a square flat 
base-block, the////////. There was much variety in the pro- 
portions and details of these mouldings, which were often 



enriched by (lutings or carved guilloches. The tall shall 
bore twenty-four deep narrow flutings separated by narrow 
fillets. The capital was the most peculiar feature of the 
order. It consisted of a bead or astragal and echinus, over 
which was a horizontal band ending on either side in a 
scroll or volute, the sides of which presented the aspect 
shown in Fig. 29. A thin moulded abacus was interposed 
between this member and the archi- 

The Ionic capital was marked by 
two awkward features which all its 
richness could not conceal. One 
was the protrusion of the echinus 
beyond the face of the band above 
it, the other was the disparity be- 
tween the side and front views of 
the capital, especially noticeable at 
the corners of a colonnade. To 
obviate this, various contrivances 
were tried, none wholly successful. 
Ordinarily the two adjacent exte- 
rior sides of the corner capital were treated alike, the scrolls 
at their meeting being bent out at an angle of 45 , while 
the two inner faces simply intersected, cutting each other 
in halves. 

The entablature comprised an architrave of two or three 
flat bands crowned by fine mouldings ; an uninterrupted 
frieze, frequently sculptured in relief ; and a simple cornice 
of great beauty. In addition to the ordinary bed-mould- 
ings there was in most examples a row of narrow blocks or 
dentils under the corona, which was itself crowned by a high 
cymatium of extremely graceful profile, carved with the 
rich " honeysuckle " {anthemioti) ornament. All the mould- 
ings were carved with the "egg-and-dart," heart-leaf and 
anthemion ornaments, so designed as to recall by their out- 





line the profile of the moulding itself. The details of this 
order were treated with much more freedom and variety 
than those of the Doric. The pediments of Ionic build- 
ings were rarely or never adorned with groups of sculpture. 
The volutes and echinus of the capital, the fluting of the 
shaft, the use of a moulded circular base, and in the cornice 
the high corona and cymatium, these were constant ele- 
ments in every Ionic order, but all other details varied 
widely in the different examples. 

ORIGIN OF THE IONIC ORDER. The origin of the Ionic order 
has given rise to almost as much controversy as that of the 
Doric. Its different elements were apparently derived 

from various sources. 
The Lycian tombs may 
have contributed the 
denticular cornice and 
perhaps also the gen- 
eral form of the column 
and capital. In the Per- 
sian architecture of the 
sixth century n.c, the 
high moulded base, the 
narrow flutings of the 
shaft, the carved bead- 
moulding and the use of 
scrolls in the capital are 
characteristic features, which may have been borrowed by 
the Ionians during the same century, unless, indeed, they 
were themselves the work of fonic or Lycian workmen in 
Persian employ. The banded architrave and the use of the 
volute in the decoration of stele-caps (from <rrq\rj = a me- 
morial stone OT COltimn standing isolated and upright), 
furniture, and minor structures are common features in 
Assyrian, Lycian, and other Asiatic architecture of early 
date. The volute or scroll itself as an independent deco- 




rative motive may have originated in successive variations 
of Egyptian lotus-patterns.* But the combination of these 
diverse elements and their development into the final form 
of the order was the work of the Ionian Greeks, and it was 
in the Ionian provinces of Asia Minor that the most splen- 
did examples of its use are to be 
found (Halicarnassus, Miletus, Pri- 
ene, Ephesus), while the most grace- 
ful and perfect are those of Doric- 
Ionic Attica. 

a late outgrowth of the Ionic rather 
than a new order, and up to the time 
of the Roman conquest was only used 
for monuments of small size (see Fig. 
38). Its entablature in pure Greek 
examples was identical with the 
Ionic ; the shaft and base were only 
slightly changed in proportion and 
detail. The capital, however, was a 
new departure, based probably on 
metallic embellishments of altars, 
pedestals, etc., of Ionic style. It 
consisted in the best examples of a 
high bell-shaped core surrounded by 
one or two rows of acanthus leaves, 
above which were pairs of branching 
scrolls meeting at the corners in spi- 
ral volutes. These served to support the angles of a 
moulded abacus with concave sides (Fig. 30). One ex- 
ample, from the Tower of the Winds (the clepsydra of 
Andronicus Cyrrhestes) at Athens, has only smooth pointed 
palm-leaves and no scrolls above a single row of acanthus 
leaves. Indeed, the variety and disparity among the dif- 
* As contended by W. H. Goodyear in his Grammar of the Lotus. 


(From the monument of Lysi- 


ferent examples prove that we have here only the first 
steps toward the evolution of an independent order, which 
it was reserved for the Romans to fully develop. 

GREEK TEMPLES ; THE TYPE. With the orders as their chief 
decorative element the Greeks built up a splendid archi- 
tecture of religious and secular monuments. Their noblest 
works were temples, which they designed with the utmost 
simplicity of general scheme, but carried out with a mastery 
of proportion and detail which has never been surpassed. 
Of moderate size in most cases, they were intended prima- 
rily to enshrine the simulacrum of the deity, and not, like 
Christian churches, to accommodate great throngs of wor- 
shippers. Nor were they, on the 
it " other hand, sanctuaries designed, 
like those of Egypt, to exclude all 
- - L> I ! J but a privileged few from secret 

a * V " ' * V *l rites performed only by the priests 

and king. The statue of the deity 
was enshrined in a chamber, the 
/ides (see plan, Fig. 31), often of 
considerable size, and accessible 
to the public through a columnar 

F-..3..-TV.ES OF GREEK TEMPLE porc h tne *,,. \ smaller 

rums. - 

,, / Antis: t, Prost,u: c, chamber, the opisthodomus, was 
Amphifirostyit : d. Peripteral sometimes added iii the rear of 

{The Parthenon) : .V, Saos ; O, ., 

Ofihthodomu, : S, Statue. llu ' " SailCtUatV, tO MTV, 

treasury or depository for votive 
offerings. Together these formed a wiudowless Structure 
called the cella, beyond which was the rear porch, the/W- 
ticum or efinaos. This whole structure was in the larger 

temples surrounded by a colonnade, the peristyle, which 
formed the most splendid feature of Creek architecture. 
The external aisle on either side of the cella was called the 

pteroma. A single gabled roof covered the entire building. 

The Greek colonnade was thus an exterior feature, sur- 


rounding the solid cella-wall instead of being enclosed by it 
as in Egypt. The temple was a public, not a royal monument ; 
and its builders aimed, not as in Egypt at size and overwhelm- 
ing sombre majesty, but rather at sunny beauty and the high- 
est perfection of proportion, execution, and detail (Fig. 34). 

There were of course many variations of the general 
type just described. Each of these has received a special 
name, which is given below with explanations and is illus- 
trated in Fig. 31. 

In antis ; with a porch having two or more columns en- 
closed between the projecting side-walls of the cella. 

Prostylar (or prostyle) ; with a columnar porch in front 
and no peristyle. 

Amphiprostyhxr (or -style) ; with columnar porches at both 
ends but no peristyle. 

Peripteral ; surrounded by columns. 

Pseudoperipteral ; with false or engaged columns built 
into the walls of the cella, leaving no pteroma. 

Dipteral ; with double lateral ranges of columns (see 

Fig- 39)- 

Pseudodipteral ; with a single row of columns on each 
side, whose distance from the wall is equal to two interco- 
lumniations of the front. 

Tetrastyle, hexastyle, octastyle, decastyle, etc. ; with four, six, 
eight, or ten columns in the end rows. 

CONSTBUCTION. All the temples known to us are of stone, 
though it is evident from allusions in the ancient writers 
that wood was sometimes used in early times. (See p. 62.) 
The finest temples, especially those of Attica, Olympia, and 
Asia Minor, were of marble. In Magna Grsecia, at Assos, 
and in other places where marble was wanting, limestone, 
sandstone, or lava was employed and finished with a thin, 
fine stucco. The roof was almost invariably of wood and 
gabled, forming at the ends pediments decorated in most 
cases with sculpture. The disappearance of these inflam- 



mable and perishable roofs has given rise to endless specu- 
lations as to the lighting of the cellas, which in all known 
ruins, except one at Agrigentum, are destitute of windows. 
It has been conjectured that light was admitted through 
openings in the roof, and even that the central part of the 
cella was wholly open to the sky. Such an arrangement is 
termed hypcet/irat, from an expression used in a description 
by Vitruvius;* but this description corresponds to no 
known structure, and the weight of opinion now inclines 
against the use of the hypoethral opening, except possibly in 
one or two of the largest temples, in which a part of the 
cella in front of the statue may have been thus left open. 
But even this partial hypathros is not substantiated by direct 
evidence. It hardly seems probable that the magnificent 
chryselephantine statues of such temples were ever thus 
left exposed to the extremes of the climate, which are often 
severe even in Greece. In the model of the Parthenon de- 
signed by Ch. Chipiez for the Metropolitan Museum in New 
York, a small clerestory opening through the roof admits a 
moderate amount of light to the cella; but this ingenious 
device rests on no positive evidence (see Frontispiece). It 
seems on the whole most probable that the cella was lighted 
entirely by artificial illumination ; but the controversy in 
its present state is and imist be wholly speculative. 

The wooden roof was covered with tiles of terra-cotta <>i 
marble. It was probably ceiled and panelled on the undef 
side, and richly decorated with color and gold. The pter- 
om.i had under the exterior roof a ceiling of stone or mar- 
ble, deeply panelled between transverse architraves. 

The naos and opisthodomus being in the larger temples 
too wide to be spanned by single beams, were furnished 
with interior columns to afford intermediate support. To 
avoid the extremes of too great massiveness and excessive 
slenderness in these columns, they were built in two stages, 
Lib III., Cap. I. 



and advantage was taken of this arrangement, in some 
cases, at least, to introduce lateral galleries into the naos. 

SCULPTURE AND CARVING. All the architectural member- 
ing was treated with the greatest refinement of design and 
execution, and the aid of sculpture, both in relief and in 
the round, was invoked 
to give splendor and 
significance to the mon- 
ument. The statue of 
the deity was the focus 
of internal interest, while 
externally, groups of 
statues representing the 
Olympian deities or the 
mythical exploits of 
gods, demigods, and 
heroes, adorned the ga- 
bles. Relief carvings in 
the friezes and metopes 
commemorated the fa- 
vorite national myths. 
In these sculptures we 
have the finest known 
adaptations of pure 
sculpture i.e., sculpt- 
ure treated as such and 
complete in itself to 

an architectural framework. The noblest examples of this 
decorative sculpture are those of the Parthenon, consisting 
of figures in the full round from the pediments, groups in 
high relief from the metopes, and the beautiful frieze of 
the Panathenaic procession from the cella-wall under the 
pteroma ceiling. The greater part of these splendid works 
are now in the British Museum, whither they were removed 
by Lord Elgin in 1801. From Olympia, Aegina, and 

:arved anthemion ornament. 



Phigaleia, other master- works of the same kind have been 
transferred to the museums of Europe. In the Doric style 
there was little carving other than the sculpture, the orna- 
ment being mainly polychromatic. Greek Ionic and Co- 
rinthian monuments, however, as well as minor works such 
as steles, altars, etc., were richly adorned with carved 
mouldings and friezes, festoons, acroteria, and other em- 
bellishments executed with the chisel. The anthemion 
ornament, a form related to the Egyptian lotus and Assy- 
rian palmette, most frequently figures in these. It was 
made into designs of wonderful vigor and beauty (Fig. ,32). 
DETAIL AND EXECUTION. In the handling and cutting of 
stone the Greeks displayed a surpassing skill and delicacy. 
While ordinarily they were content to use stones of moder- 
ate size, they never hesitated at any dimension ne< essary 
for proper effect or solid construction. The lower drums 
of the Parthenon peristyle are 6 feet (>' _ inches in diameter, 
and 2 feet 10 inches high, cut from single blocks of l'entelic 
marble.- The architraves of the Propylaea at Athens are 
each made up of two lintels placed side by side, the longesl 
17 feet 7 inches long, 3 feet 10 inches high, and 2 feel 1 
inches thick. In the colossal temples of Asia Minor, where 
the taste for the vast and grandiose was more pronounced, 
blocks of much greater size were used. These enormous 
stones were cut and fitted with the most scrupulous exa< t- 
mss. The walls of all important structures were built in 

regular courses throughout, every stone carefully bedded 
with extremely 1 lose joints. The masonry w.ts usually laid 
up without cement and clamped with metal ; there is no 
filling in with rubble and concrete between men facings of 
cut stone, as in most modern work. When the only avail- 
able stone iras of 1 ".use texture it was finished with a coat- 
ing of fine StUCCO, in which sharp edges and minute detail 
could be worked. 

The details were, in the best period, executed with the 


most extraordinary refinement and care. The profiles of 
capitals and mouldings, the carved ornament, the arrises of 
the flutings, were cut with marvellous precision and deli- 
cacy. It has been rightly said that the Greeks " built like 
Titans and finished like jewellers." But this perfect finish 
was never petty nor wasted on unworthy or vulgar design. 
The just relation of scale between the building and all its 
parts was admirably maintained ; the ornament was dis- 
tributed with rare judgment, and the vigor of its design 
saved it from all appearance of triviality. 

The sensitive taste of the Greeks led them into other 
refinements than those of mere mechanical perfection. In 
the Parthenon especially, but ajso in lesser degree in other 
temples, the seemingly straight lines of the building were 
all slightly curved, and the vertical faces inclined. This 
was done to correct the monotony and stiffness of absolutely 
straight lines and right angles, and certain optical illusions 
which their acute observation had detected. The long hor- 
izontal lines of the stylobate and cornice were made convex 
upward ; a similar convexity in the horizontal corona of the 
pediment counteracted the seeming concavity otherwise re- 
sulting from its meeting with the multiplied inclined lines 
of the raking cornice. The columns were almost imper- 
ceptibly inclined toward the cella, and the corner inter- 
columniations made a trifle narrower than the rest ; while 
the vertical lines of the arrises of the flutings were made 
convex outward with a curve of the utmost beauty and 
delicacy. By these and other like refinements there was 
imparted to the monument an elasticity and vigor of 
aspect, ah elusive and surprising beauty impossible to de- 
scribe and not to be explained by the mere composition and 
general proportions, yet manifest to every cultivated eye.* 

* These refinements, first noticed by Allason in 1814, and later confirmed 
by Cockered and Haller as to the columns, were published to the world in 
1838 by IIofTer, verified by Penrose in 1846, and further developed by the 
investigations of Ziller and later observers. 



Books Recommended : Same as for Chapter VI. Also, 
Bacon and Clarke, Investigations at Assos. Espouy, Frag- 
ments d'arehitee urt antique. Harrison and Verrall, Mythology 
ami Monuments of Ancient Athens. Hitorff et Zanth, Recual 
des Monuments de S&geste et Se/inonte. Magne, Le Parthenon. 
Koldewey and Puchstein, Die griechischen Tempel in Unter~ 
italien und Sicilien. Waldstein, The Argive Herceum. 

HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT. The history of Greek architect- 
ure, subsequent to the Heroic or Primitive Age, may be 
divided into periods as follows : 

The Archaic ; from 650 to 500 b.c. 

The Transitional ; from 500 to 460 b.c, or to the re- 
vival of prosperity after the Persian wars. 

The Periclean ; from 460 to 400 b.c. 

The FLORID or Alexandrian ; from 400 to 300 B.C. 
The Decadent ; 300 to 100 b.c. 

The Roman ; 100 ill. to 200 ad. 

These dates are, of course, somewhat arbitrary ; it is 
impossible to set exact bounds to style-periods, which must 
inevitably overlap at certain points, but the dates, as given 
above, will assist in distinguishing the successive phases of 
the history. 

ARCHAIC PERIOD. The archaic period is characterized by 
' Insure use <>f the Doric order, which appears iii the 
earliest monuments complete in all its parts, but heavy in its 
proportions and coarse in its execution. The oldest known 
temples of this period are the Apollo Temple at Corinth (650 
b.c. ?), and the Northern Temple on the acropolis at Selinus in 
Sicily (cir. 610-590 B.C.), They are both of a coarse lime- 
stone covered with stucco. The columns are low and mas- 
sive (41/3 to 4^ diameters in height), widely spaced, and 


carry a very high entablature. The triglyphs still appear 
around the cella wall under the pteroma ceiling, an illogical 
detail destined to disappear in later buildings. Other tem- 
ples at Selinus date from the middle or latter part of the 
sixth century ; they have higher columns and finer profiles 
than those just mentioned. The great Temple of Zeus at 
Selinus was the earliest of five colossal Greek temples of 
very nearly identical dimensions ; it measured 360 feet by 167 
feet in plan, but was never completed. During the second 
half of the sixth century important Doric temples were 
built at Paestum in South 




Italy, and Agrigentum in 
Sicily ; the somewhat primi- 
tive temple at Assos in Asia 
Minor, with uncouth carv- 
ings of centaurs and mon- 
sters on its architrave, be- * ' "" '^ 
longs to this same period, fig. 33 . temple of zeus. agrigentum. 
The Temple of Zeus at 

Agrigentum (Fig. 3$) ' s another singular and exceptional 
design, and was the second of the five colossal temples 
mentioned above. The pteroma was entirely enclosed by 
walls with engaged columns showing externally, and was of 
extraordinary width. The walls of the narrow cella were 
interrupted by heavy piers supporting atlantes, or applied 
statues under the ceiling. There seem to have been win- 
dows between these figures, but it is not clear whence they 
borrowed their light, unless it was admitted by the omis- 
sion of the metopes between the external triglyphs. 

THE TRANSITION. During the transitional period there 
was a marked improvement in the proportions, detail, and 
workmanship of the temples. The cella was made broader, 
the columns more slender, the entablature lighter. The 
triglyphs disappeared from the cella wall, and sculpture of 
a higher order enhanced the architectural effect. The pro- 


files of the mouldings and especially of the capitals became 
more subtle and refined in their curves, while the develop- 
ment of the ionic order in important monuments in Asia 

Minor was preparing the way for the splendors of the I'cr- 
ielean age. Three temples especially deserve notice : the 
Athena Temple on the island of .ZEgina, the Temple of 
Zeus at Olympia, and the so-called Theseum perhaps a 
temple of Heracles in Athens. They belong to the pe- 
riod 470-450 B.C. ; they are all hexastyle and peripteral, 
and without triglyphs on the cella wall. Of the three the 
uid in the list is interesting as the scene of those rites 
which preceded and accompanied the I'anhellenic Olympian 
games, and as the central feature of the Altis, the most 
complete temple-group and enclosure among all (Ireek re- 
mains. It was built of a coarse conglomerate, finished 
with fine stucco, and embellished with sculpture by the 
greatest masters of the time. The adjacent Heraion (tem- 
ple of Hera) was a highly venerated and ancient shrine, 
originally built with wooden columns which, according 
to Pausanias, were replaced one by one, as they decayed, 
by stone columns. The truth of this statement is attested 

by the discovery of a singular variety of capitals among it* 

ruins, corresponding to the various periods at which they 
were added. The Theseum is the most perfectly preserved 
of all (Ireek temples, and in the refinement of its forms is 
only surpassed by those of the Periclean age. 

THE PEBICLEAN AGE. The Persian wars may be taken 
as the dividing line between the Transition period and 
the l'erielean agei 'I he ,'lan of national enthusiasm that 
followed the expulsion of the invader, and the glory and 

wealth which accrued to Athens ;<s the champion of all 

Hellas, resulted in a splendid reconstruction of the Attic 
monuments as well as a revival of building activity in Asia 

Minor. By the wise administration of Pericles and by the 

genius of Ictinus, Phidias, and other artists of surpassing 



skill, tin- Acropolis at Athens was crowned with a group of 
buildings and statues absolutely unrivalled. Thief among 
them was the Parthenon, the shrine of Athena Parthenos, 
which the critics of all schools have agreed in considering 
the most faultless in design and execution of all buildings 
erected by man (Figs. 31, 34, and Frontispiece). It was 


an octastyle peripteral temple, with seventeen columns on 
the side, and measured 220 by 100 feet on the top of the 
stylobate. It was the work of Ictinus and Callicrates, built 
to enshrine the noble statue of the goddess by Phidias, a 
standing chryselephantine figure forty feet high. It was 
the masterpiece of Greek architecture not only by reason of 
its refinements of detail, but also on account of the beauty 
of its sculptural adornments. The frieze about the cella 
wall under the pteroma ceiling, representing in low relief 



with masterly skill the Panathenaic procession ; the sculpt- 
ured groups in the metopes, and the superb assemblages of 
Olympic and symbolic figures of colossal size in the pedi- 
ments, added their majesty to the 
perfection of the architecture. 
Here also the horizontal curva- 
tures and other refinements are 
found in their highest develop- 
ment. Northward from it, upon 
the Acropolis, stood the Erech- 
theum, an excellent example of 
the Attic-Ionic style (Figs. 35, 36). 
Its singular irregularities of plan F,r - a*-*"" of nomw 
and level, and the variety of its detail, exhibit in a striking 
way the Greek indifference to mere formal symmetry when 
confronted by practical considerations. The motive in this 
case was the desire to include in one design several existing 
and venerated shrines to Attic deities and heroes Athena 
Pofias, Poseidon, Pandrosus, Krechtheus, Boutes, etc. He- 
gun by unknown architects in 479 B.C., and not completed 

until 408 B.C., it re- 
mains in its ruin 
still one of the most 
interesting and at- 
tractive of ancient 
buildings. Its two 
colonnades of dif- 
fering design, its 
beautiful north 
doorway, and the 
unique and noble 
caryatid porch or 
balcony on the south side arc unsurpassed in delicate beauty 
combined with vigor of design. * A smaller monument of the 
Ionic order, the amphiprostyle temple to Nike Apteros 

* Sec Appendix, p. 427. 





the Wingless Victory stands on a projecting spur of the 
Acropolis to the southwest. It measures only 27 feet by 
18 feet in plan ; the cella is nearly square ; the columns are 
sturdier than those of the Erechtheum, and the execution 
of the monument is admirable. It was the first complet- 
ed of the extant build- 
ings of the group of 
the Acropolis and dates 
from 466 B.C. 

In the Propylaea (Fig. 
37), the monumental 
gateway to the Acropo- 
lis, the Doric and Ionic 
orders appear to have 
been combined for the 
first time (437 to 432 
B.C.). It was the mas- 
ter work of Mnesicles. 
The front and rear facades were Doric hexastyles ; ad- 
joining the front porch were two projecting lateral wings 
employing a smaller Doric order. The central passage- 
way led between two rows of Ionic columns to the rear 
porch, entered by five doorways and crowned, like the 
front, with a pediment. The whole was executed with the 
same splendor and perfection as the other buildings of 
the Acropolis, and was a worthy gateway to the group of 
noble monuments which crowned that citadel of the Attic 
capital. The two orders were also combined in the temple 
of Apollo Epicurius at Phigalaea (Bassae). This temple 
was erected in 430 b.c. by Ictinus, who used the Ionic 
order internally to decorate a row of projecting piers in- 
stead of free-standing columns in the naos, in which there 
was also a single Corinthian column of rather archaic de- 
sign, which may have been used as a support for a statue 
or votive offering. 


ALEXANDRIAN AGE. A period of reaction followed the 
splendid architectural activity of the Periclean age. A 
succession of disastrous wars the Sicilian, Peloponnesian, 
and Corinthian drained the energies and destroyed the 
peace of European Greece for seventy-five years, robbing 
Athens of her supremacy and inflicting wounds from which 
she never recovered. In the latter part of the fourth cen- 
tury, however, the triumph of the Macedonian empire over 
all the Mediterranean lands inaugurated a new era of 
architectural magnificence, especially in Asia Minor. The 
keynote of the art of this time was splendor, as that of the 
preceding age was artistic perfection. The Corinthian 
order came into use, as though the Ionic were not rich 
enough for the sumptuous taste of the time, and capitals 
and bases of novel and elaborate design embellished the 
Ionic temples of Asia Minor. In the temple of Apollo 
Didymaeus at Miletus, the plinths of the bases were made 
octagonal and panelled with rich scroll-carvings ; and the 
piers which buttressed the interior faces of the cella- 
walls were given capitals of singular but elegant form, mid- 
way between the Ionic and Corinthian types. This temple 
belongs to the list of colossal edifices already referred to ; 
its dimensions were 366 by 163 feet, making it the largest 
of them all. The famous Artemisium (temple of Arte ms 
or Diana) measured 342 by 163 feet. Several of the columns 
of the latter were enriched with sculptured figures encir- 
cling the lower drums of the colossal shafts. The most lav- 
ish expenditure was bestowed upon small structures, shrines, 
and sarcophagi. The graceful monument still visible in 
Athens, erected by the choraegus Lysicrates in token of 
his victory in the choral competitions, belongs to this period 
.'330 B.C.). It is circular, with a slightly domical imbricated 
roof, and is decorated with elegant engaged Corinthian col- 
umns (Fig. 38). In the Imperial Museum at Constantinople 
are several sarcophagi of this period found at Sidon, but 



executed by Greek artists, and of exceptional beauty. They 
are in the form of temples or shrines ; the finest of them, 
supposed by some to have been made for Alexander's 
favorite general Perdiccas, and 
by others for the Persian satrap 
who figures prominently on its 
sculptured reliefs, is the most 
sumptuous work of the kind in 
existence. The exquisite poly- 
chromy of its beautiful reliefs 
and the perfection of its rich 
details of cornice, pediment, til- 
ing, and crestings, make it an 
exceedingly interesting and in- 
structive example of the minor 
architecture of the period. 

THE DECADENCE. After the de- 
cline of Alexandrian magnifi- 
cence Greek art never recovered 
its ancient glory, but the flame 
was not suddenly extinguished. 
While in Greece proper the works 

of the second and third centuries B.C., are for the most part 
weak and lifeless, like the Stoa of Attalus (175 B.C.) and the 
Tower of the Winds (the Clepsydra of Andronicus Cyrrhes- 
tes, 100 B.C.) at Athens or the Portico of Philip in Delos, 
there were still a few worthy works built in Asia Minor. 
The splendid Altar erected at Pergamon by Eumenes II. 
(circ. 180 B.C.) in the Ionic order, combined sculpture of ex- 
traordinary vigor with imposing architecture in masterly 
fashion. At Aizanoi an Ionic Temple to Zeus, by some at- 
tributed to the Roman period, but showing rather the charac- 
ter of good late Greek work, deserves mention for its elegant 
details, and especially for its frieze-decoration of acanthus 
leaves and scrolls resembling those of a Corinthian capital. 


(Restored model, N. Y.) 


ROMAN PERIOD. During this period, i.e., throughout the 
second and first centuries B.C., the Roman dominion was 
spreading over Greek territory, and the structures erected 
subsequent to the conquest partake of the Roman charac- 
ter and mingle Roman conceptions with Greek details and 
vice versd. The temple of the Olympian Zeus at Athens (Fig. 

39), a mighty dipteral Co- 

il rinthian edifice measuring 

^^^^"4 354 by 171 feet, standing on 

_ > * * 1' * 'm\ * ^fr^--* " " 3 a vast terrace or temenos 

B^^^^i-^ 3 surrounded by a buttressed 
fmimi umi wall, was begun by Anti- 

, B^-- jy -j^ ochus Epiphanes (170 B.C.) 

01] the site of an earlier un- 


ATHENS> finished Doric temple of the 

time of Pisistratus, and car- 
ried out under the direction of the Roman architect, ( 
sutius. It was not, however, finally completed until the time 
of Hadrian, 130 A.D. Meanwhile Sulla had despoiled it of 
several columns* which he carried to Rome (86 is.c), to use 
in the rebuilding of the temple of Jupiter on the Capitol, 
where they undoubtedly served as models in the develop- 
ment of the Roman Corinthian order. The columns were 
57 feet high, with capitals of the most perfect Corinthian 
type ; fifteen are now standing, and one lies prostrate near 
by. To the Roman period also belong the Agora Gate 
((in. 35 1:1 .), the Arch of Hadrian (117 a.d.), the Odeon 
of Regilla or of Eierodei Atticus (143 a.d.), at Athens, 
and many temples and tombs, theatres, arches, etc., in the 

k provin 


* I.. Bevier, in Papers of the American Classical School at Athens (vol. 
i., pp. 195, 196), contend! that these were columns left from the old Doric 
temple. This is untenable, for Sulla would certainly not have taken the 
trouble to carry away archaic Doric columns, with sue 1 splendid Corin- 
thian columns before him. 


SECULAR MONUMENTS; PROPYL.EA. The stately gateway 
by which the Acropolis was entered has already been de- 
scribed. It was the noblest and most perfect of a class of 
buildings whose prototype is found in the monumental co- 
lumnar porches of the palace-group at Persepolis. The 
Greeks never used the arch in these structures, nor did 
they attach to them the same importance as did most of 
the other nations of antiquity. The Altis of Olympia, the 
national shrine of Hellenism, appears to have had no cen- 
tral gateway of imposing size, but a number of insignificant 
entrances disposed at random. The Propylaea of Sunium, 
Priene and Eleusis are the most conspicuous, after those 
of the Athenian Acropolis. Of these the Ionic gateway at 
Priene is the finest, although the later of the two at Eleu- 
sis is interesting for its anta-capitals. (Anta = a flat pilas- 
ter decorating the end of a wing-wall and treated with a 
base and capital usually differing from those of the adja- 
cent columns.) These are of Corinthian type, adorned with 
winged horses, scrolls, and anthemions of an exuberant 
richness of design, characteristic of this late period. 

COLONNADES, ST02E. These were built to connect public 
monuments (as the Dionysiac theatre and Odeon at 
Athens) ; or along the sides of great public squares, as at 
Assos and Olympia (the so-called Echo Hall) ; or as inde- 
pendent open public halls, as the Stoa Diple at Thoricus. 
They afforded shelter from sun and rain, places for prom- 
enading, meetings with friends, public gatherings, and simi- 
lar purposes. They were rarely of great size, and most of 
them are of rather late date, though the archaic structure 
at Paestum, known as the Basilica, was probably in reality 
an open hall of this kind. 

THEATRES, ODEONS. These were invariably cut out of the 
rocky hillsides, though in a few cases (Mantinsea, Myra, 
Antiphellus) a part of the seats were sustained by a built-up 
substructure and walls to eke out the deficiency of the hill- 



S 3 II 

|^J t 


o, Orchestra ; /, Logeion ; /, Paraskettai , 
t, J, Stoa. 

slope under them. The front of the excavation was en- 
closed by a stage and a set scene or background, built up 

so as to leave somewhat 
over a semicircle for the 
orchestra or space enclosed 
by the lower tier of seats 
(Fig. 40). An altar to Dio- 
nysus (Bacchus) was the es- 
sential feature in the fore- 
ground of the orchestra, 
where the Dionysiac choral 
dance was performed. The 
seats formed successive 
steps of stone or marble 
sweeping around the slop- 
ing excavation, with carved marble thrones for the priests, 
archons, and other dignitaries. The only architectural dec- 
oration of the theatre was that of the set scene or skctir, which 
with its wing-walls (paraskenai) enclosing the stage {iageio/i\ 
was a permanent structure of stone or marble adorned with 
doors, cornices, pilasters, etc This has perished in nearly 
every case ; but at Aspendus, in Asia Minor, there is one still 
fairly well preserved, with a rich architectural decoration 
on its inner face. The extreme diameter of the theatres 
varied greatly ; thus at Aizanoi it is 187 feet, and at Syra- 
cuse 495 feet. The theatre of Dionysus at Athens (finished 
325 n.( .) could accommodate thirty thousand spectators. 

The odeon differed from the theatre principally in being 
smaller and entirely covered in by a wooden roof. The 
Odeon of Eegilla, bttilt by Herodes Atticus in Athens (143 
A.D.), is a well-preserved specimen of this class, but all 

traces of its cedar ceiling and of its intermediate supports 
have disappeared. 

stadia and hippodromes for races, and gymnasia and pa- 


laestrae for individual exercise, bathing, and amusement. The 
stadia and hippodromes were oblong enclosures surrounded 
by tiers of seats and without conspicuous architectural feat- 
ures. The palcestra or gymnasium for the terms are not 
clearly distinguished was a combination of courts, cham- 
bers, tanks (piscina?) for bathers and exedroz or semicircular 
recesses provided with tiers of seats for spectators and 
auditors, destined not merely for the exercises of athletes 
preparing for the stadium, but also for the instruction and 
diversion of the public by recitations, lectures, and discus- 
sions. It was the prototype of the Roman thermae, but 
less imposing, more simple in plan and adornment. Every 
Greek city had one or more of them, but they have almost 
wholly disappeared, and the brief description by Vitruvius 
and scanty remains at Alexandria Troas and Ephesus fur- 
nish almost the only information we possess regarding their 
form and arrangement. 

TOHBS. These are not numerous, and the most important 
are found in Asia Minor. The greatest of these is the 
famed Mausoleum at Halicarnassus in Caria, the monument 
erected to the king Mausolus by his widow Artemisia (354 
b.c; Fig. 41). It was designed by Satyrus and Pythius in 
the Ionic style, and comprised a podium or base 50 feet 
high and measuring 80 feet by 100 feet, in which was the 
sepulchre. Upon this base stood a cella surrounded by 
thirty-six Ionic columns, and crowned by a pyramidal roof, 
on the peak of which was a colossal marble quadriga at a 
height of 130 feet. It was, superbly decorated by Scopas 
and other great sculptors with statues, marble lions, and a 
magnificent frieze. The British Museum possesses frag- 
ments of -this most imposing monument. At Xanthus the 
Nereid Mouumeut, so called from its sculptured figures of 
Nereides, was a somewhat similar design on a smaller scale, 
with sixteen Ionic columns. At Mylassa was another tomb 
with an open Corinthian colonnade supporting a roof formed 



in a stepped pyramid. Some of the later rock-cut tombs of 
Lycia at Myra and Antiphellus may also be counted as 
Hellenic works. 


(As restored by the author.) 

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE. This never attained great im- 
portant* in Greece, and <>ui knowledge of the typical Greek 
house is principally derived from literary sources. Very 
few remains of Greek houses have been found sufficiently 

well preserved to permit of restoring even the plan. It is 

probable that they resembled in general arrangement 

the houses of Pompeii (see p. 107) ; but that they were 
generally insignificant in size and decoration. The exte- 
rior walls were pierced only by the entrance doors, all light 
being thrived from one or more interior courts. In the 

Ionian epoch there must have been greater display 

and luxury in domestic architecture, but no remains have 


come down to us of sufficient importance or completeness 
to warrant further discussion. 

MONUMENTS. In addition to those already mentioned in the text the 
following should be enumerated : 

Prehistoric Period. In the Islands about Santorin, remains of 
houses antedating 1500 B.C. ; at Tiryns the Acropolis, walls, and miscel- 
laneous ruins ; the like also at Mycenae, besides various tombs ; walls 
and gates at Samos, Thoricus, Menidi, Athens, etc. 

Archaic Period. Doric Temples at Metapontium (by Durm assigned 
to 610 B.C.), Selinus, Agrigentum, Paestum ; at Athens the first Parthe- 
non ; in Asia Minor the primitive Ionic Artemisium at Ephesus and 
the Heraion at Samos, the latter the oldest of colossal Greek temples. 

Transitional Period. At Agrigentum, temples of Concord, Castor 
and Pollux, Demeter, Aesculapius, all circ. 480 B.C. ; temples at Selinus 
and Segesta. 

Periclean Period. In Athens the Ionic temple on the Illissus, de- 
stroyed during the present century ; on Cape Sunium the temple of Athena, 
430 B.C., partly standing ; at Nemea, the temple of Zeus ; at Tegea, the 
temple of Athena Elea (400? B.C.) ; at Rhamnus, the temples of Themis 
and of Nemesis ; at Argos, two temples, stoa, and other buildings ; all 
these were Doric. 

Alexandrian Period. The temple of Dionysus at Teos ; temple of 
Artemis Leucophryne at Magnesia, both about 330 B.C. and of the Ionic 

Decadence and Roman Period. At Athens the Stoa of Eumenes, 
circ. 170 B.C. ; the monument of Philopappus on the Museum hill, 110 A. D. ; 
the Gymnasium of Hadrian, 114 to 137 A.D. ; the last two of the Corin- 
thian order. 

Theatres. Besides those already mentioned there are important re- 
mains of theatres at Epidaurus, Argos, Segesta, Iassus (400? B.C.), Delos, 
Sicyon, and Thoricus ; at Aizanoi, Myra, Telmissus, and Patara, besides 
many others of less importance scattered through the Hellenic world. At 
Taormina are extensive ruins of a large Greek theatre rebuilt in the Roman 



Books RBCOlfMSHDCD : As before, Anderson and Spiers, 
Baumeister, Reber. Choisy, D Art de bdtir chcz les Romains. 
Desgodetz, Rome in her Ancient Grandeur. Durni, Die Bau- 
kunst iter Etrusker; Die Baukunst der Romer. Lanciani, 
Ancient Rome in the Light of Modem Discovery ; New Tales 
of Old Rome ; Ruins and Excavations of Ancient Rome. De 
Mar'ha, Archeologie ctrusque et romaine. Middleton, Ancient 
Rome in 1888. 

LAND AND PEOPLE. The geographical position of Italy 
conferred upon her special and obvious advantages for tak- 
ing up and carrying northward and westward the arts of 
civilization. A scarcity of good harbors was the only draw- 
back amid the blessings of a glorious climate, fertile soil, 
varied scenery, and rich material resources. From a re- 
mote antiquity Dorian colonists had occupied the southern 
portion and the island of Sicily, enriching them with splen- 
did monuments of Doric art ; and Phoenician commerce 
had brought thither the products of Oriental art and indus- 
try. The foundation of Rome in 753 B.C. established the 
nucleus about which the sundry populations of Italy were 
to crystallize into the Roman nation, under the dominating 
influence of the Latin element. Later on, the absorption 
of the conquered Etruscans added to this composite people 
a race of builders and engineers, as jrel rude and uncouth 
in their art, but destined to become a powerful factor in 
developing the new architecture that was to spring from 
the contact of the practical Romans with the noble art of 
the Greek centres. 


GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS. While the Greeks bequeathed 
to posterity the most perfect models of form in literary and 
plastic art, it was reserved for the Romans to work out, 
the applications of these to every-day material life. The > 
Romans were above all things a practical people. Their 
consummate skill as organizers is manifest in the marvel- 
lous administrative institutions of their government, under 
which they united the most distant and diverse nationali- 
ties. Seemingly deficient in culture, they were yet able to 
recast the forms of Greek architecture in new moulds, and 
to evolve therefrom a mighty architecture adapted to wholly 
novel conditions. They brought engineering into the ser- 
vice of architecture, which they fitted to the varied require- 
ments of government, public amusement, private luxury, 
and the common comfort. They covered the antique 
world with arches and amphitheatres, with villas, baths, 
basilicas, and temples, all bearing the unmistakable impress 
of Rome, though wrought by artists and artisans of divers 
races. Only an extraordinary genius for organization could 
have accomplished such results. 

The architects of Rome marvellously extended the range 
of their art, and gave it a flexibility by which it accommo- 
dated itself to the widest variety of materials and condi- 
tions. They made the arch and vault the basis of their 
system of design, employing them on a scale previously un- 
dreamed of, and in combinations of surpassing richness and 
majesty. They systematized their methods of construction 
so that soldiers and barbarians could execute the rough 
mass of their buildings, and formulated the designing of 
the decorative details so that artisans of moderate skill 
could execute them with good effect. They carried the 
principle of repetition of motives to its utmost limit, and 
sought to counteract any resulting monotony by the scale 
and splendor of the design. Above all they developed 
planning into a fine art, displaying their genius in a won- 


derful variety of combinations and in an unfailing sense 

of the demands of constructive propriety, practical con- 
venience, and artistic effect. Where Egyptian or Greek 
architecture shows one type of plan, the Roman shows a 

GREEK INFLUENCE. Previous to the closing years of the 
Republic the Romans had no art but the Etruscan. The 
few buildings of importance they possessed were of Etrus- 
can design and workmanship, excepting a small number 
built by Greek hands. It was not until the Empire that 
Roman architecture took on a truly national form. True 
Roman architecture is essentially imperial. The change 
from the primitive Etruscan style to the splendors of the 
imperial age was due to the conquest of the Greek states. 
Not only did the Greek campaigns enrich Rome with an 
unprecedented wealth of artistic spoils ; they also brought 
into Italy hosts of Greek artists, and filled the minds ol 
the campaigners with the ambition to realize in their own 
dominions the marble colonnades, the temples, theatres, 
and propylaea of the Greek cities they had pillaged. The 
Greek orders were adopted, altered, and applied to ar- 
caded designs as well as to peristyles and other open 
colonnades. The marriage of the column and an h gave 
birth to a system of forms as characteristic of Roman 
architecture as the Doric or Ionic colonnade is of the 

THE ROMAN ORDERS. To meet the demands of Roman 
taste the BtruScan column was retained with its simple en- 
tablature ; the Doric and lonii were adopted in a modified 
form; the Corinthian was developed into a complete and 
independent order, and the Composite was added to the 

list. A regular system of proportions for all these five 
orders was gradually evolved, and the mouldings were 
profiled with arcs of circles instead of the subtler Greek 
curves. In the building of many - storied structures the 



ciders were superposed, the more slender over the stur- 
dier, in an orderly and graded succession. The immense 
extent and number of the Roman buildings, the coarse 
materials often used, the relative scarcity of highly trained 
artisans, and above all, the necessity of making a given 
amount of artistic design serve for the largest possible 
amount of architecture, combined 
to direct the designing of detail 
into uniform channels. Thus in 
time was established a sort of canon 
of proportions, which was reduced 
to rules by Vitruvius, and revived 
in much more detailed and precise 
form by Vignola in the sixteenth 

In each of the orders, including 
the Doric, the column was given a 
base one half of a diameter in height 
(the unit of measurement being the 
diameter of the lower part of the 
shaft, the crassitudo of Vitruvius). 
The shaft was made to contract 
about one-sixth in diameter toward 
the capital, under which it was termi- 
nated by an astragal or collar of 
small mouldings ; at the base it end- 
ed in a slight flare and fillet called 
the cincture. The entablature was 
in all cases given not far from one quarter the height of the 
whole column. The Tuscan order was a rudimentary or 
Etruscan Doric with a column seven diameters high and a 
simple entablature without triglyphs, mutules, or dentils. 
But few examples of its use are known. The Doric (Fig. 42) 
retained the triglyphs and metopes, the mutules and guttae of 
the (ireek ; but the column was made eight diameters high, 






the shaft was smooth or had deep flutings separated by nar- 
row fillets, and was usually provided with a simple moulded 
base on a square plinth. Mutules were used only over the 
triglyphs, and were even replaced in some cases by dentils ; 
the corona was made lighter than the Greek, and a cyma- 
tium replaced the antefixae on the lateral cornices. The 
Ionic underwent fewer changes, and these principally in 
the smaller mouldings and details of the capital. The col- 
umn was nine diameters high (Fig. 43). The Corinthian 
was made into an independent order by the designing of a 
special base of small tori and scoiiie, and by sumptuously 
carved modillions or brackets en- 
riching the cornice and supporting 
the corona above a denticulated 
bed - mould (Fig. 44). Though the 
first designers of the modillion were 
probably Greeks, it must, never- 
theless, be taken as really a Roman 
device, worthily completing the es- 
sentially Roman Corinthian order. 
The Composite was formed by com- 
bining into one capital portions <>f 
the Ionic and Corinthian, and giv- 
ing to it a simplified form of the 
Corinthian cornice. Tift- Corinthian 
order remained, however, the fa- 
vorite order of Roman architecture. 
U8E OF THE OEDERS. The Romans 
introduced many innovations in the 
general use and treatment of the 
orders. Monolithic shafts were preferred to those built up 
of superposed drums. The fluting was omitted on these, 
and when hard and semi-precious stone like porphyry or 
verd-antique was the material, it was highly polished to 
bring out its color. These polished monoliths were often 





of great size, and they were used in almost incredible 

Another radical departure from Greek usage was the 
mounting of columns on pedestals to secure greater height 
without increasing the 
size of the column and 
its entablature. The 
Greek anta was devel- 
oped into the Roman 
pilaster or flattened 
wall-column, and every 
free column, or range of 
columns perpendicular 
to the facade, had its 
corresponding pilaster 
to support the wall-end 
of the architrave. But 
the most radical inno- 
vation was the general 
use of engaged columns 
as wall - decorations or 
buttresses. The en- 
gaged column projected 
from the wall by more 
than half its diameter, 
and was built up with 
the wall as a part of its 
substance (Fig. 45). The 

entablature was in many cases advanced only over the col- 
umns, between which .it was set back almost to the plane 
of the wall. This practice is open to the obvious criticism 
that it makes the column appear superfluous by depriving it 
of its function of supporting the continuous entablature. 
The objection has less weight when the projecting entabla- 
ture over the column serves as a pedestal for a statue or 

FIG. 44.- 




similar object, which restores to the column its function as 
a support (see the Arch of Constantine, Fig. 63), 

ARCADES. The orders, though probably at first used only 
as free supports in porticos and colonnades, were early 

applied as decorations to 
arcaded structures. This 
practice became general with 
the multiplication of many- 
storied arcades like those ot 
the amphitheatres, the en- 
gaged columns being set 
between the arches as but- 
tresses, supporting entabla- 
tures which marked the divi- 
sions into stories (Fig. 45). 
This combination has been 
" assailed as a false and illogi- 
cal device, but the critic ism 
proceeds from a too narrow- 
conception of architectural 
propriety. It is defensible 
upon both artistic and logi- 
cal -rounds ; for it not only 
furnishes a most desir- 
=. able play of light and 

shade and a pleasing 

contrast of re< tangular 

and curved lines, but by 
emphasizing the con- 
structive divisions and elements of the building and the 
vertical support of the piers, it also contributes to the ex- 
pressiveness and vigor of the design. 

VAULTING. The Romans substituted vaulting in brick, 
concrete, or masonry for wooden ceilings wherever possible, 
both in public and private edifices. The Etruscans were 


(V rom the Colosseum.) 





the first vault-builders, and the Cloaca. Maxima, the great 
sewer of Republican Rome (about 500 b.c.) still remains as 
a monument of their engineering skill. Probably not only 
cmm Etruscan engineers (whose tradi- 

tions were perhaps derived from Asi- 
atic sources in the remote past), but 
Asiatic builders also from conquered 
eastern provinces, were engaged 
together in the development of the 
wonderful system of vaulted con- 
struction to which Roman architect- 
ure so largely owed its grandeur. 
Three types of vault were commonly 
used : the barrel-vault, the groined or four-part vault, and 
the dome. 

The barrel vault (Fig. 46) was generally semi-cylindrical 
in section, and was used to cover corridors and oblong halls, 
like the temple-cellas, or was bent around a curve, as in 
amphitheatre passages. 

The groined vault is formed by the intersection of two 
barrel-vaults (Fig. 47). When several compartments of 
groined vaulting are placed together 
over an oblong plan, a double ad- 
vantage is secured. Lateral win- 
dows can be carried up to the full 
height of the vaulting instead of 
being stopped below its springing ; 
and the weight and thrust of the 
vaulting are concentrated upon a 
number of isolated points instead 
of being exerted along the whole 
extent of the side walls, as with 
the barrel-vault. The Romans saw that it was sufficient 
to dispose the masonry at these points in masses at right 
angles to the length of the hall, to best resist the lateral 


St St Groins. 


thrust of the .vault. This appears clearly in the plan of the 
Basilica of Constantine (Fig. 58). 

The dome was in almost all Roman examples supported 
on a circular wall built up from the ground, as in the Pan- 
theon (Fig. 54). The pendentive dome, sustained by four or 
eight arches over a square or octagonal plan, is not found 
in true Roman buildings. 

The Romans made of the vault something more than a 
mere constructive device. It became in their hands an 
element of interior effect at least equally important with 
the arch and column. No style of architecture has ever 
evolved nobler forms of ceiling than the groined vault and 
the dome. Moreover, the use of vaulting made possible 
effects of unencumbered spaciousness and amplitude which 
could never be compassed by any combination of piers and 
columns. It also assured to the Roman monuments a du- 
ration and a freedom from danger of destruction by fire im- 
possible with any wooden-roofed architecture, however no- 
ble its form or careful its execution. 

CONSTRUCTION. The constructive methods of the Romans 
varied with the conditions and resources of different prov- 
inces, but were everywhere dominated by the same prac- 
tical spirit. Their vaulted architecture demanded for the 
support of its enormous weights and for resistance to its 
disruptive thrusts, piers and buttresses of great mass. To 
construct these wholly of cut stone appeared preposterous 
and wasteful to the Roman. Italy abounds in clay, lime, 
and a volcanic product, pozzolana (from Puteoli or Pozzuoli, 
where it has always been obtained in large quantities), 
which makes an admirable hydraulic cement. With these 
materials it was possible to employ unskilled labor for the 
great bulk of this massive masonry, and to erect with the 
greatest rapidity and in the most economical manner those 
stupendous piles which, even in their ruin, excite the ad- 
miration of every beholder. 


an externally decorative character such as temples, arches 
of triumph, and amphitheatres, as well as in all places where 
brick and concrete were not easily obtained, stone was em- 
ployed. The walls were built by laying up the inner and 
outer faces in ashlar or cut stone, and filling in the inter- 
mediate space with rubble (random masonry of uncut stone) 
laid up in cement, or with concrete of broken stone and 
cement dumped into the space in successive layers. The 
cement converted the whole into a conglomerate closely 
united with the face-masonry. In Syria and Egypt the 
local preference for stones of enormous size was gratified, 
and even surpassed, as in Herod's terrace-walls for the tem- 
ple at Jerusalem (p. 41), and in the splendid structures of 
Palmyra and Baalbec. In Italy, however, stones of mod- 
erate size were preferred, and when blocks of unusual di- 
mensions occur, they are in many cases marked with false 
joints, dividing them into apparently smaller blocks, lest 
they should dwarf the building by their large scale. The 
general use in the Augustan period of marble for a decora- 
tive lining or wainscot in interiors 
led in time to the objectionable prac- 
tice of coating buildings of concrete 
with an apparel of sham marble ma- 
sonry, by carving false joints upon an 
external veneer of thin slabs of that 
material. Ordinary concrete walls 

r ^ f , ... 11, 1 1 FIG. 48. ROMAN WALL MA- 

were frequently faced with small blocks sonry. 

of tufa, called, according to the man- a , Brickwork : b. Tufa 

ner of its application, opus reticulatum, aMar r -> J"' S reticu - 

latum; i, Opus incertum. 

opus incertum, opus spicatum, etc. (Fig. 

48). In most cases, however, the facing was of carefully 
executed brickwork, covered sometimes by a coating of 
stucco. The bricks were large, measuring from one to two 
feet square where used for quoins or arches, but triangular 


where they served only as facings. Bricks were also used 
in the construction of skeleton ribs for concrete vaults of 
large span. 

VAULTING. Here, as in the wall-masonry, economy and 
common sense devised methods extremely simple for ac- 
complishing vast designs. While the smaller vaults were, 
so to speak, cast in concrete upon moulds made of rough 
boards, the enormous weight of the larger vaults precluded 
their being supported, while drying or " setting," upon timber 
centrings built up from the ground. Accordingly, a skeleton 
of light ribs was first built on wooden centrings, and these 
ribs, when firmly " set," became themselves supports for 
intermediate centrings on which to cast the concrete fill- 
ings between the ribs. The whole vault, once hardened, 
formed really a monolithic curved lintel, exerting no thrust 
whatever, so that the extraordinary precautions against 
lateral disruption practised by the Romans were, in fart, 
in many cases quite superfluous. 

DECORATION. The temple of Castor and Pollux in the 
Forum (long miscalled the temple of Jupitor Stator), is a 
typical example of Roman architectural decoration, in 
which richness was preferred to the subtler refinements 
of design (see Fig. 44). The spdendid figure -sculpture 
which adorned the Greek monuments would have been 
inappropriate on the theatres and thcrnue of Rome Of 
the provinces, even had there been the taste or the skill to 
produce it. Conventional carved ornament was substituted 
in its place, and developed into a splendid system of highly 
decorative forms. Two principal elements appear in this 
Oration the acanthus-leaf, as the basis of a whole series 
of wonderfully varied motives ; and symbolism, represented 
principally by what are technically termed grotesque* in- 
congruous combinations of natural forms, as when an in- 
fant's body terminates in a bunch of foliage (Fig. 49). Only 
to a limited extent do we find true sculpture employed as 



decoration, and that mainly for triumphal arches or 
memorial columns. 

The architectural mouldings were nearly always carved, 
the Greek water-leaf and egg-and-dart forming the basis of 
most of the enrichments ; but these were greatly elabo- 
rated and treated with more minute detail than the Greek 
prototypes. Friezes and bands were commonly ornamented 

tin-* \^ri *&&? Cfra 



(Lateran Museum.) 

with the foliated scroll or rinceau (a convenient French 
term for which we have no equivalent). This motive was 
as characteristic of Roman art as the anthemion was of the 
Greek. It consists of a continuous stem throwing out al- 
ternately on either side branches which curl into spirals 
and are richly adorned with rosettes, acanthus-leaves, 
scrolls, tendrils, and blossoms. In the best examples the 
detail was modelled with great care' and minuteness, and 
the motive itself was treated with extraordinary variety 
and fertility of invention. A derived and enriched form of 
the anthemion was sometimes used for bands and friezes ; 
and grotesques, dolphins, griffins, infant genii, wreaths, 



festoons, ribbons, eagles, and masks are also common feat- 
ures in Roman relief carving. 

The Romans made great use of panelling and of moulded 
plaster in their interior decoration, especially for ceilings. 

The panelling of domes ;m<l 

|" Jj ^2^2^ L "^ vaults was usually roughly 

S^^fifi nlyiil l^^ffl shaped in their first construc- 

^^ i a^^P iSc^teS ti on aiu ' finished afterward in 

I fe^^l BraS^S?! stucco with rich moulding and 

^W*2i i^PlN ^^^^ rosettes. The panels were no! 
>> . *& & h se j&s- | I I ftW -^aJ a i w;ivs square or rectangular, 

as in Greek ceilings, but of va- 
rious geometric forms in pleas- 
panels and decorations were 
wrought in relief in a heavy 
coating of plaster applied to 
the finished structure, and these 
stucco reliefs are among the 
most refined and charming prod- 
ucts of Roman art. (Baths of Titus ; Baths at Pompeii ; 
Palace of the Caesars and tombs at Rome.) 

COLOR DECORATION. Plaster was also used as a ground for 
painting, executed in distemper or by the encaustic process, 
wax liquefied by a hot iron being the medium for applying 
the color in the latter case. Pompeii and Herculaneum fur- 
nish countless examples of brilliant wall-painting in which 
strong primary colors form the ground, and a semi-natu- 
ralistic, semi-fantastic representation of figures, architect- 
ure and landscape is mingled with festoons, vines, and 
purely conventional ornament. Mosaic was also employed 
to decorate floors and wall-spaces, and sometimes for ceil- 
ings.* The later imperial baths and palaces were espe- 

Sce Van Dyke's History of Painting, p. 33. 


(, From Palmyra ; b. Basilica of Con- 


cially rich in mosaic of the kind called opus Grecanicum, 
executed with numberless minute cubes of stone or glass, 
as in the Baths of Caracalla and the Villa of Hadrian at 

To the walls of monumental interiors, such as temples, 
basilicas, and thermae, splendor of color was given by 
veneering them with thin slabs of rare and richly colored 
marble. No limit seems to have been placed upon the 
costliness or amount of these precious materials. Byzan- 
tine architecture borrowed from this practice its system of 
interior color decoration. 



Hooks RECOMMENDED : Same as for Chapter VIII. 
Also, Guhl and Ivorner, Life of the Ancient Creeks and 
Romans. Adams, Ruins of the Palace of Spalatro. Burn, 
Rome and the Campagna. Cameron, Roman Baths. Mail, 
tr. by Kelcey, Pompeii, its Life and Art. Mazois, Raines de 
Pompeii. Von Presuhn, Die neueste Ausgrabungen zu Pom- 
peii. Wood, Ruins of Palmyra and Baalbec. 

THE ETRUSCAN STYLE. Although the first Creek archi- 
tects were employed in Rome as early as 493 B.C., the archi- 
tecture of the Republic was practically Etruscan until near- 
ly 100 b.c. Its monuments, consisting mainly of city walls, 
tombs, and temples, are all marked by a general uncouth- 
ness of detail, denoting a lack of artistic refinement, but 
they display considerable constructive skill. In the 
Etruscan walls we meet with both polygonal and regularly 
coursed masonry ; in both kinds the true arch appears as 
the almost universal form for gates and openings. A famous 
example is the Augustan Cate at Perugia, a late work rebuilt 
about 40 b.c, but thoroughly Etruscan in style. At Vola- 
terra (Volterra) is another arched gate, and in Perugia frag- 
ments of still another appear built into the modern walls. 

The Etruscans built both structural and excavated 
tombs ; they consisted in general of a single chamber 
with a slightly arched or gabled roof, supported in the 
larger tombs on heavy square pins. The interiors were 

covered with pictures ; externally there was little orna- 
ment except about the gable and doorway. The latter 


8 9 

had a stepped or moulded frame with curious crossettes or 
ears projecting laterally at the top. The gable recalled the 
wooden roofs of Etruscan temples, but was coarse in detail, 
especially in its mouldings. Sepulchral monuments of other 
types are also met with, such as cippi or memorial pillars, 
sometimes in groups of five on a single pedestal (tomb at 

Among the temples of Etruscan style that of Jupiter 
Capitolinus on the Capitol at Rome, destroyed by fire in 
80 b.c, was the chief. Three narrow chambers side by side 
formed a cella nearly square in plan, preceded by a hexa- 
style porch of huge Doric, or rather Tuscan, columns ar- 
ranged in three aisles, widely spaced and carrying ponder- 
ous wooden architraves. The roof was of wood ; the 
cymatium and ornaments, as well as the statues in the pedi- 
ment, were of terra-cotta, painted 
and gilded. The details in general 
showed acquaintance with Greek 
models, which appeared in debased 
and awkward imitations of triglyphs, 
cornices, antefixae, etc. 

GREEK STYLE. The victories of 
Marcellus at Syracuse, 212 B.C., 
Fabius Maximus at Tarentum (209 
b.c), Flaminius (196 b.c), Mum- 
mius (146 b.c), Sulla (86 b.c), and 
others in the various Greek prov- 
inces, steadily increased the vogue 
of Greek architecture and the num- 
ber of Greek artists in Rome. The 
temples of the last two centuries 
b.c, and some of earlier date, though 
still Etruscan in plan, were in many cases strongly Greek in 
the character of their details. A few have remained to our 
time in tolerable preservation. The temple of Fortuna 




Virilis (really of Fors Fortuna), of the second century (?) 
B.C., is a tetrastyle prostyle pseudoperipteral temple with 
a high podium or base, a typical Etruscan cella, and a deep 

porch, now walled up, but 
thoroughly Greek in the ele- 
gant details of its Ionic order 
(Fig. 51). Two circular tem- 
ples, both called erroneously 
Temples of Vesta, one at 
Rome near the Cloaca Maxi- 
ma, the other at Tivoli, be- 
long among the monuments 
of Greek style. The first was 
probably dedicated to Hercu- 
les, the second probably to 
the Sibyls; the latter being 
much the better preserved of 
the two. Both were surround- 
ed by peristyles of eighteen 
Corinthian columns, and prob- 
ably covered by domical roofs 
with gilded bronze tiles. The 
Corinthian order appears here 
complete with its modillion 
cornice, but the crispness of 
the detail and the fineness of 
the execution are Greek and not Roman. These temples 
date from about 72 u.c, though the one at Rome was 
probably rebuilt in the first century A.D. (Fig. 52). 

temples of Greek style Roman conceptions of plan and 
composition are dominant. The Creek architect was not 
free to reproduce textually Greek designs or details, how- 
ever strongly he might impress with the Greek character 
whatever he touched. The demands of imperial splendor 



and the building of great edifices of varied form and com- 
plex structure, like the thermae and amphitheatres, called 
for new adaptations and combinations of planning and 
engineering. The reign of Augustus (27 B.c-14 a.d.) in- 
augurated the imperial epoch, but many works erected before 
and after his reign properly belong to the Augustan age by 
right of style. In general, we find in the works of this period 
the happiest combination of Greek refinem ent with Roman 
splend or. _ It was in this period that Rome first assumed the 
aspect of an opulent and splendid metropolis, though the 
way had been prepared for this by the regularization and 
adornment of the Roman Forum and the erection of many 
temples, basilicas, fora, arches, and theatres during the 
generation preceding the accession of Augustus. His reign 
saw the inception or completion of the portico of Octavia, 
the Augustan forum, the Septa Julia, the first Pantheon, 
the adjoining Thermae of Agrippa, the theatre of Mar- 
cellus, the first of the imperial palaces on the Palatine, and 
a long list of temples, including those of the Dioscuri 
(Castor and Pollux), of Mars Ultor, of Jupiter Tonans on 
the Capitol, and others in the provinces ; besides colon- 
nades, statues, arches, and other embellishments almost 
without number. 

LATER IMPERIAL WORKS. With the successors of Augus- 
tus splendor increased to alfnost fabulous limits, as, for in- 
stance, in the vast extent and the prodigality of ivory and 
gold in the famous Golden House of Nero. After the 
great fire in Rome, presumably kindled by the agents of 
this emperor, a more regular and monumental system of 
street-planning and building was introduced, and the first 
municipal building-law was decreed by him. To the reign of 
Vespasian (68-79 a.d.) we owe the rebuilding in Roman 
style and with the Corinthian order of the temple of Jupi- 
ter Capitolinus, the Baths of Titus, and the beginning of 
the Flavian amphitheatre or Colosseum. The two last- 


named edifices both stood on the site of Nero's Golden 
House, of which the greater part was demolished to make 
way for them. During the last years of the first century 
the arch of Titus was erected, the Colosseum finished, 
amphitheatres built at Verona, Pola, Reggio, Tusculum, 
Nimes (France), Constantine (Algiers), Pompeii and Her- 
culanum (these last two cities and Stabiae rebuilt after the 
earthquake of 63 a.o.), and arches, bridges, and temples 
erected all over the Roman world. 

The first part of the second century was distinguished 
by the splendid architectural achievements of the reign of 
Hadrian (117-138 a.o.) in Rome and the provinces, espe- 
cially Athens. Nearly all his works were marked by great 
dignity of conception as well as beauty of detail. During 
the latter part of the century a very interesting series of 
buildings were erected in the Hauran (Syria), in which 
(ireek and Arab workmen under Roman direction pro- 
duced examples of vigorous stone architecture of a mingled 
Roman and Syrian character. 

The most remarkable thermae of Rome belong to the 
third century those of (aracalla (211-217 a.d.) and of 
Diocletian (284-305 a.d.) their ruins to-day ranking 
among the most imposing remains of antiquity. In Syria 
the temples of the Sun at Baalbec and Palmyra (273 \.i., 
under Aurelian), and the great palace of Diocletian at 
Spalato, in Dalmatia (300 a.o.), are still the wonder of the 
few travellers who reach those distant spots. 

While during the third and fourth centuries there was a 
marked decline in purity and refinement of detail, many of 
the later works of the period display a remarkable freedom 
and originality in conception. Bat these works are really 
not Roman, they are foreign, that is, provincial products ; 
and the transfer of the capital to Byzantium revealed the in- 
ising degree in which Rome was coming to look to the 
for her Strength and her art. 



TEMPLES. The Romans built both rectangular and circu- 
lar temples, and there- was much variety in their treatment. 
In the rectangular temples a high /odium, or basement, was 
substituted for the Greek stepped stylobate, and the pro- 
Style plan was more 

common than the pe- esm . I r rl % ^j 

ripteral. The cella ['lll"*"* , * f *it 
was relatively short 
and wide, the front 
porch inordinately 
deep, and frequently 
divided by longitudi- 
nal rows of columns 
into three aisles. In 
most cases the exte- 
rior of the cella in 
prostyle temples was 
decorated by engaged 
columns. A barrel 
vault gave the inte- 
rior an aspect of spa- 
ciousness impossible 
with the Greek sys- 
tem of a wooden 
ceiling supported on 
double ranges of col- 
umns. In the place of 
these, free or engaged 
columns along the 

side-walls received the ribs of the vaulting. Between these 
ribs the ceiling was richly panelled, or coffered and sump- 
tuously gilded. The temples of Fortuna Virilis and of 
Faustina at Rome '(the latter built 141 a.d., and its ruins 
incorporated into the modern church of S. Lorenzo in Mi- 
randa), and the beautiful and admirably preserved Maison 




Carree, at Nlmes (France) (4 a.d.) are examples of this 
type. The temple of Concord, of which only the podium 
remains, and the small temple of Julius (both of these in the 
Forum) illustrate another form of prostyle temple in which 
the porch was on a long side of the cella. Some of the 
larger temples were peripteral. The temple of the Dioscuri 
(Castor and Pollux) in the Forum, was one of the most 
magnificent of these, certainly the richest in detail (Fig. 44). 
Very remarkable was the double temple of Venus and Rome, 
east of the Forum, designed by the Emperor Hadrian about 
130 a.d. (Fig. 53). It was a vast pseudodipteral edifice 
containing two cellas in one structure, their statue-niches 
or apses meeting back to back in the centre. The temple 
stood in the midst of an imposing columnar peribolus en- 
tered by magnificent gateways. Other important temples 
have already been rr^ntioned on p. 91. 

Besides the two circular temples already described, the 
temple of v esta, adjoining the House of the Vestals, at the 
east end of the Forum should be 
mentioned. At Baalbec is a cir- 
cular temple whose entablature 
curves inward between the widely- 
spaced columns until it touches the 
Cells in the middle of each inter- 
columniation. It illustrates the 
caprices of design which sometimes 
resulted from the disregard of tra- 
dition and the striving after origi- 
nality (273 A. P.). 

THE PANTHEON. The noblest of 
all circular temples of Rome and of 
the worl 1 was the Pantheon. It 
was built by .Vadrian, 11 7-138 a.d., 
on the site of the earlier rectangular ten;ole of the* same 
name erected by Agrippa. It measures 142 fc^t in diameter 




** "tOtaMp> ^^ JIIMKf . ^$0 ''"*" 

internally ; the wall is 20 feet thick and supports a hemi- 
spherical dome rising to a height of 140 feet (Figs. 54, 55). 
Light is admitted solely through a round opening 28 feet in 
diameter at the top of 
the dome, the simplest 
and most impressive 
method of illumina- 
tion conceivable. The 
rain and snow that 
enter produce no ap- 
preciable effect upon 
the temperature of 
the vast hall. There 
is a single entrance, 
with noble bronze 
doors, admitting di- 
rectly to the interior, 
around which seven 
niches, alternately 
rectangular and semi- 
circular in plan and 
fronted by Corinthian 

columns, lighten, without weakening, the mass of the encir- 
cling wall. This wall was originally incrusted with rich 
marbles, and the great dome, adorned with deep coffering 
in rectangular panels, was decorated with rosettes and 
mouldings in gilt stucco. The dome appears to have been 
composed of numerous arches and ribs, filled in and finally 
coated with concrete. A recent examination of a denuded 
portion of its inner surface has convinced the writer that 
the interior panelling was executed after, and not during, 
its construction, by hewing the panels out of the mass of 
brick and concrete, without regard to the form and posi- 
tion of the origin skeleton of ribs. 

The exterior (Fig. 56) was less successful than the inte- 



rior. The gabled porch of twelve superb granite columns 
50 feet high, three-aisled in plan after the Etruscan mode, 
and covered originally by a ceiling of bronze, was a rebuild- 
ing with the materials and on the plan of tin- original pro- 
naos of the Pantheon of Agrippa. The circular wall behind 
it is faced with fine brickwork, and displays, like the dome, 


(From model in Metropolitan Museum, New York.) 

many curious arrangements of discharging arches, reminis- 
- of traditional constructive precautions here wholly 
useless and fictitious because only skin-deep. A revetment 
A marble below and plaster above once concealed this brick 
facing. The portico, in spite of its too steep gable (once 
filled with a " gigantomachia " in gilt bronze) and its 
what awkward association with a round building, is n< 
theless a noble work, its capitals in Pentelic marble ranking 
among the finest known examples of the Roman Corinl 
Taken as a whole, the Pantheon is one of the great master 
s of the world's architecture. 



FORA AND BASILICAS. The fora were the places for gen- 
eral public assemblage. The chief of those in Rome, the 
Forum Magnum, or Forum Romanum, was at first merely an 
irregular vacant space, about and in which, as the focus of 
the civic life, temples, halls, colonnades, and statues grad- 
ually accumulated. These chance aggregations the system- 
atic Roman mind reduced in time to orderly and monumental 
form ; successive emperors extended them and added new 
fora at enormous cost and with great splendor of architect- 
ure. Those of Julius, Augustus, Vespasian, and Nerva (or 
Domitian), adjoining the Roman Forum, were magnificent 
enclosures surrounded 
by high walls and single 
or double colonnades. 
Each contained a temple 
or basilica, besides gate- 
ways, memorial columns 
or arches, and countless 
statues. The Forum of 
Trajan surpassed all the 
rest ; it covered an area 
of thirty-five thousand 
square yards, and in- 
cluded, besides the main 
area, entered through a 
triumphal arch, the Ba- 
silica Ulpia, the temple 
of Trajan, and his colos- 
sal Doric column of Vic- 
tory. Both in size and 
beauty it ranked as the chief architectural glory of the 
city (Fig. 57). The six fora together contained thirteen 
temples, three basilicas, eight triumphal arches, a mile of 
porticos, and a number of other public edifices.* Besides 

* Lanciani : Ancient Rome in the Light of Recent Discoveries, p. 89. 



these, a net-work of colonnades covered large tracts of the 
city, affording sheltered communication in every direction, 
and here and there expanding into squares or gardens sur- 
rounded by peristyles. 

The public business of Rome, both judicial and commer- 
cial, was largely transacted in the basilicas ^ large buildings 
consisting usually of a wide and lofty central nave Hanked by 
lower side-aisles, and terminating at one or both ends in 
an apse or semicircular recess called the tribune, in which 
were the seats for the magistrates. The side-aisles were 
separated from the nave by columns supporting a clear- 
story wall, pierced by windows above the roofs of the 
side-aisles. In some cases the latter 
were two stories high, with galleries ; 
in others the central space was open 
to the sky, as at Pompeii, suggesting 
the derivation of the ha >ilica from 
the open square surrounded by col- 
onnades, or from the forum itself, 
with which we And it usually associ- 

,";7nNK U '>^ CON ated - The most important basilicM 
in Rome were the Sempronian, the 
iEmilian (about 54 n.e.), the Julian In the Forum 
lHini (51 B.C.), and the TTlpian in the Forum of Trajan (113 
A. i).). The last two were probably open basilh as, only the 
side-aisles being roofed. The Ulpian (Fig. 57) was the most 
magnificent of all, and in conjunction with the Forum of 
Trajan formed one of the most imposing of those monu- 
mental aggregations of columnar architecture which con- 
tributed so largely to the splendor of the Roman capital. 

These monuments frequently suffered from the burning 
of their wooden roofs. It was Constantine who completed 
the first vaulted and fireproof basilica, begun by his pre- 
decessor and rival, Maxentius, on the site of the former 
Temple of Peace (Figs. 58, 59). Its design reproduced on a 



grand scale the plan of the tepidarium-halls of the thermae, 
the side-recesses of which were converted into a continuous 
side-aisle by piercing arches through the buttress-walls that 
separated them. Above the imposing vaults of these re- 
cesses and under the cross-vaults of the nave were windows 
admitting abundant light. A narthex y or porch, preceded 


the hall at one end ; there were also a side entrance from 
the Via Sacra, and an apse or tribune for the magistrates 
opposite each of these entrances. The dimensions of the 
main hall (325 x 85 feet), the height of its vault (117 feet), 
and the splendor of its columns and incrustations excited 
universal admiration, and exercised a powerful influence on 
later architecture. 

THERMJE. The leisure of the Roman people was largely- 
spent in the great baths, or therma, which took the place 
substantially of the modern club. The establishments 



erected by the emperors for this purpose were vast and 
complex congeries of large-and small halls, courts, and cham- 
bers, combined with a masterly comprehension of artistic- 
propriety and effect in the sequence of oblong, square, oval, 
and circular apartments, and in the relation of the greater 
to the lesser masses. They were a combination of the Greek 
pahestra with the Roman balnea, and united in one harmoni- 
ous design great public 
swimming-baths, private 
baths for individuals and 
families, places for gym- 
nastic exercises and 
games,courts, peristyles, 
gardens, halls for liter- 
ary entertainments, 
lounging-rooms, and all 
the complex accommo- 
dation required for the 
service of the whole es- 
tablishment. They were 
built with apparent dis- 
regard of cost, and 
adorned with splendid extravagance. The earliest were 
the Baths of Agrippa(27 B.C.) behind the Pantheon ; next 
may be mentioned those of Titus, built on the Substructions 
of Nero's Golden House. The remains of the Thermae of 
Caracalla (21 1 \.n.) form the most extensive mass of ruins 
in Rome, and clearly display the admirable planning of this 
and similar establishments. A gigantic block of buildings 
containing the three great halls for cold, warm, and hot 
baths, stood in the centre of a vast enclosure surrounded 
by private baths. .md halls for lecture-audiences 

and other gatherings. The enclosure was adorned with 
statues, flower-gardens, and places for out-door games. 
The Baths of Diocletian (302 a.d.) embodied this arrange- 


o . . . . 3/ 

A, Caldarium,or Hot Bath : B, Intermediate 
Chamber : C, l'f/>idarium, or Warm Path : D, 
Rrigidarium, or Cold Bath: E, Peristyles: 
a, Cymnasth Rooms : 6, Dressing- Rooms : c, 
Cooling Rooms : d. Small Courts ; e, Entrances/ 
r, / 'eslibules. 


Capua, and many cities in the foreign provinces there are 
well-preserved remains of similar structures. 

Closely related to the amphitheatre were the circus and 
the stadium. The Circus Maximus between the Palatine 
and Aventine hills was the oldest of those in Rome. That 
erected by Caligula and Nero on the site afterward partly 
occupied by St. Peter's, was more splendid, and is said to 
have been capable of accommodating over three hundred 
thousand spectators after its enlargement in the fourth 
century. The long, narrow race-course was divided into 
two nearly equal parts by a low parapet, the spina, on which 
were the goals (inetce) and many small decorative structures 
and columns. One end of the circus, as of the stadium 
also, was semicircular ; the other was segmental in the cir- 
us, square in the stadium ; a colonnade or arcade ran 
f c ong the top of the building, and the entrances and exits 
ar ?re adorned with monumental arches. 

j n TRIUMPHAL ARCHES AND COLUMNS. Rome and the pro- 
TiMcial cities abounded in monuments commemorative of 
victory, usually single or triple arches with engaged col- 
umns and rich sculptural adornments, or single colossal 
columns supporting statues. The arches were characteris- 
tic products of Roman design, and some of them deserve 
high praise for the excellence of their proportions and the 
elegance of their details. There were in Rome in the sec- 
ond century a.d., thirty-eight of these monuments. The 
Arch of Titus (71-82 a.d.) is the simplest and most perfect 
of those still extant in Rome ; the arch of Septimius Sev- 
erus in the Forum (203 a.d.) and that of Constantine (330 
a.d.) near the Colosseum, are more sumptuous but less 
pure in detail. The last-named was in part enriched with 
sculptures taken from the earlier arch of Trajan. The 
statues of Dacian captives on the attic (attic=z species of 
subordinate story added above the main cornice) of this 
arch were a fortunate addition, furnishing a raison-d 'etre 




(From model in Metropolitan Museum, New York.) 

for the columns and broken entablatures on which they 
rest. Memorial columns of colossal size were erected by 
several emperors, both in Rome and abroad. Those of 

Trajan and of Marcus 
Aurelius are still stand- 
ing in Rome in perfect 
preservation. The first 
was 140 feet high in- 
cluding the pedestal 
and the statue which 
surmounted it ; its cap- 
ital marked the height 
of the ridge levelled by 
the emperor for the fo- 
rum on which the col- 
umn stands. Its most 
striking peculiarity is 
the spiral band of reliefs winding around the shaft from 
bottom to top and representing the Dacian campaigns 
of Trajan. The other column is of similar design and 
dimensions, but greatly inferior to the first in execution. 
Both are really towers, with interior stair-cases leading to 
the top. 

TOMBS. The Romans developed no special and national 
type of tomb, and few of their sepulchral monuments were 
of large dimensions. The most important in Rome were the 
pyramid of Cains Cestius (late first century B.C.), and the 
circular tombs of Cecilia Metella (fio b.< .). Augustus (14 
a.m.) and Hadrian, now the Castle of S. Angelo (138 \.i.). 
The latter was composed of a huge cone of marble sup- 
ported on a cylindrical structure 230 feet in diameter stand- 
ing on a square podium 300 feet long and wide. The cone 
probably once terminated in the gilt bronze pine-cone now 
in the Giardino delta Pigna of the Vatican. In the Mauso 
leum of Augustus a mound of earth planted with trees 


crowned a similar circular base of marble on a podium 220 
feet square, now buried. 

The smaller tombs varied greatly in size and form. Some 
were vaulted chambers, with graceful internal painted deco- 
rations of figures and vine patterns combined with low-relief 
enrichments in stucco. Others were designed in the form 
of altars or sarcophagi, as at Pompeii ; while others again 
resembled aediculse, little temples, shrines, or small towers 
in several stories of arches and columns, as at St. Remy 

PALACES AND DWELLINGS. Into their dwellings the Romans 
carried all their love of ostentation and personal luxury. 
They anticipated in many details the comforts of modern 
civilization in their furniture, their plumbing and heating, 
and their utensils. Their houses may be divided into four 
classes : the palace, the villa, the dotnus or ordinary house, 
and the insula or many-storied tenement built in compact 
blocks. The first three alone concern us, and will be taken 
up in the above order. 

The imperial palaces on the Palatine Hill comprised a 
wide range in style and variety of buildings, beginning with 
the first simple house of Augustus (26 B.C.), burnt and re- 
built 3 a.d. Tiberius, Caligula, and Nero added to the 
Augustan group ; Domitian rebuilt a second time and en- 
larged the palace of Augustus, and Septimius Severus re- 
modelled the whole group, adding to it his own extraordi- 
nary seven-storied palace, the Septizonium. The ruins of 
these successive buildings have been carefully excavated, 
and reveal a remarkable combination of dwelling-rooms, 
courts, temples, libraries, basilicas, baths, gardens, peri- 
styles, fountains, terraces, and covered passages. These 
were adorned with a profusion of precious marbles, mosaics, 
columns, and statues. Parts of the demolished palace of 
Nero were incorporated in the substructions of the Baths 
of Titus. The beautiful arabesques and plaster reliefs 



which adorned them were the inspiration of much <>f the 
fresco and stucco decoration of the Italian Renaissance, 
At Spalato, in Dalmatia, are the extensive ruins of the 

great Palace of Diocle- 
tian, which was laid 
out on the plan of a 
Roman camp, with two 
intersecting avenues 
(Fig. 64). It comprised 
a temple, mausoleum, 
basilica, and other 

i_* _ \ 1^ structures besides 

^- 3 ; s&K Hf t those portions devot- 

ed to the purposes of 
a royal resident 

45$^ iM^[HPx D Thc vma was in re - 

ality a country palace, 
arranged with special 
reference to the pre- 
vailing winds, exposure 
to the sun and shade, 
and the enjoyment of a wide prospect Fiat lis, temples, 
exedrce, theatres, tennis-courts, sun-rooms, and shaded por- 
ticoes were connected with the house proper, which was 
built around two or three interior courts or peristyles. 
Statues, fountains, and colossal vases of marble adorned 
the grounds, which were laid out in terraces and tr 
with all the fantastic arts of the Roman landscape-gardener, 
The most elaborate and extensive villa was that of Ha- 
drian, at Tibur (Tivoli) ; its ruins, covering hundreds <<f 
. form one of the most interesting spots to visit in the 
-hborhood of Rome. 

There are few remains in Rome of the domus or private 
house. Two, however, have left remarkably interesting 
ruins the Atrium Vestae, or House of the Vestal Virgins, 




east of the Forum, a well-planned and extensive house sur- 
rounding a cloister or court ; and the House of Livia, so- 
called, on the Palatine Hill, the walls and decorations of 
which are excellently preserved. The typical Roman house 
in a provincial town is best illustrated by the ruins of Pom- 
peii and Herculanum, which, 

buried by an eruption of fiortus or Garden 

Vesuvius in 79 a.d., have 
been partially excavated 
since 1721. The Pompeiian 
house (Fig. 65) consisted of 
several courts or atria, some 
of which were surrounded 
by colonnades and called 
peristyles. The front portion 
was reserved for shops, or 
presented to the street a 
wall unbroken save by the 
entrance ; all the rooms and 
chambers opened upon the 
interior courts, from which 
alone they borrowed their 
light. In the brilliant cli- 
mate of southern Italy win- 
dows were little needed, as 
sufficient light was admitted 
by the door, closed only by 
portieres for the most part ; 
especially as the family life 
was passed mainly in the 
shaded courts, to which fountains, parterres of shrub- 
bery, statues, and other adornments lent their inviting 
charm. The general plan of these houses seems to have 
been of Greek origin, as well as the system of decora- 
tion used on the walls. These, when not wainscoted with 


abx ala 


j, Shops : v. Vestibule ; J", Family Rooms ; 
, Kitchen ; /, Lararium ; P, P, P, Peri- 


marble, were covered with fantastic, but often artistic, 
painted decorations, in which an imaginary architecture as 
of metal, a fantastic and arbitrary perspective, illusory pict- 
ures, and highly finished figures were the chief elements. 
These were executed in brilliant colors with excellent effect. 
The houses were lightly built, with wooden ceilings and 
roofs instead of vaulting, and usually with but one story on 
account of the danger from earthquakes. That the work- 
manship anil decoration were in the capital often superior 
to what was to be found in a provincial town like Pompeii, 
is evidenced by beautiful wall-paintings and reliefs discov- 
ered in Rome in 1879 and now preserved in the Museo 
delle Terme. More or less fragmentary remains of Roman 
houses have been found in almost every corner of the 
Roman empire, but nowhere exhibiting as completely as 
in Pompeii the typical Roman arrangement. 

WORKS OF UTILITY. A word should be said about Roman 
engineering works, which in many cases were designed 
with an artistic sense of proportion and form which raises 
them into the domain of genuine art. Such were especially 
the bridges, in which a remarkable effect of monumental 
grandeur was often produced by the form and proportions 
of the arches and piers, and an appropriate use of rough 
and dressed masonry, as in the Pons ilius (Ponte S. An- 
the great bridge at Alcantara (Spain), ami the Pool 
du Gard, in southern France. The aqueducts are impres- 
sive rather by their length, scale, and simplicity, than by 
any special refinements of design, except where their arches 
are treated with some architectural decoration to form 
gates, as in the Porta Maggiore, at Rome. 

MONUMENTS : 1 Those which have no important extant remains are given 
in italics. ) Tl Mil I I : Jupiter (',;/> /'/.>//'// - , Liter, and l.i- 

bera, 404 K.c. (ruins of later rebuilding in S. Mari.i in < osmedin) ; first T. 
0/ CtHCtrd (rebuilt in AdfUSfl ', first marble temple in por- 

tico of Metdlus, by a(ireck. Hermodorus, 143 H.c. ; temples of Fortune at 


Pneneste and at Rome, and of " Vesta " at Rome, 83-78 B.C. ; of " Vesta" 
at Tivoli, and of Hercules at Cori, 72 B.C. ; first Pantheon, 27 B.C. In 
Augustan Age temples of Apollo, Concord rebuilt, Dioscuri, Julius, Jupi- 
ter Stalor, Jupiter Tonans, Mars Ultor, Minerva {at Rome and Assisi), 
Maison Carree at Nimes, Saturn ; at Puteoli, Pola, etc. T. of Peace; 
T.Jupiter Capitolinus, rebuilt 70 a.d. ; temple at Brescia. Temple of 
Vespasian, 96 A.D. ; also of Minerva in Forum of Nerva ; of Trajan, 117 
A.D. ; second Pantheon ; T. of Venus and Rome at Rome, and of Jupiter 
Olympius at Athens, 135-138 a.d. ; Faustina, 141 a.d. ; many in Syria ; 
temples of Sun at Rome, Baalbec, and Palmyra, cir. 273 A.D. ; of Romulus, 
305 a.d. (porch S. Cosmo and Damiano). Places of Assembly : Fora 
Roman, Julian, 46 B.C. ; Augustan, 40-42 B.C. ; of Peace, 75 A.D. ; Nerva, 
97 a.d. ; Trajan (by Apollodorus of Damascus, 117 a.d. Basilicas : Sem- 
proniaii, j-Emilian, 1st century B.C. ; Julian, 51 B.C. ; Septa Julia, 26 B.C. ; 
the Curia, later rebuilt by Diocletian, 300 A.D. (now Church of S. Adriano) ; 
at Fa no, 20 A.D. (?) ; Forum and Basilica at Pompeii, 60 a.d. ; of Trajan ; 
of Constantine, 310-324 a.d. Theatres (th.) and Amphitheatres 
(amp.) : th. Pompey, 55 B.C. ; of Balbus and of Marcellus, 13 B.C. ; th. 
and amp. at Pompeii and Herculanum ; Colosseum at Rome, 78-82 a.d. ; 
th. at Orange and in Asia Minor ; amp. at Albano, Constantine, Nimes, 
Petra, Pola, Reggio, Trevi, Tusculum, Verona, etc. ; amp. Castrense at 
Rome, 96 a.d. Circuses and stadia at Rome. Thermae: of Agrippa, 27 
B.C. ; of Nero ; of Titus, 78 a.d. ; Domitian, 90 a.d. ; Caracalla, 211 
A.D. ; Diocletian, 305 A.D. ; Constantine, 320 A.D. ; " Minerva Medica," 
3d or 4th century a.d. Arches : of Stertinius, 196 B.C. ; Scipio, 190 B.C.; 
Augustus, 30 B.C. ; Titus, 71-82 a.d. ; Trajan, 117 A.D. ; Severus, 203 
A.D. ; Constantine, 320 A.D. ; of Drusus, Dolabella, Silversmiths, 204 A.D.; 
Janus Quadrifrons, 320 a.d. (?) ; all at Rome. Others at Benevento, An- 
cona, Rimini in Italy ; also at Athens, and at Reims and St. Chamas in 
France. Columns of Trajan, Antoninus, Marcus Aurelius at Rome; 
others at Constantinople, Alexandria, etc. Tombs : along Via Appia and 
Via Latina, at Rome ; Via Sacra at Pompeii ; tower-tombs at St. Remy 
in France ; rock-cut at Petra ; at Rome, of Caius Cestius and Cecilia Me- 
tella, 1st century B.C. ; of Augustus, 14 a.d. ; Hadrian, 138 a.d. Pal- 
aces and Private Houses : On Palatine, of Augustus, Tiberius, Nero, 
Domitian, Septimius Severus, Elagabalus ; Villa of Hadrian at Tivoli ; 
palaces of Diocletian at Spalato and of Constantine at Constantinople. 
House of Livia on Palatine (Augustan period) ; of Vestals, rebuilt by 
Hadrian, cir. 120 a.d. Houses at Pompeii and Herculanum, cir. 60-79 
a.d. ; Villas of Gordianus (" Tor' de' Schiavi," 240 a.d.), and of Sallust 
at Rome, and of Pliny at Laurentium. 



Books Recommended : Hansen, Die Basiliken christlichen 
Rams. Butler, Architecture and other Arts in Northern Cen- 
tra/ Syria. Corroyer, V architecture romane. Camming*, 
A History of Architecture in Italy. Essenwein (Handbuch d. 
Architektur , Ausg&nge der kiassischen Bauhunst. (lutensohn 
u. Knap]), Denhmdler der christlichen Religion. Htlbsch, 
Monti mints de P architecture chrio'eune. Lanciani, Pagan 'tint 
Christian Rome. Mothes, Die BasiKhenform li ,/en Christen, 
etc. Okely, Development of Christian Architecture in Italy. 
Von Quast, Die a !te litis (lie hen Bauwerht %U Ravenna. De 
Rossi, Roma Sottcrtanea. De Vogue, Syrie Centrale ; Eglises 
ile la Tern Sainte. 

INTRODUCTORY. The official recognition of Christianity 
in the year 328 by Constantine simply legalized an institu- 
tion which had been for three centuries gathering momen- 
tum for its final conquest of the antique world. The new 
religion rapidly enlisted in its service for a common purpose 
and under a common impulse races as wide apart in blood 
and culture as those which had built up the art of imperial 
Rome. It was Christianity which reduced to civilization in 
the West the Germanic hordes that had overthrown Koine, 
bringing their fresh and hitherto untamed vigor to the task 
of recreating architecture out of the decaying fragments of 
tit. So in the East its life-giving influence awoke 
the slumbering Greek art-instinct to new triumphs in the 
arts of building, less refined and perfect indeed, but not 

- sublime than those of the Periclean age. Long before 
the Constantinian edict, the Christians in the Eastern prov- 
inces had enjoyed substantial freedom of worship. Meet- 
ing often in the private basilicas of wealthy converts, and 


finding these, and still more the great public basilicas, 
suited to the requirements of their worship, they early be- 
gan to build in imitation of these edifices. There are many 
remains of these early churches in northern Africa and 
central Syria. 

early christian ART in ROME. This was at first wholly 
sepulchral, developing in the catacombs the symbols of the 
new faith. Once liberated, however, Christianity appro- 
priated bodily for its public rites the basilica-type and 
the general substance of Roman architecture. Shafts and 
capitals, architraves and rich linings of veined marble, even 
the pagan Bacchic symbolism of the vine, it adapted to new 
uses in its own service. Constantine led the way in archi- 
tecture, endowing Bethlehem and Jerusalem with splendid 
churches, and his new capital on the 
Bosphorus with the first of the three 
historic basilicas dedicated to the Holy 
Wisdom (Hagia Sophia). One of the 
greatest of innovators, he seems to 
have had a special predilection for 
circular buildings, and the tombs and 
baptisteries which he erected in this 
form, especially that for his sister 
Constantia in Rome (known as Santa 
Costanza, Fig. 66), furnished the pro- FIG ^^ COSTANZA) 
totype for numberless Italian baptis- rome. 

teries in later ages. 

The Christian basilica (see Figs. 67, 68) generally com- 
prised a broad and lofty nave, separated by rows of columns 
from the single or double side-aisles. The aisles had usually 
about half the width and height of the nave, and like it were 
covered with wooden roofs and ceilings. Above the columns 
which flanked the nave rose the lofty clearstory wall, pierced 
with windows above the side-aisle roofs and supporting the 
immense trusses of the roof of the nave. The timbering of 


the latter was sometimes bare, sometimes concealed by a 
richly panelled ceiling, carved, gilded, and painted. At the 
further end of the nave was the sanctuary or apse, with the 
seats for the clergy on a raised platform, the bcrna, in front 
of which was the altar. Transepts sometimes expanded to 
right and left before the altar, under which was the confi-s- 
sio or shrine of the titular saint or martyr. 

An atrium or forecourt surrounded by a covered arcade 
preceded the basilica proper, the arcade at the front of the 
church forming a porch or uarthex, which, however, in some 
cases existed without the atrium. The exterior was ex- 
tremely plain ; the interior, on the contrary, was resplen- 
dent with incrustations of veined marble and with sumptuous 
decorations in glass mosaic (called opus Grecanicum) on a 
blue or golden ground. Especially rich were the half-dome 
of the apse and the wall-space surrounding its arch and 
called the triumphal arch ; next in decorative importance 
came the broad band of wall beneath the clearstory win- 
dow-,. Upon these surfaces the mosaic-workers wrought 
with minute cubes of colored glass pictures and symbols 
almost imperishable, in which the glow of color and a cer- 
tain decorative grandeur of effect in the composition went 
far to atone for the uncouth drawing. With growing 
wealth and an increasingly elaborate ritual, the furniture 
and equipments of the church assumed greater architectural 
importance. A large rectangular space was retained for 
the choir in front of the bema, and enclosed by a breast* 
high parapet of marble, richly inlaid. On either side were 
the pulpits or ambones for the Gospel and Epistle. A lofty 
canopy was built over the altar, the baldaquin, supported on 
four marble columns. A few basilicas were built with side- 
. in two stories, as in S. I.oren/.o and Sta. Agnese. 
Adjoining the basilica in the earlier examples were the 
baptistery and the tomb of the saint, Circular or polygonal 
buildings usually ; but in later times these were replaced 


by the font or baptismal chapel in the church and the con- 
frssio under the altar. 

Of the two Constantinian basilicas in Rome, the one 
dedicated to St. Peter was demolished in the fifteenth cen- 
tury ; that of St. John Lateran has been so disfigured by 
modern alterations as to be unrecognizable. The former of 
the two adjoined the site of the martyrdom of St. Peter in 
the circus of Caligula and Nero ; it was five-aisled, 380 
feet in length by 2 1 2 feet in 
width. The nave was 80 
feet wide and 100 feet 
high, and the dispropor- \ 
tionately high clearstory 
wall rested on horizontal 
architraves carried by col- 


umns. The impressive di- 
mensions and simple plan of this structure gave it a 
majesty worthy of its rank as the first church of Christen- 
dom. St. Paul beyond the Walls (S. Paolo fuori le mura), 
built in 386 by Theodosius, resembled St. Peter's closely 
in plan (Figs. 67, 68). Destroyed by fire in 1821, it has 
been rebuilt with almost its pristine splendor, and is, next 
to the modern St. Peter's and the Pantheon, the most im- 
pressive place of worship in Rome. Santa Maria Maggiore,* 
though smaller in size, is more interesting because it so 
largely retains its original aspect, its Renaissance ceiling hap- 
pily harmonizing with its simple antique lines. Ionic col- 
umns support architraves to carry the clearstory, as in St. 
Peter's. In most other examples, St. Paul's included, arches 
turned from column to column perform this function. The 
first known case of such use of classic columns as arch-bear- 
ers was in the palace of Diocletian at Spalato ; it also appears 
in Syrian buildings of the third and fourth centuries a.u. 

* Hereafter the abbreviation S. M. will be generally used instead of the 
name Santa Maria. 



The basilica remained the model for ecclesiastical archi- 
tecture in Rome, without noticeable change either of plan 
or detail, until the time of the Renaissance. All the earlier 
examples employed columns and capitals taken from ancient 

ruins, often incongruous 
and ill-matched in size and 
order. San Clemente ( i < HS4) 
has retained almost intact 
its early aspect, its choir- 
enclosure, baldaquin, and 
ambones having been well 
preserved or carefully re- 
stored. Other important 
basilicas are mentioned in 
the list of monuments on 
pages 118, 119. 

JtAVENNA. The fifth and 
s i .\ t h centuries endowed 
Ravenna with a number of 
notable buildings which, 
with the exception of the 
cathedral, demolished in the 
last century, have been pre- 
served to our day. Subdued 
by the Byzantine emperof 
Justinian in 537, Ravenna became the meeting-ground 
irly Christian and Byzantine traditions and the basili- 
Can and circular plans are both represented. The two 
churches dedicated to St. Apollinaris, S. Apollinare Nuovo 
(520) in the city, and S. Apollinare in Classe (538) three 
miles distant from the city, in what was formerly the 
port, are especially interesting for their fine mosaics, 
and for the impost-blocks interposed above the capitals of 
their columns to receive the springing of the pier-arches. 
These blo< ks appear to be somewhat crude modifications 



ol the fragmentary architraves or entablatures employed 
in classic Roman architecture to receive the springing 
of vaults sustained by columns, and became common in 
Byzantine structures (Fig. 73). The use of external arcad- 
ing to give some slight adornment to the walls of the 
second of the above-named churches, and the round bell- 
towers of brick which adjoined both of them, were first 
steps toward the development of the "wall-veil" or ar- 
caded decoration, and of the campaniles, which in later cen- 
turies became so characteristic of north Italian churches 
(see Chapter XIII.). In Rome the campaniles which ac- 
company many of the mediaeval basilicas are sauare and 
pierced with many windows. 

The basilican form of church became general in Italy, a 
large proportion of whose churches continued to be built 
with wooden roofs and with but slight deviations from the 
original type, long after the appearance of the Gothic style. 
The chief departures from early precedent were in the ex- 
terior, which was embellished with marble incrustations 
as in .S. Miniato (Florence) ; or with successive stories 
of wall-arcades, as in many churches in Pisa and Lucca 
(see Fig. 90) ; until finally the introduction of clustered 
piers, pointed arches, and vaulting, gradually transformed 
the basilican into the Italian Romanesque and Gothic 

SYRIA AND THE EAST. In Syria, particularly the central 
portion, the Christian architecture of the 3d to 8th centuries 
produced a number of very interesting monuments. The 
churches built by Constantine in Syria the Church of the 
Nativity in Bethlehem (nominally built by his mother), of 
the Ascension at Jerusalem, the magnificent octagonal 
church on the site of the Temple, and finally the some- 
what similar church at Antioch were the most notable 
Christian monuments in Syria. The first three on the list, 
still extant in part at least, have been so altered by later 

I 10 


additions and restorations that their original forms are only 
approximately known from early descriptions. They were 
all of large size, and the octagonal church on the Temple 
platform was of exceptional magnificence.* The columns 
and a part of the marble incrustations of the early design 
are still visible in the " Mosque of Omar," but most of the 
old work is concealed by the decoration of tiles applied 
by the Moslems, and the whole interior aspect altered by 
the wood-and-plaster dome with which they replaced the 

simpler roof of the original. 
Christian architecture in 
Syria soon, however, di- 
verged from Roman tradi- 
tions. T h e abundance of 
hard stone, the total lack of 
clay or brick, the remote- 
from Rome, led t<> a 
peculiar independence and 
originality in the forms and 
details of the ecclesiastical 
as well as of the domestic: 
architecture of central 
Syria. These innovations upon Roman models resulted in 
the development of distinct types which, but for the arrest 
of progress by the Mohammedan conquest in the seventh 
century, WOOld doubtless have inaugurated a new and in- 
dependent style of architecture. Piers of masonry came 

Ftryuwon (History of Arckittctwt, vol. ii.. pp. 408, 432) contend! 
that this was the real (onstantinian church of the Holy Sepulchre, and that 
the one called to-day by that name was erected by the Crusaders in the 
twelfth century. The more general view is that the latter was originally 
built by < onst.mtine as the Church of the Sepulchre, though subsequently 
much altered, and that the octagonal edifice was also his work, but erected 
under some other name. Whether this church was later incorporated in 
the " Mosque of Omar." or merely furnished some of the materials for its 
construction, is not quite clear. 




to replace the classic column, as at Tafkha (third or fourth 
century), Rouheiha and Kalb Louzeh (fifth century ? Fig. 
69) ; the ceilings in the smaller churches were often 
formed with stone slabs ; the apse was at first confined 
within the main rectangle of the plan, and was sometimes 
square. The exterior assumed a striking and pictur- 
esque variety of forms by means of turrets, porches, and 
gables. Singularly enough, vaulting hardly appears at all, 
though the arch is used with fine effect. Conventional and 
monastic groups of buildings appear early in Syria, and 
that of St. Simeon Stylites at Kelat Seman is an impres- 
sive and interesting monument. Four three-aisled wings 
form the arms of a cross, meet- 
ing in a central octagonal open 
court, in the midst of which 
stood the column of the saint. 
The eastern arm of the cross 
forms a complete basilica of 
itself, and the whole cross meas- 
ures 330 x 300 feet. Chapels, 
cloisters, and cells adjoin the 
main edifice. 

Circular and polygonal plans 
appear in a number of Syrian 
examples of the early sixth cen- 
tury. Their most striking feat- 
ure is the inscribing of the circle or polygon in a square 
which forms the exterior outline, and the use of four 
niches to fill out the corners. This occurs at Kelat Seman 
in a small double church, perhaps the tomb and chapel 
of a martyr ; in the cathedral at Bozrah (Fig. 70), and in 
the small domical church of St. George at Ezra. These 
were probably the prototypes of many Byzantine churches 
like St. Sergius at Constantinople, and San Vitale at 
Ravenna .(Fig. 74), though the exact dates of the Syrian 

:athedral at bozrah. 


churches are not known. The one at Ezra is the only 
one of the three which has a dome, the others having been 
roofed with wood. 

The interesting domestic architecture of this period is 
preserved in whole towns and villages in the Hauran, which, 
deserted at the Arab conquest, have never been reoccupied 
and remain almost intact but for the decay of their wooden 
roofs. They are marked by dignity and simplicity of de- 
sign, and by the same picturesque massing of gables and 
roofs and porches which has already been remarked of the 
churches. The arches are broad, the columns rather heavy, 
the mouldings few and simple, and the scanty carving vig- 
orous and effective, often strongly Byzantine in type. 

Elsewhere in the Eastern world are many early churches 
of which even the enumeration would exceed the limits of 
this work. Salonica counts a number of basilicas and sev- 
eral domical churches. The church of St. George, now a 
mosque, is of early date and thoroughly Roman in plan and 
ion, of the same class with the Pantheon and the tomb 
of Helena, in both of which a massive circular wall is light- 
ened by eight niches. At Angora (Ancyra), Hierapolis,. 
Pergamus, and other points in Asia Minor ; in Egypt, Nu- 
bia, and Algiers, are many examples of both circular and 
basilican edifices of the early centuries of Christianity. In 
Constantinople there remains but a single representative of 
the basilican type, the church of St. John Studius, now the 
Emir Akhor mosque. 

M0NUMENT8: ROMI : 4th century : St. Peter's, Sta. Costanza, 330? ; 
Ma. Pudentiana, 335 (rebuilt 1598); tomb of St. Helena; Baptistery of 
< onstantine ; St. Paul's beyond the Walls, 386 ; St. John Lateral] (wholly 
remodelled in modern times). 5th century : Baptistery of St. John Lateran ; 
Sta. Sabina, 425 ; Sta. Maria Maggiorc, 432 ; S. I'ietro in Vincoli, 442 
(greatly altered in modern times). 6th century: S. Lorenzo, 5S0 (the 
older portion in two stories) ; SS. Cosmo e Damiano. 7th century : Sta. 
Agnese, 625 ; S. Giorgio in Velabro, 682. 8th century : Sta. Maria in 


Cosmedin ; S. Crisogono. 9th century : S. Nereo ed Achilleo ; Sta. Pras- 
sede ; Sta. Maria in Dominica. 12th and 13th centuries: S. Clemente, 
1 1 18 ; Sta. Maria in Trastevere ; S. Lorenzo (nave) ; Sta. Maria in Ara 
Coeli. RAVENNA : Baptistery of S. John, 400 (?) ; S. Francesco ; S. Gio- 
vanni Evangelista, 425 ; Sta. Agata, 430 ; S. Giovanni Battista, 439 ; 
tomb of Galla Placidia, 450 ; S. Apollinare Nuovo, 500-520 ; S. Apollinare 
in Classe, 538 ; St. Victor ; Sta. Maria in Cosmedin (the Arian Baptist- 
ery) ; tomb of Theodoric (Sta. Maria della Rotonda, a decagonal two- 
storied mausoleum, with a low dome cut from a single stone 36 feet in 
diameter), 530-540. Italy in General : basilica at Parenzo, 6th cen- 
tury ; cathedral and Sta. Fosca at Torcello, 640-700 ; at Naples Sta. 
Restituta, 7th century ; others, mostly of ioth-i3th centuries, at Murano 
near Venice, at Florence (S. Miniato), Spoleto, Toscanella, etc. ; bap- 
tisteries at Asti, Florence, Nocera dei Pagani, and other places. In Sy- 
ria and the East : basilicas of the Nativity at Bethlehem, of the 
Sepulchre and of the Ascension at Jerusalem ; also polygonal church 
on Temple platform ; these all of 4th century. Basilicas at Bakouzah, 
Hass, Kelat Seman, Kalb Louzeh, Rouheiha, Tourmanin, etc. ; circular 
churches, tombs, and baptisteries at Bozrah, Ezra, Hass, Kelat Seman, 
Rouheiha, etc. ; all these 4th-8th centuries. Churches at Constantinople 
(Holy Wisdom, St. John Studius, etc.), Hierapolis, Pergamus, and Thes- 
salonica (St. Demetrius, " Eski Djuma") ; in Egypt and Nubia (Djemla, 
Announa, Ibreem, Siout, etc.) ; at Orleansville in Algeria. (For churches, 
etc., of 8th-ioth centuries in the West, see Chapter XIII.) 



Books Recommended : As before, Essenwein, Hiibsch, 
Von Quast. Also, Bayet, L Art Byzantin. Choisy, L Art 
de bdtir chcz les Byzantins. Lethaby and Swainson, Sancta 
Sophia. Ongania, La Basilica di San Marco. Pulgher, An- 
cicnncs EgSses ByaanHnes de Constantinople. Salzenberg, 
Alkhristlichc Baudrnkmalc von Constantinopel. Texier and 
Pullan, Byzantine Architecture. 

ORIGIN AND CHARACTER. The decline and fall of Rome 
arrested the development of the basilican style in the West, 
as did the Arab conquest later in Syria. It was otheru 
in the new Eastern capital founded by Constantine in the 
ancient Byzantium, which was rising in power and wealth 
while Rome lay in ruins. Situated at the strategic point 
of the natural highway of commerce between East and 
West, salubrious and enchantingly beautiful in its sur- 
roundings the new capital grew rapidly from provincial 
insignificance to metropolitan importance. Its founder 
had embellished it with an extraordinary wealth of build- 
in:^, in whit h, owing to the scarcity of trained architet ts, 
quantity and cost doubtless outran quality. But at least 
the tatnenesfl of blindly followed precedent was avoided, 
and this departure from traditional tenets contributed un- 
doubtedly to the originality of Byzantine architecture. A 
lar^e part of the artisans employed in building were then, 
as BOW, from Asia Minor and the /Egean Islands, (ireek in 
race if not in name. An Oriental taste for brilliant and har- 
monious color and for minute decoration spread over broad 


surfaces must have been stimulated by trade with the Far 
East and by constant contact with Oriental peoples, cos- 
tumes, and arts. An Asiatic origin may also be assigned 
to the methods of vaulting employed, far more varied than 
the Roman, not only in form but also in materials and pro- 
cesses. From Roman architecture, however, the Byzan- 
tines borrowed the fundamental notion of their structural 
art ; that, namely, of distributing the weights and strains 
of their vaulted structures upon isolated and massive points 
of support, strengthened by deep buttresses, internal or ex- 
ternal, as the case might be. Roman, likewise, was the use 
of polished monolithic columns, and the incrustation of the 
piers and walls with panels of variegated marble, as well as 
the decoration of plastered surfaces by fresco and mosaic, 
and the use of opus sectile and opus Alexandrinum for the 
production of sumptuous marble pavements. In the first of 
these processes the color-figures of the pattern are formed 
each of a single piece of marble cut to the shape required ; 
in the second the pattern is compounded of minute squares, 
triangles, and curved pieces of uniform size. Under these 
combined influences the artists of Constantinople wrought 
out new problems in construction and decoration, giving to 
all that they touched a new and striking character. 

There is no absolute line of demarcation, chronological, 
geographical, or structural, between Early Christian and 
Byzantine architecture. But the former was especially 
characterized by the basilica with three or five aisles, and 
the use of wooden roofs even in its circular edifices ; the 
vault and dome, though not unknown, being exceedingly 
rare. Byzantine architecture, on the other hand, rarely 
produced the simple three-aisled or five-aisled basilica, and 
nearly all its monuments were vaulted. The dome was es- 
pecially frequent, and Byzantine architecture achieved its 
highest triumphs in the use of the pendentive, as the trian- 
gular spherical surfaces are called, by the aid of which a 


dome can be supported on the summits of four arches span- 
ning the four sides of a square, as explained later. There 
is as little uniformity in the plans of Byzantine buildings 
as in the forms of the vaulting. A few types of church- 
plan, however, predominated locally in one or another cen- 
tre ; but the controlling feature of the style was the dome 
and the constructive system with which it was associated. 
The dome, it is true, had long been used by the Romans, 
but always on a circular plan, as in the Pantheon. It is 
also a fact that pendentives have been found in Syria and 
Asia Minor older than the oldest Byzantine examples. But 
the special feature characterizing the Byzantine dome on 
pendentives was its almost exclusive association with plans 
having piers and columns or aisles, with the dome as the 
central and dominant feature of the complex design | 
plans, Figs. 74, 75, 78). Another strictly Byzantine pra< ti< e 
was the piercing of the lower portion of the dome with win- 
dows forming a circle or crown, and the final development 
of this feature into a high drum. 

CONSTRUCTION. Still another divergence from Roman 
methods was in the substitution of brick and stone ma- 
sonry for concrete. Brick was used for the mass as well as 
the facing of walls and piers, and for the vaulting in many 
buildings mainly built of stone. Stone was used either 
alone or in combination with brick, the latter appearing 
in bands of four or five courses at intervals of three or 
four feet. In later work a regular alternation of the two 
materials, course for course, was not uncommon. In piers 
intended to support unusually heavy loads the stone was 
very carefully cut and fitted, and sometimes tied and 
clamped with iron. 

Vaults were built sometimes of brick, sometimes of cut 
stone ; in a few cases even of earthenware jars fitting into 
each other, and laid up in a continuous contracting spiral 
from the base to the crown of a dome, as in San Vitale at 



Ravenna. Ingenious processes for building vaults without 
centrings were made use of processes inherited from the 
drain-builders of ancient Assyria, and still in vogue in Ar- 
menia, Persia, and Asia Minor. The groined vault was 
common, but always approximated the form of a dome, by 
a longitudinal convexity upward in the intersecting vaults. 
The aisles of Hagia Sophia * display a remarkable variety 
of forms in the vaulting. 

DOMES. The dome, as we have seen, early became the 
most characteristic feature of Byzantine architecture ; and 
especially the dome on pendentives. If a hemisphere be cut 
by five planes, four per- 
pendicular to its base and 
bounding a square in- 
scribed therein, and the 
fifth plane parallel to the 
base and tangent to the 
semicircular intersections 
made by the first four, 
there will remain of the 
original surface only four 
triangular spaces bounded 
by arcs of circles. These 
are called pendentives (Fig. 
71 a). When these are built 
up of masonry, each course 
forms a species of arch, by virtue of its convexity. At 
the crown of the four arches on which they rest, these 
courses meet and form a complete circle, perfectly stable 
and capable of sustaining any superstructure that does not 
by excessive weight disrupt the whole fabric by overthrow- 

* "St. Sophia," the common name of this church, is a misnomer. It 
was not dedicated to a saint at all, but to the Divine Wisdom (Hagia 
Sophia), which name the Turks have retained in the softened form " Aya 



ing the four arches which support it. Upon these pen- 
dentives, then, a new dome may be started of any desired 
curvature, or even a cylindrical drum to support a still 
loftier dome, as in the later churches (Fig. 71 b). This 
method of covering a square is simpler than the groined 
vault, having no sharp edges or intersections ; it is at least 
as effective architecturally, by reason of its greater height 
in the centre ; and is equally applicable to successive bays 
of an oblong, cruciform, and even columnar building. In 
the great cisterns at Constantinople vast areas are covered 
by rows of small domes supported on ranges of columns. 

The earlier domes were commonly pierced with windows 
at the base, this apparent weakening of the vault being com- 
pensated for by strongly buttressing the piers between the 
windows, as in Hagia Sophia. Here forty windows form a 
crown of light at the spring of the dome, producing an ef- 
lYi t almost as striking as that of the simple oculus of the 
Pantheon, and celebrated by ancient writers in the most 
extravagant terms. In later and smaller churches a high 
drum was introduced beneath the dome, in order to secure, 
by means of longer windows, more light than could be ob- 
tained by merely piercing the diminutive domes. 

Buttressing was well understood by the Byzantines, 
whose plans were skilfully devised to provide internal 
abutments, which were often continued above the roofs of 
the side-aisles to prop the main vaults, pre* \t was 

done by the Romans in their therm. e and similar halls. 

But the Byzantines, while adhering less strictly than the 

Romans to traditional forms and processes, and displaying 
much more ready contrivance and special adaptation of 
means to ends, never worked out this pregnant structural 
principle to its logical conclusion as did the Gothic archi- 
- of Western Europe a few centuries later. 
DECORATION. The exteriors of Byzantine buildings (ex- 
cept in some of the small churches of late date) were 



generally bare and lacking in beauty. The interiors, on 
the contrary, were richly decorated, color playing a much 
larger part than carving in the designs. Painting was re- 
sorted to only in the smaller buildings, the more durable 
and splendid medium of mosaic being usually preferred. 
This was, as a rule, confined to the vaults and to those por- 
tions of the wall-surfaces embraced by the vaults above 
their springing. The colors were brilliant, the background 
being usually of gold, though sometimes of blue or a deli- 
cate green. Biblical scenes, symbolic and allegorical fig- 
ures and groups of saints adorned the larger areas, partic- 
ularly the half-dome of the apse, as in the basilicas. The 
smaller vaults, the sof- 
fits of arches, borders 
of pictures, and other 
minor surfaces, received 
a more conventional 
decoration of crosses, 
monograms, and set 

The walls throughout 
were sheathed with 
slabs of rare marble in 
panels so disposed that 
the veining should pro- 
duce symmetrical fig- 
ures. The panels were 
framed in billet-mould- 
ings, derived perhaps 
from classic dentils ; the billets or projections on one side 
the moulding coming opposite the spaces on the other. This 
seems to have been a purely Byzantine feature. 

CARVED DETAILS. Internally the different stories were 
marked by horizontal bands and cornices of white or inlaid 
marble richly carved. The arch-soffits, the archivolts or 




hands around the arches, and the spandrils between them 
were covered with minute and intricate incised carving. 
The motives used, though based on the acanthus and an- 
themion, were given a wholly new aspect. The relief was 
low and flat, the leaves sharp and crowded, and the effect 
rich and lacelike, rather than vigorous. It was, however, 
well adapted to the Covering of large areas where genera] 
effect was more important than detail. Even the capital! 
were treated in the same spirit. The impost-block was al- 
most universal, except where its use was rendered unnec- 
essary by giving to the capital itself the massive pyrami- 
dal form required to 
receive properly the 
spring of the arch or 
vault. In such cases 
(more frequent in Con- 
stantinople than else* 
where) the surface of 
the capital was simply 
covered with incised 
carving of foliage, l>as- 

kctwork, monograms. 
etc. ; rudimentary vo- 
lutes in a few cases 
recalling classic tra- 
ditions (Figs. 72, 73). 
The mouldings were 
weak and poorly exe- 
cuted, and the vigor- 
ous profiles of classic 

cornices were only remotely suggested by the charai ter- 

ions of mouldings which took their place. 
PLAN8. The remains of I'yzaiitine architecture are almost 
exclusively Of churches and baptisteries, but the plans of 
eedingly varied. The first radical departure 



from the basilica-type seems to have been the adoption of 
circular or polygonal plans, such as had usually served only 
for tombs and baptisteries. The Baptistery of St. John at 
Ravenna (early fifth century) is classed by many authorities 
as a Byzantine monument. In the early years of the sixth 
century the adoption of this model 
had become quite general, and with 
it the development of domical de- 
sign began to advance. The church 
of St. Sergius at Constantinople 
(Fig. 74), originally joined to a short 
basilica dedicated to St. Bacchus 
(afterward destroyed by the Turks), 
as in the double church at Kelat 
Seman, was built about 520 ; that 
of San Vitale at Ravenna was be- 
gun a few years later; both are FIG - 74 - _ST - SERGIUS > CON- 

domical churches on an octagonal 

plan, with an exterior aisle. Semicircular niches four in St. 
Sergius and eight in San Vitale projecting into the aisle, 
enlarge somewhat the area of the central space and giVe va- 
riety to the internal effect. The origin of this characteristic 
feature may be traced to the eight niches of the Pantheon, 
through such intermediate examples as the temple of Minerva 
Medica at Rome. The true pendentive does not appear in 
these two churches. Timidly employed up to that time in 
small structures, it received a remarkable development in 
the magnificent church of Hagia Sophia, built by Anthe- 
mius of Tralles and Isodorus of Miletus, under Justinian, 
532-538 a.d. In the plan of this marvellous edifice (Fig. 
75) the, dome rests upon four mighty arches bounding a 
square, into two of which open the half-domes of semicir- 
cular apses. These apses are penetrated and extended each 
by two smaller niches and a central arch, and the whole 
vast nave, measuring over 200 x 100 feet, is flanked by 



enormously wide aisles connecting at the front with a 
majestic narthex. Huge transverse buttresses, as in the Ba- 
silica of Constantine (with whose 
structural design this building 
shows striking affinities), divide 
the aisles each into three sec- 
tions. The plan suggests that 
of St. Sergius cut in two, with a 
lofty dome on pendentives over 
a square plan inserted between 
the halves. Thus was secured a 
noble and unobstructed hall of 
unrivalled proportions and great 
beauty, covered by a combina- 
tion of half-domes increasing in 
span and height as they lead up 
successively to the stupendous 
central vault, which rises 180 feet into the air and fitly 
crowns the whole. The imposing effect of this low-curved 
but loftily-poised dome, resting as it does upon a crown of 
windows, and so disposed that its summit is visible from 
every point of the nave (as may be easily seen from an 
examination of the section, Fig. 76), is not surpassed in any 
interior ever erected. 





The two lateral arches under the dome are filled by clear- 
story walls pierced by twelve windows, and resting on ar- 
cades in two stories carried by magnificent columns taken 
from ancient ruins. These separate the nave from the side- 
aisles, which are in two stories forming galleries, and are 
vaulted with a remarkable variety of groined vaults. All 
the masses are disposed with studied reference to the re- 
sistance required by the many and complex thrusts exerted 
by the dome and other vaults. That the earthquakes of 
one thousand three hundred and fifty years have not de- 
stroyed the church is the best evidence of the sufficiency of 
these precautions. 

Not less remarkable than the noble planning and con- 
struction of this church was the treatment of scale and 
decoration in its interior design. It was as conspicuously 
the masterpiece of Byzantine architecture as the Parthenon 
was of the classic Greek. With little external beauty, it is 
internally one of the most perfectly composed and beauti- 
fully decorated halls of worship ever erected. Instead 
of the simplicity of the Pantheon it displays the com- 
plexity of an organism of admirably related parts. The 
division of the interior height into two stories below the 
spring of the four arches, reduces the component parts of 
the design to moderate dimensions, so that the scale of 
the whole is more easily grasped and its vast size em- 
phasized by the contrast. The walls are incrusted with 
precious marbles up to the spring of the vaulting ; the 
capitals, spandrils, and soffits are richly and minutely carved 
with incised ornament, and all the vaults covered with 
splendid mosaics. Dimmed by the lapse of centuries and 
disfigured by the vandalism of the Moslems, this noble in- 
terior, by the harmony of its coloring and its impressive 
grandeur, is one of the masterpieces of all time (Fig. 77). 

LATER CHURCHES. After the sixth century no monuments 
were built at all rivalling in scale the creations of the 



former period. The later churches were, with few excep- 
tions, relatively small and trivial. Neither the plan nor 
the general aspect of Hagia Sophia seems to have been 
imitated in these later works. The crown of dome-windows 
was replaced by a cylindrical drum under the dome, which 
was usually of insignificant size. The exterior was treated 
more decoratively than before, by means of bands and in- 
crustations of colored marble, or alternations of stone and 
brick ; and internally mosaic continued to be executed with 
great skill and of great beauty until the tenth century, wlu-n 
the art rapidly declined. These later churches, of which a 
number were spared by the Turks, are, therefore, generally 
pleasing and elegant rather than striking or imposing. 

foreign monuments. The influence of Byzantine art 
was wide-spread, both in Europe and Asia. The leading 
city of civilization through the Dark Ages, Constantino- 
ple influenced Italy through her 
political and commercial relations 
with Ravenna, (lenoa, and Yen- 
ice. The church of St. Mark in 
the latter city was one result of 
this influence (Figs. 78, 79). I'.e- 
gun in 1063 to replace an earlier 
church destroyed by fire, it re- 
ceived through several centuries 
additions not always Byzantine in 
character. Yet it was mainly the 
work of Byzantine builders, who 
copied most probably the church 
of the Apostles at Constantinople, 
built by Justinian. The picturesque but wholly unstructural 
use of columns in the entrance porches, the upper part-> of 
the facade, the wooden cupolas over the five domes, and the 
pointed art ties in the narthex, are deviations from Byzan- 
tine traditions dating in part from the later Middle Ages 

FIG. 78. PLAN (IK ST. MAKk's, 




Nothing could well be conceived more irrational, from a 
structural point of view, than the accumulation of columns 
in the entrance-arches ; but the total effect is so pictur- 
esque and so rich in color, that its architectural defects 
are easily overlooked. The external veneering of white 
and colored marble occurs rarely in the East, but became 


a favorite practice in Venice, where it continued in use for 
five hundred years. The interior of St. Mark's, in some 
respects better preserved than that of Hagia Sophia, is 
especially fine in color, though not equal in scale and gran- 
deur to the latter church. With its five domes it has less 
unity of effect than Hagia Sophia, but more of the charm of 
picturesqueness, and its less brilliant and simpler lighting 
enhances the impressiveness of its more modest dimensions. 


In Russia and Greece the Byzantine style has continued 
to be the official style of the Greek Church. The Russian 
monuments are for the most part of a somewhat fantastic 
aspect, the Muscovite taste having introduced many inno- 
vations in the form of bulbous domes and other eccentric 
details. In Greece there are few large churches, and some 
of the most interesting, like the Cathedral at Athens, are 
almost toy-like in their diminutiveness. On Mt. Athos 
(Hagion Oros) is an ancient monastery which still retains 
its Byzantine character and traditions. In Armenia (as at 
Ani, Etchmiadzin, etc.) are also interesting examples of 
late Armeno-Byzantine architecture, showing applications 
to exterior carved detail of elaborate interlaced ornament 
looking like a re-echo of Celtic MSS. illumination, itself, 
no doubt, originating in Byzantine traditions. But the 
greatest and most prolific offspring of Byzantine architec- 
ture appeared after the fall of Constantinople (1453) m tlic 
new mosque-architecture of the victorious Turks. 

MONUMENTS. COMtTAHTWOPLE : St. Sergius, 520; Hagia Sophia, 
532-53S ; Holy Apostles by Justinian (demolished); Holy Peace (St. 
Irene) originally by Constantine, rebuilt by Justinian, and again in 8th 
century by Leo the Isaurian ; Hagia Theotokos, 12th century (?) ; Mone- 
tea Choral <" Kahire Djami"), 10th century; Bantokrator ; "1 
Djami." Cisterns, especially the " Bin l'.ir Direk" (1,001 columns) and 
" Yere Batan Serai ; " palaces, few vestiges except the great hall of the 
Blachern.x- palace. Sai.osh \ : Churches of Divine Wisdom 

V.ardias, St. F.lias. RAVKHKA : San Yitale, 527-540. VMM- 

' **, ^77-1071 ; " Fondaco dei Turchi," now < "ivic Museum, 

12th century. Other churches at Athens ani Mt. Athos; at Misitra. 

pllfll. etc. ; in Armenia at Ani. Dighoor, F.tchmiad/in. 

Koiithais. I'it/ounda, Csunlar. etc.; tombs at Ani, Yar/hahan, etc. ; in 

I at Kieff (St. Basil, Cathedral), Kostroma, Moscow (Assumption, 

m1, Yasili Blaghennoi, etc.), Novgorod, Tchernigoff ; at Kurtea 

iish in Wallachia, and many other places. 




Books Recommended : Bourgoin, Les Arts Arabes. Coste, 
Monuments du Caire ; Monuments modernes de la Perse. 
Cunningham, Archozological Survey of India. Fergusson. 
Indian and Eastern Architecture. De Forest, Indian Archi- 
tecture and Ornament. Flandin et Coste, Voyage en Perse. 
Franz-Pasha, Die Baukunst des Islam. Gayet, L Art Arabe ; 
L'Art Persan. Girault de Prangey, Essai sur f architecture 
des Arabes en Espagne, etc. Goury and Jones, The Alham- 
bra. Jacob, Jeypore Portfolio of Architectural Details. Le 
Bon, La civilisation des Arabes; Les monuments dc I'Inde. 
Owen Jones, Grammar of Ornament. Parvillee, D Architec- 
ture Ottomane. Prisse d'Avennes, DArt Arabe. Texier, 
Description de PA rme'tiie, la Perse, etc. 

GENERAL SURVEY. While the Byzantine Empire was at 
its zenith, the new faith of Islam was conquering Western 
Asia and the Mediterranean lands with a fiery rapidity, 
which is one of the marvels of history. The new archi- 
tectural styles which grew up in the wake of these con- 
quests, though differing widely in conception and detail in 
the several countries, were yet marked by common charac- 
teristics which set them quite apart from the contemporary 
Christian styles. The predominance of decorative over 
structural considerations, a predilection for minute surface- 
ornament, the absence of pictures and sculpture, are found 
alike in Arabic, Persian, Turkish, and Indian buildings, 
though in varying degree. These new styles, however, were 
almost entirely the handiwork of artisans belonging to the 


conquered races, and many traces of Byzantine, and even 
after the Crusades, of Norman and Gothic design, are 
recognizable in Moslem architecture. But the Orientalism 
of the conquerors and their common faith, tinged with the 
poetry and philosophic mysticism of the Arab, stamped 
these works of Copts, Syrians, and Greeks with an unmis- 
takable character of their own, neither Byzantine nor Early 

ARABIC ARCHITECTURE. In the building of mosques and 
tombs, especially at Cairo, this architecture reached a re- 
markable degree of decorative elegance, and sometimes of 
dignity. It developed slowly, the Arabs not being at the 
outset a race of builders. The early monuments of Syria 
and Egypt were insignificant, and the sacred Kaabah at 
Mecca and the mosque at Medina hardly deserve to be 
called architectural monuments at all. The most impor- 
tant early works were the mosques of Amrou at Cairo (642, 
rebuilt and enlarged early in the eighth century), of El 
Aksah on the Temple platform at Jerusalem (691, by AM- 
el-Melek), and of El Walid at Damascus (705-732, recently 
seriously injured by fire). All these were simple one- 
storied structures, with flat wooden roofs carried on par- 
allel ranges of columns supporting pointed arches, the 
arcades either closing one side of a square court, or sur- 
rounding it completely. The long perspectives of the aisles 
and the minute decoration of the archivolts and ceilings 
alone gave them architectural character. The beautiful 
Dome of the Rock (Kubbet-es-Sakhrah, miscalled the 
Mosque <>f Omar) on the Temple platform at Jerusalem is 
either a remodelled Constantinian edifice, or in large part 
composed of the materials of one (see p. 1 16). 

The splendid mosque of Ibn Touloun (876-885) was built 
on tin- same plan as that of Amrou, but with cantoned piers 
instead of columns and a corresponding increase in variety 
of perspective and richness of effect. With the incoming 


of the Fatimite dynasty, however, and the foundation of 
the present city of Cairo (971), vaulting began to take the 
place of wooden ceilings, and then appeared the germs of 
those extraordinary 
applications of ge- 
ometry to decorative 
design which were 
henceforth to be the 
most striking feature 
of Arabic ornament. 
Under the Ayub dy- 
nasty, which began 
with Salah-ed-din 
(Saladin) in 11 72, 
these elements, of 
which the great Bar- 
kouk mosque (1149) 
is the most imposing 
early example, de- 
veloped slowly in the 
domical tombs of the 
Kara/ah at Cairo, 
and prepared the way 
for the increasing 
richness and splen- 
dor of a long series 
of mosques, among 
which those of Kala- 
oun ( 1 284-1318), Sul- 
tan Hassan (1356), El Mu'ayyad (1415), and Kaid Bey (1463), 
were the most conspicuous examples (Fig. 80). They mark, 
indeed, successive advances in complexity of planning, in- 
genuity of construction, and elegance of decoration. To- 
gether they constitute an epoch in Arabic architecture, 
which coincides closely with the development of Gothic 


a, Mihrab : i, Mimber. 


vaulted architecture in Europe, both in the stages and the 
duration of its advances. 

The mosques of these three centuries are, like the mediae- 
val monasteries, impressive aggregations of buildings of 
various sorts about a central court of ablutions. The tomb 
of the founder, residences for the imams, or priests, schools 
(madrassah), and hospitals {mdristdn) rival in importance the 
prayer-chamber. This last is, however, the real focus of 
interest and splendor ; in some cases, as in Sultan Hassan, 
it is a simple barrel-vaulted chamber open to the court ; 
in others an oblong arcaded hall with many small domes ; 
or again, a square hall covered with a high pointed dome 
on pendentives of intricately beautiful stalactite-work (see 
below). The ceremonial requirements of the mosque were 
simple. The court must have its fountain of ablutions 
in the centre. The prayer-hall, or mosque proper, must 
have its mi/irdb, or niche, to indicate the kibleh, the direc- 
tion of Mecca ; and its mimber, or high, slender pulpit for 
the reading of the Koran. These were the only absolutely 
indispensable features" of a mosque, but as early as the 
ninth century the minaret was added, from which the call 
to prayer could be sounded over the city by the mueddin. 
Not until the Ayubite period, however, did it begin to as- 
sume those forms of varied and picturesque grace which 
lend to Cairo so much of its architectural charm. 

ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS. While Arabic architecture, in 
Syria and Egypt alike, possesses more decorative than con- 
structive originality, the beautiful forms of its domes, pen- 
dentives, and minarets, the simple majesty of the great 
pointed barrel-vaults of the Hassan mosque and similar 
monuments, and the graceful lines of the universally used 
pointed arch, prove the Coptic builders and their later 
hie successors to have been architects of great ability. 
The Arabic domes, as seen both in the mosques and in the 
remarkable group of tombs commonly called "tombs of the 


Khalifs," are peculiar not only in their pointed outlines 
and their rich external decoration of interlaced geomet- 
ric motives, but still more in the external and internal 
treatment of the pendentives, exquisitely decorated with 
stalactite ornament. 
This ornament, de- 
rived, no doubt, from 
a combination of 
minute corbels with 
rows of small niches, 
and presumably of 
Persian origin, was 
finally developed 
into a system of ex- 
traordinary intricacy, 
applicable alike to 
the topping of a niche 
or panel, as in the 
great doorways of 
the mosques, and to 
the bracketing out 
of minaret galleries 
(Figs. 81, 82). Its ap- 
plications show a be- 
wildering variety of forms and an extraordinary aptitude 
for intricate geometrical design. 

decoration. Geometry, indeed, vied with the love of 
color in its hold on the Arabic taste. Ceiling-beams were 
carved into highly ornamental forms before receiving their 
rich color-decoration of red, green, blue, and gold. The 
doors and the n u mber were framed in geometric patterns 
with slender intersecting bars forming complicated star- 
panelling. The voussoirs of arches were cut into curious 
interlocking forms ; doorways and niches were covered with 
stalactite corbelling, and pavements and wall-incrustations, 



whether of marble or tiling, combined brilliancy and har- 
mony of color with the perplexing beauty of interlaced 
star-and-polygon patterns of marvellous intricacy. Stained 
glass added to the interior color-effect, the patterns being 
perforated in plaster, with a bit of colored glass set into 
each perforation a device not very durable, perhaps, but 
singularly decorative. 

OTHER WOEKS. Few of the mediaeval Arabic palaces 
have remained to our time. That they were adorned with 
a splendid prodigality appears from contemporary accounts. 
This splendor was internal rather than external ; the pal- 
ace, like all the larger and richer dwellings in the East, 
surrounded one or more courts, and presented externally 
an almost unbroken wall. The fountain in the chief court, 
the diwdn (a great, vaulted reception-chamber opening 
upon the court and raised slightly above it), the ddr, or 
men's court, rigidly separated from the kareem for the 
women, were and are universal elements in these great 
dwellings. The more common city-houses show as their 
most striking features successively corbelled-out stories 
and broad wooden eaves, with lattice-84 reens covering 
single windows, or almost a whole facade, composed oj 
turned work (iiKis/nafriyva), in designs of great beauty. 

The fountains* gates, and minor works of the Arabs dis- 
play the same beauty in decoration and color, the same 
general forms and details which characterize the larger 
works, but it is impossible here to particularize further 
with regard to them. 

Moresque. Elsewhere in Northern Africa the Arabs pro- 
duced DO such important works as in Egypt, nor is the 
architecture of the other Moslem states so well preserved or 

so well known. Constructive design would appear to have 
been there even more completely subordinated to decora- 
tion ; tiling and plaster-relief took the place of more archi- 
tectural elements and materials, while horseshoe and cusped 


arches were substituted for the simpler and more architect- 
ural pointed arch (Fig. 82). The courts of palaces and 
public buildings were 

surrounded by ranges 
of horseshoe arches on 
slender columns ; these 
last being provided with 
capitals of a form rare- 
ly seen in Cairo. Tow- 
ers were built of much 
more massive design 
than the Cairo mina- 
rets, usually with a 
square, almost solid 
shaft and a more open 
lantern at the top, 
sometimes in several 
diminishing stories. 

The most splendid 
phase of this branch of 
Arabic architecture is 
found not in Africa but 
in Spain, which was 
overrun in 710-713 by 
the Moors, who estab- 
lished there the inde- 
pendent Khalifate of 


CordOVa. I hlS Was Showing stalactite and perforated work, 

later Split UP intO pettV Moorish cusped arch, Hispano-Moresque cap- 

itais, and decorative inscriptions. 

kingdoms, of which the 

most important were Granada, Seville, Toledo, and Valen- 
cia. This dismemberment of the Khalifate led in time to 
the loss of these cities, which were one by one recovered 
by the Christians during the fourteenth and fifteenth cen- 



turies ; the capture of Granada, in 1492, finally destroying 
the Moorish rule. 

The dominion of the Moors in Spain was marked by a 
high civilization and an extraordinary activity in building. 
The style they introduced became the national style in the 
regions they occupied, and even after the expulsion of the 
Moors was used in buildings erected by Christians and by 
Jews. The " House of Pilate," at Seville, is an example of 
this, and the general use of the Moorish style in Jewish 
synagogues, down to our own day, both in Spain and abroad, 

originated in the erec- 
tion of synagogues for 
the Jews in Spain by 
Moorish artisans and in 
Moorish style, both dur- 
ing and after the period 
of Moslem supremacy! 

Besides innumerable 
mosques, castles, bridg- 
es, aqueducts, gates, and 
fountains, the Moors 
erected several monu- 
ments of remarkable 
size and magnifh in< e. 

Specially worthy of no- 
tice among them are the 

( rreat Mosque at ( \>r- 

dova, the Alcazars of 
Seville and Malaga, the 
Giralda at Seville, and 
the Alhambra at ( Ca- 
The Mosque at Cordova, begun in 786 by 'Abd-er-Rah- 
man, enlarged in 876, and again by HI Mansour in 976, is a 
va>t art aded ball 375 feet x 420 feet in extent, but only 30 

no. 83. iNTRKioK of nra grsat Moaom at 


feet high (Fig. 83). The rich wooden ceiling rests upon sev- 
enteen rows of thirty to thirty-three columns each, and two 
intersecting rows of piers, all carrying horseshoe arches in 
two superposed ranges, a large portion of those about the 
sanctuary being cusped, the others plain, except for the 
alternation of color in the voussoirs. The mihrdb niche is 
particularly rich in its minutely carved incrustations and 
mosaics, and a dome ingeniously formed by intersecting 
ribs covers the sanctuary before it. This form of dome 
occurs frequently in Spain. 

The Alcazars at Seville and Malaga, which have been re- 
stored in recent years, present to-day a fairly correct coun- 
terpart of the castle-palaces of the thirteenth century. They 
display the same general conceptions and decorative feat- 
ures as the Alhambra, which they antedate. The Oiralda 
at Seville is, on the other hand, unique. It is a lofty rectan- 
gular tower, its exterior panelled and covered with a spe- 
cies of quarry-ornament in relief ; it terminated originally 
in two or three diminishing stages or lanterns, which were 
replaced in the sixteenth century by the present Renais- 
sance belfry. 

The Alhambra is universally considered to be the mas- 
terpiece of Hispano-Moresque art, partly no doubt on ac- 
count of its excellent preservation. It is most interesting as 
an example of the splendid citadel-palaces built by the Moor- 
ish conquerors, as well as for its gorgeous color-decoration 
of minute quarry-ornament stamped or moulded in the wet 
plaster wherever the walls are not wainscoted with tiles. It 
was begun in 1248 by Mohammed-ben- Al-Hamar, enlarged 
in 1279 by his successor, and again in 1306, when its 
mosque was built. Its plan (Fig. 84) shows two large courts 
and a smaller one next the mosque, with three great square 
chambers and many of minor importance. Light arcades 
surround the Court of the Lions with its fountain, and 
adorn the ends of the other chief court ; and the stalactite 




pendentive, rare in Moorish work, appears in the " Hall of 
Ambassadors" and some other parts of the edifice. But 
its chief glory is its ornamentation, less durable, less archi- 
tectural than that of the Cairene buildings, but making up 

for this in delicacy 
and richness. Mi- 
nute vine -patterns 
and Arabic inscrip- 
tions are interwov- 
en with waving in- 
tersecting lines, 
forming a net-like 
framework, to all of 
w li i c h deep red, 
blue, black, and gold 
give an indescriba- 
ble richness of ef- 

The Moors also 
overran Sicily in tin- 
eighth century, but 
while their architecture there profoundly influenced that 
of the Christians who recovered Sicily in 1090, and copied 
the style of the conquered Moslems, there is too little of 
the original Moorish architecture remaining to claim men- 
tion here. 

8A8SANIAN. The Sassanian empire, which during the four 
Centuries from 226 to 641 AJX had withstood koine and 

extended its own sway almost to India, left on Persian soil a 
number of interesting monuments which powerfully influ- 
enced the Mohammed. in style of that region. The Sassanian 
buildings appear to have been principally palaces, and were 

all vaulted. With their long barrel-vaulted halls, combined 

with square domical chambers, a^ in Firouz-Abad and Ser- 

bistan, they exhibit reinmix en< es of antique Assyrian tia- 


A, Hall of Ambassadors : a, Mosque : b. Court of 
Mosque ; c, Sata delta Barca ; d, d, fiat lis : <, flail 
0/ the Two Sisters ; _/", f, /, Hall of the Tribunal ; g. 
Half 0/ the Abencerrages. 


dition. The ancient Persian use of columns was almost 
entirely abandoned, but doors and windows were still 
treated with the banded frames and cavetto-cornices of 
Persepolis and Susa. The Sassanians employed with these 
exterior details others derived perhaps from Syrian and 
Byzantine sources. A sort of engaged buttress-column 
and blind arches repeated somewhat aimlessly over a whole 
facade were characteristic features ; still more so the huge 
arches, elliptical or horse-shoe shaped, which formed the 
entrances to these palaces, as in the Tak-Kesra at Ctesiphon. 
Ornamental details of a debased Roman type appear, min- 
gled with more gracefully flowing leaf-patterns resembling 
early Christian Syrian carving. The last great monument 
of this style was the palace at Mashita in Moab, begun by 
the last Chosroes (627), but never finished, an imposing and 
richly ornamented structure about 500 x 170 feet, occupy- 
ing the centre of a great court. 

aces must have strongly influenced Persian architecture 
after the Arab conquest in 641. For although the ar- 
chitecture of the first six centuries after that date suf- 
fered almost absolute extinction at the hands of the Mon- 
gols under Genghis Khan, the traces of Sassanian influence 
are still perceptible in the monuments that rose in the fol- 
lowing centuries. The dome and vault, the colossal por- 
tal-arches, and the use of brick and tile are evidences of 
this influence, bearing no resemblance to Byzantine or 
Arabic types. The Moslem monuments of Persia, so far as 
their dates can be ascertained, are all subsequent to 1200, 
unless tradition is correct in assigning to the time of 
Haroun Ar Rashid (786) certain curious tombs near Bag- 
dad with singular pyramidal roofs. The ruined mosque at 
Tabriz (1300), and the beautiful domical Tomb at Sultani- 
yeh (13 13) belong to the Mogul period. They show all 
the essential features of the later architecture of the Sufis 


(1499-1694), during whose dynastic period were built the Still 
more splendid and more celebrated Meidan or square, the 
great mosque of Mesjid Shah, the Bazaar and the College or 
Medress of Hussein Shah, all at Ispahan, and many other 
important monuments at Ispahan, Bagdad, and Teheran. 
In these structures four elements especially claim atten- 
tion ; the pointed bulbous dome, the round minaret, the 
portal-arch rising above the adjacent portions of the build 
ing, and the use of enamelled terra-cotta tiles as an exter- 
nal decoration. To these may be added the ogee arch 
(ogee = double-reversed curve), as an occasional feature. 
The vaulting is most ingenious and beautiful, and its forms, 
whether executed in brick or in plaster, are sufficiently va- 
ried without resort to the perplexing complications of 
stalactite work. In Persian decoration the most striking 
qualities are the harmony of blended color, broken up into 
minute patterns and more subdued in tone than in the 
Hispano- Moresque, and the preference of flowing lines and 
floral ornament to the geometric puzzles of Arabic design. 
Persian architecture influenced both Turkish and Indo- 
Moslem art, which owe to it a large part of their decorative 

INDO-MOSLEM. The Mohammedan architecture of India is 
so distinct from all the native Indian styles and so related 
to the art of Persia, if not to that of the Arabs, that it prop- 
erly belongs here rather than in the later chapter on Orien- 
tal styles. It was in the eleventh century that the states 
of India first began to fall before Mohammedan invaders, 
but not until the end of the fifteenth century that the great 
Mogul dynasty was established in Hindostan as the domi- 
nant power. During the intervening period local schools 
of Moslem architecture were developing in the Pathan 
country of Northern India (1 1931554), in Jaunpore and 
Gnjerat ('396-1572), in Scinde, where Persian influence pre- 
dominated ; in Kalburgah and Bidar (1 347-1426). These 


schools differed considerably in spirit and detail ; but un- 
der the Moguls (i 494-1 706) there was less diversity, and 
to this dynasty we owe many of the most magnificent 
mosques and tombs of India, among which those of Bijapur 
retain a marked and distinct style of their own. 

The Mohammedan monuments of India are characterized 
by a grandeur and amplitude of disposition, a symmetry 
and monumental dignity of design which distinguishes 
them widely from the 
picturesque but some- 
times trivial buildings 
of the Arabs and Moors. 
Less dependent on col- 
or than the Moorish or 
Persian structures, they 
are usually built of mar- 
ble, or of marble and 
sandstone, giving them 
an air of permanence 
and solidity wanting in 
other Moslem styles ex- 
cept the Turkish. The 
dome, the round mina- 
ret, the pointed arch, and the colossal portal-arch, are uni- 
versal, as in Persia, and enamelled tiles are also used, but 
chiefly for interior decoration. Externally the more digni- 
fied if less resplendent decoration of surface carving is 
used, in patterns of minute and graceful scrolls, leaf forms, 
and Arabic inscriptions covering large surfaces. The Arabic 
stalactite pendentive star-panelling and geometrical inter- 
lace are rarely if ever seen. The dome on the square 
plan is almost universal, but neither the Byzantine nor the 
Arabic pendentive is used, striking and original combina- 
tions of vaulting surfaces, of corner squinches, of corbel- 
ling and ribs, being used in its place. Many of the Pathan 



domes and arches at Delhi, Ajmir, Ahmedabad, Shepree, 
etc., are built in horizontal or corbelled courses supported 
on slender columns, and exert no thrust at all, so that 
they are vaults only in form, like the dome of the Tholos 
of Atreus (Fig. 24). The most imposing and original of 
all Indian domes are those of the Jumma Musjid and of the 
Tomb of Mahmud, both at Bijapur, the latter 137 feet in 
span (Fig. 85). These two monuments, indeed, with the 
Mogul Taj Mahal at Agra, not only deserve the first rank 
among Indian monuments, but in constructive science 
combined with noble proportions and exquisite beauty 
are hardly, if at all, surpassed by the greatest triumphs 
of western art. The Indo-Moslem architects, moreover, 
especially those of the Mogul period, excelled in providing 
artistic settings for their monuments. Immense platforms, 
superb courts, imposing flights of steps, noble gateways, 
minarets to mark the angles of enclosures, and landscape 
gardening of a high order, enhance greatly the effect of 
the great mosques, tombs, and palaces of Agra, Delhi, lut- 
tehpore Sikhri, Allahabad, Secundra, etc. 

The most notable monuments of the Moguls are the 
Mosque of Akbar (1 556-1605) at l-'uttehpore Sikhri, the 
tomb of that sultan at Secundra, and his pain e at Alla- 
habad ; the Pearl Mosque at Agra and the Jumma Musjid at 
Delhi, one of the largest and noblest of Indian mosques, 
both built by Shah Jehan about 1650 ; his immense but 
now ruined palace in the lame City ; and finally the un- 
rivalled mausoleum, the Taj Mahal at Agra, built during 
his lifetime as a festal hall, to serve as his tomb after 
death (Fig. 86)* This last is the pearl of Indian archite* 
ture, though it is said to have been designed by a Kuropean 
an hitect, French or Italian. It is a white marble structure 
185 feet square, centred in a court 313 feet square, forming 
a platform 18 feet high. The corners of this court are 
marked by elegant minarets, and the whole is dominated by 


the exquisite white marble dome, 58 feet in diameter, 80 
feet high, internally rising over four domical corner chapels, 
and covered externally by a lofty marble bulb-dome on a 
high drum. The rich materials, beautiful execution, and ex- 
quisite inlaying of this mausoleum are worthy of its majes- 


tic design. On the whole, in the architecture of the Mo- 
guls in Bijapur, Agra, and Delhi, Mohammedan architecture 
reaches its highest expression in the totality and balance 
of its qualities of construction, composition, detail, orna- 
ment, and settings. The later monuments show the decline 
of the style, and though often rich and imposing, are lack- 
ing in refinement and originality. 

TURKISH. The Ottoman Turks, who began their conquer- 
ing career under Osman I. in Bithynia in 1299, had for a 


century been occupying the fairest portions of the Byzan- 
tine empire when, in 1453, they became masters of Constan- 
tinople. Hagia Sophia was at once occupied as their chief 
mosque, and such of the other churches as were spared, 
were divided between the victors and the vanquished. 
The conqueror, Mehmet II., at the same time set about the 
building of a new mosque, entrusting the design to a By- 
zantine, Christodoulos, whom he directed to reproduce, 
with some modifications, the design of the "Great Church " 
Hagia Sophia. The type thus officially adopted has 
ever since remained the controlling model of Turkish 
mosque design, so far, at least, as general plan and con- 
structive principles are concerned. Thus the conquer- 
ing Turks, educated by a century of study and imita- 
tion of Byzantine models in Brusa, Nicomedia, Smyrna, 
Adrianople, and other cities earlier subjugated, did what 
the Byzantines had, during nine centuries, failed to do. 
The noble idea first expressed by Anthemius and Isidorus 
in the Church of Hagia Sophia had remained undevel- 
oped, unimitated by later architects. It was the Turk 
who first seized upon its possibilities, and developed there- 
from a style of architecture less sumptuous in color and 
decoration than the sister styles of Persia, Cairo, or India, 
but of great nobility and dignity, notwithstanding. The 
low-curved dome with its crown of buttressed windows, the 
plain spherical pendentives, the great apses at each end, 
covered by half-domes and penetrated by smaller niches, 
the four massive piers with their projecting buttress-massei 
extending across the broad lateral aisles, the narthex and 
the arcaded atrium in front all these appear in the great 
Turkish mosques of Constantinople. In the Conqueror's 
mosque, however, two apses with half-domes replace the 
lateral galleries and clearstory of Hagia Sophia, making 
a perfectly quadripartite plan, destitute of the emphasis 
and significance of a plan drawn on one main axis (Fig. 87). 


The same treatment occurs in the mosque of Ahmed I., 
the Ahmediyeh (1608 ; Fig. 88), and the Yeni Djami (" New 
Mosque ") at the port (1665). In the mosque of Osman III. 
(1755) the reverse change was effected ; the mosque h^s no 
great apses, four clearstories filling the four arches under the 
dome, as also in several of the later and smaller mosques. 
The greatest and noblest cf 'he Turkish mosques, the 
Suleimaniyeii, Dun. in 1553 by Soliman the Magnificent, re- 
turned to the Byzantine combination of two half-domes 
with two clearstories (Fig. 89). 

In none of these monuments is there the internal magnif- 
icence of marble and 
mosaic of the Byzan- 
tine churches. These 
are only in a measure 
replaced by Persian 
tile-wainscoting and 
stained - glass win- 
dows of the Arabic 
type. The division 
into stories and the 
treatment of scale 
are less well man- 
aged than in the Ha- 
gia Sophia ; on the 
other hand, the proportion of height to width is generally 
admirable./ The exterior treatment is unique and effect- 
ive, far superior to the Byzantine practice. The massing of 
domes and half-domes and roofs is more artistically ar- 
ranged ; and while there is little of that minute carved de- 
tail found in Egypt and India, the composition of the lat- 
eral arcades, the simple but impressive domical peristyles 
of the courts, and the graceful forms of the pointed arches, 
with alternating voussoirs of white and black marble, are 
artistic in a high degree. The minarets are, however, in- 



(The dimensions figured in metres.) 



ferior to those of Indian, Persian, and Arabic art, though 
graceful in their proportions. 

Nearly all the great mosques are accompanied by the 
domical tombs (turbe/i) of their imperial founders. Some of 
these are of noble size and great beauty of proportion and 
decoration. The Tomt of Roxelana (Khourrem), the fa- 


vorite wife of Soliman the Magnificent (1553), is the most 
beautiful of all, and perhaps the most perfect gem of Turk- 
ish architecture, with its elegant arcade surrounding the 
octagonal domical mausoleum-chamber. The monumental 
fountains of Constantinople also deserve mention. Of 
these, the one erected by Ahmet III. (1710), near Hagia 


Sophia, is the most beautiful. They usually consist of a 
rectangular marble reservoir with pagoda-like roof and 
broad eaves, the four faces of the fountain adorned each 
with a niche and ba- 
sin, and covered with 
relief carving and 
gilded inscriptions. 

PALACES. In this 
department the 
Turks have done littie 
of importance. The 
buildings in the Se- 
raglio gardens are 
low and insignificant. 
The Tchinli Kiosque, 
now the Imperial Mu- 
seum, is however, a 
simple but graceful 
two-storied edifice, 
consisting of four 
vaulted chambers in 
the angles of a fine 
cruciform hall, with 
domes treated like 
those of Bijapur on a small scale ; the tiling and the veranda 
in front are particularly elegant ; the design suggests Per- 
sian handiwork. The later palaces, designed by Armenians, 
are picturesque white marble and stucco buildings on the 
water's edge ; they possess richly decorated halls, but the 
details are of a debased European rococo style, quite un- 
worthy of an Oriental monarch. 


MONUMENTS. Arabian : " Mosque of Omar," or Dome of the Rock, 
63S ; El Aksah, by 'Abd-el-Melek,6o,i, both at Jerusalem ; Mosque 'Amrou 
at Cairo, 642 ; mosques at Cyrene, 665 ; great mosque of El Walid, Da- 


mascus, 705-717. Bagdad built, 755. Great mosque at Kairouan, 737. At 
Cairo, Ibn Touloun, 876; Cama-El-Azhar, 971 ; Barkouk, 1149 ; " Tombs 
of Khalifs " (Karafah), 1250-1400 ; Moristan Kalaoun, 1284 ; Medreseeo 
Sultan Hassan, 1356 ; El Azhar enlarged ; El Muayed, 1415 ; Kaid Bey, 
1463 ; Sinan Pacha, 1468 ; " Tombs of Mamelukes," 16th century. Also 
palaces, baths, fountains, mosques, and tombs. IfOUSQUE : Mosque at Sa- 
ragossa, 713 ; mosque and arsenal at Tunis, 742 ; great mosque at Cordova, 
786, 876, 975 ; sanctuary, 14th century. Mosques, baths, etc., at Cordova, 
Tarragona, Segovia, Toledo, 960-980 ; mosque of Sobeiha at Cordova, 981. 
Palaces and mosques at Fez ; great mosque at Seville, 11 72. Extensive 
building in Morocco close of 12th century. Ciralda at Seville, 1 160; Al- 
cazars in Malaga and Seville, 1 225-1 300 ; Alhambra and Generalife at 
Granada, 1248, 1279, 1306 ; also mosques, baths, etc. Yussuf builds pal- 
ace at Malaga, 1348 ; palaces at Granada. Persian : Tombs near I 
dad, 786 (?) ; mosque at Tabriz, 1300 ; tomb of Khodabendeh at Sultani- 
yeh, 1 313 ; Meidan Shah (square) and Mesjid Shah (mosque) at Ispahan, 
17th century ; Medresseh (school) of Sultan Hussein, 18th century ; 
palaces of Chehil Soutoun (forty columns) and Aineh Khaneh (Palace of 
Mirrors). Baths, tombs, bazaars, etc., at Cashan, Koum, Kasmin, etc. 
Aminabad Caravanserai between Shiraz and Ispahan ; bazaar at Ispahan. 

INDIAN: Mosque and " Kutub Minar" (tower) dr. 1200; Tomb of 
Altumsh, 1236 ; mosque at Ajmir, 1211-1236 ; tomb at Old Delhi ; Adina 
Mosque, Maldah, 1358. Mosques J umma Musjid and Lai 1 >urwa/a at 
Jaunpore, first half of 15th century. Mosque and bazaar, Kalhurgah, 
1435 (?) Mosques at Ahmedabad and Sirkedj, middle 15th century. 
Mosque Jumma Musjid and Tomb of Mahmud, Bijapur, dr. 1550. Tomb 
of Humayfin, Delhi; of Mohammed (.bans, ( iwalior ; mosque at rutteh- 
pore Sikhri ; palace at Allahabad ; tomb of Akbar at Secundra, all by Ak- 
bar, 1556-1605. Palace and Jumma Musjid at Delhi ; Mmi Musjid (Pearl 
mosque) and Taj Mahal at Agra, by Shah Jehan, 1628-1658. 

Ti kkish : Tomb of Osman, Brusa, 1326; Green Mosque (Yeshil 
Djami) Brusa, dr. 1350. Mosque at Knik (Nicxa), 1376. Mehmediyeh 
(mosque Mchmet II.) Constantinople, 1453; mosque at Evoiib ; Tchinli 
Kiosque.l.y Mehmet II., 1450-60; mosque Bayazid, I5<*> ; Selim I., t 
Suleimaniyeh, by Sinan, 1553; Ahmediyeh by Ahmet I., 1608; Yeni Djami, 
1665 ; Nouri Osman, by Osman III., 1755; mosque Mohammed AM in 
Cairo, 1824. Mosque at Adrianople. Kuans, cloistered courts for public 
business and commercial lodgers, various dates, i&th and 17th centuries 
(Yalide Khan, Vizir Khan), vaulted bazaars, fountains, Seraskierat 
Tower, all at Constantinople. 




Books Recommended : Cattaneo, L 'Architecture en Italic 
Chapuy, Le moyen age monumental. Corroyer, Architecture 
romane. Cummings, A History of Architecture in Italy. En- 
lart, Manuel d'archeologie /ran false. Hiibsch, Monuments de 
P architecture chretienne. Knight, Churches 0/ Northern Italy. 
Lenoir, Architecture monastique. Osten, Bauwerke in der Lom- 
bardei. Quicherat, Melanges d'histoire et d'archeologie. Reber, 
History of Mediaeval Architecture. Revoil, Architecture romane 
du midi de la France. Rohault de Fleury, Monuments de 
Pise. Sharpe, Churches of Charente. De Verneilh, U Archi- 
tecture byzantine en France. Viollet-le-Duc, Dictionnaire 
raisonne de l' architecture f ran false (especially in Vol. I., 
Architecture religieuse) ; discourses on Architecture. 

EARLY MEDLEVAL EUROPE. The fall of the Western Em- 
pire in 476 a.d. marked the beginning of a new era in 
architecture outside of the Byzantine Empire. The so- 
called Dark Ages which followed this event constituted 
the formative period of the new Western civilization, dur- 
ing which the Celtic and Germanic races were being Chris- 
tianized and subjected to the authority and to the edu- 
cative influences of the Church. Under these conditions a 
new architecture was developed, founded upon^ethe tradi- 
tions of the early Christian builders, modified In different 
regions by Roman or Byzantine influences. For Rome re- 
covered early her antique prestige, and Roman monuments 
covering the soil of Southern Europe, were a constant ob- 


ject lesson to the builders of that time. To this new archi- 
tecture of the West, which in the tenth and eleventh 
centuries first began to achieve worthy and monumental 
results, the generic name of Romanesque has been com- 
monly given, in spite of the great diversity of its manifesta- 
tions in different countries. 

character OF THE ARCHITECTURE. Romanesque archi- 
tecture was pre-eminently ecclesiastical. Civilization and 
culture emanated from the Church, and her requirements 
and discipline gave form to the builder's art. But the 
basilican style, which had so well served her purposes in 
the earlier centuries and on classic soil, was ill-suited to 
the new conditions. Corinthian columns, marble incrusta- 
tions, and splendid mosaics were not to be had for the ask- 
ing in the forests of Gaul or Germany, nor could the Lom- 
bards and Ostrogoths in Italy or their descendants repro- 
duce them. The basilican style was complete in itself, 
possessing no seeds of further growth. The priests and 
monks of Italy and Western Europe sought to rear with 
unskilled labor churches of stone in which the general dis- 
positions of the basilica should reappear in simpler, more 
massive dress, and, as far as possible, in a fireproof con- 
struction with vaults of stone. This problem underlies 
all the varied phases of Romanesque architecture ; its final 
solution was not, however, reached until the Gothic period, 
to which the Romanesque forms the transition and step- 

MEDIAEVAL ITALY. Italy in the Dark Ages stood midway 
between the civilization of the Eastern Empire and the 
semi-barbarism of the West. Rome, Ravenna, and Venice 
early became centres of culture and maintained continu- 
ous commercial relations with the East. Architecture did 
not lack either the inspiration Of the means for advancing 
OB new lines. But its advance was by no means the same 
everywhere. The unifying influence of the church was 



counterbalanced by the provincialism and the local diversi- 
ties of the various Italian states, resulting in a wide variety 
of styles. These, however, may be broadly grouped in four 
divisions : the Lombard, the Tuscan - Romanesque, the 
Italo-Byzantine, and the unchanged Basilican or Early 
Christian, which last, as was shown in Chapter X., contin- 
ued to be practised in Rome throughout the Middle Ages. 
LOMBARD STYLE. Owing to the general rebuilding of an- 
cient churches under the more settled social conditions of 


the eleventh and twelfth centuries, little remains to us of 
the architecture of the three preceding centuries in Italy, 
except the Roman basilicas and a few baptisteries and cir- 
cular churches, already mentioned in Chapter X. The so- 
called Lombard monuments belong mainly to the eleventh 
and twelfth centuries. They are found not only in Lom- 
bardy, but also in Venetia and the Emilia. Milan, Pavia, 
Piacenza, Bologna, and Verona were important centres of 
development of this style. The churches were nearly all 
vaulted, but the plans were basilican, with such variations 

i 5 8 



as resulted from efforts to meet the exigencies of vaulted 
construction. The nave was narrowed, and instead of 
I rows of columns carrying a thin clearstory 

A wall, a few massive piers of masonry, con- 

A nected by broad pier-arches, supported the 

t heavy ribs of the groined vaulting, as in S. 

flB Ambrogio, Milan (Fig. 90). To resist the 

M thrust of the main vault, the clearstory was 

sometimes suppressed, the side aisle carried 
up in two stories forming galleries, and rows 
of chapels added at the sides, their partitions 
forming buttresses. The piers were often 
of clustered section, the better to receive 
the various arches and ribs they supported. 
The vaulting was in 
square divisions 
or vaulting-bays, each 
embracing two pier- 
arches which met up- 
on an intermediate 
pier lighter than the 
others. Thus the 
whole aspect of the in- 
terior was revolution- 
ized. The lightness, 
paci ousness, and 
decorative elegance 
of the basilicas were 
here exchanged for a 
sombre and massive 
dignity severe in its 
plainness. The choir 
was sometimes raised 
afew feet above the nave, to allow of a crypt and con/essio be- 
neath, reached by broad flights of steps from the nave. Sta 

hi. gi. Mill nam and campanile ok caihk- 


Maria della Pieve at Arezzo (9th-nth century), S. Michele 
at Pavia (late nth century), the Cathedral of Piacenza 
(11 22), S. Amhrogio at Milan (12th century), and S. Zeno at 
Verona (1139) are notable monuments of this style. 

LOMBARD EXTERIORS. The few architectural embellish- 
ments employed on the simple exteriors of the Lombard 
churches were usually effective and well composed. Slen- 
der columnettes or long pilasters, blind arcades, and open 
arcaded galleries under the eaves gave light and shade to 
these exteriors. The facades were mere frontispieces with 
a single broad gable, the three aisles of the church being 
merely suggested by flat or round pilasters dividing the 
front (Fig 91). Gabled porches, with columns resting on 
the backs of lions or monsters, adorned the doorways. 
The carving was often of a fierce and grotesque character. 
Detached bell-towers or campaniles adjoined many of these 
churches ; square and simple in mass, but with well-dis- 
tributed openings and well-proportioned belfries (Piacenza 
S. Zeno at Verona, etc.).* 

THE TUSCAN ROMANESQUE. The churches of this style 
(sometimes called the Pisan) were less vigorous but more 
elegant and artistic in design than the Lombard. They 
were basilicas in plan, with timber ceilings and high clear- 
stories on columnar arcades. In their decoration, both in- 
ternal and external, they betray the influence of Byzantine 
traditions, especially in the use of white and colored marble 
in alternating bands or in panelled veneering. Still more 
striking is the external decorative application of wall-ar- 
cades, sometimes occupying the whole height of the wall 
and carried on flat pilasters, sometimes in superposed stages 
of small arches on slender columns standing free of the 
wall. In general the decorative element prevailed over the 
constructive in the design of these picturesquely beautiful 
churches, some of which are of noble size. The Duomo 
(cathedral) of Pisa, built 1063-1118, is the finest monument 

* See Annendix R. 



of the style (Figs. 92,93). It is 312 feet long and 118 
wide, with long transepts and an elliptical dome of later 
date over the crossing (the intersection of nave and tran- 
septs). Its richly arcaded front and banded flanks strik- 
ingly exemplify the illogical and unconstructive but highly 
decorative methods of the Tuscan Romanesque builders 


Hie < in iiku Baptistery (1 153), with its lofty domical cen- 
tral hall surrounded by an aisle, an imposing development 
of the type established by Constantine (p. 1 11), and the 
famous Leaning Tower (1 174), both designed with external 
arcading, combine with the Duomo to form the most re- 
markable group of ecclesiastical buildings in Italy, if not in 
Europe (Fig. 92). 
The same st)le appears in more flamboyant shape in 



some of the churches of Lucca. The cathedral S. Martino 
(1060; facade, 1204 ; nave altered in fourteenth century) is 
the finest and largest of these; S. Michele (facade, 1288) 
and S. Frediano (twelfth century) have the most elaborately 
decorated facades. The same principles of design appear in 
the cathedral and several other churches in Pistoia and Prato; 
but these belong, for the most part, to the Gothic period. 


FLORENCE. The church of S. Miniato, in the suburbs of 
Florence, is a beautiful example of a modification of the 
Pisan style. It is in plan a basilica with two piers inter- 
rupting the colonnade on each side of the nave and sup- 
porting powerful transverse arches. The interior is embel- 
lished with bands and patterns in black and white, and the 
woodwork of the open-timber roof is elegantly decorated 
with fine patterns in red, green, blue, and gold a treatment 
common in early mediaeval churches, as at Messina, Or- 
vieto, etc. The exterior is adorned with wall-arches of 


classic design and with panelled veneering in white and 
dark marble, instead of the horizontal bands of the Pisan 
churches. This system of external decoration, a blending 
of Pisan and Italo-Byzantine methods, became the estab- 
lished practice in Florence, lasting through the whole 
Gothic period. The Baptistery of Florence, originally the 
cathedral, an imposing polygonal domical edifice of the tenth 
century, presents externally one of the most admirable 
examples of this practice. Its marble veneering in black 
and white, with pilasters and arches of excellent design, is 
attributed by Vasari to Arnolfo di Cambio, but is by many 
considered to be much older, although restored by that 
architect in 1294. 

Suggestions of the Pisan arcade system are found in 
widely scattered examples in the east and south of Italy, 
mingled with features of Lombard and Byzantine design. 
In Apulia, as at Bari, Caserta Vecchia (1100), Molfetta 
(1192), and in Sicily, the Byzantine influence is conspic- 
uous in the use of domes and in many of the decorative de- 
tails. Particularly is this the case at Palermo and Mun- 
reale, where the churches erected after the Norman con- 
quest some of them domical, some basilican show a 
strange but picturesque and beautiful mixture of Roman- 
esque, Byzantine, and Arabic forms. The Cathedral of 
Monreale and the churches of the Eremiti and La Martorana 
at Palermo are the most important. 

The Italo-Byzantine style has already found mention in 
the latter part of Chapter XI. Venice and Ravenna were 
its chief centres; while the influence, both of the parent 
style and of its Italian offshoot wa*. as we have just shown, 
very widespread. 

rope the unrest and lawlessness which attended the un- 
settled relations of society under 'the feudal system long 
retarded the establishment of that social order without 


which architectural progress is impossible. With the 
eleventh century there began, however, a great activity in 
building, principally among the monasteries, which repre- 
sented all that there was of culture and stability amid the 
prevailing disorder. Undisturbed by war, the only abodes 
of peaceful labor, learning, and piety, they had become rich 
and powerful, both in men and land. Probably the more or 
less general apprehension of the supposed impending end 
of the world in the year 1000 contributed to this result by 
driving unquiet consciences to seek refuge in the monas- 
teries, or to endow them richly. 

The monastic builders, with little technical training, but 
with plenty of willing hands, sought out new architect- 
ural paths to meet their special needs. Remote from classic 
and Byzantine models, and mainly dependent on their own 
resources, they often failed to realize the intended results. 
But skill came with experience, and with advancing civiliza- 
tion and a surer mastery of construction came a finer taste 
and greater elegance of design. Meanwhile military archi- 
tecture developed a new science of building, and covered 
Europe with imposing castles, admirably constructed and 
often artistic in design as far as military exigencies would 

CHARACTER OF THE STYLE. The Romanesque architecture 
of the eleventh and twelfth centuries in Western Europe 
(sometimes called the Round- Arched Gothic) was thus pre- 
dominantly though not exclusively monastic. This gave it 
a certain unity of character in spite of national and local 
variations. The problem which the wealthy orders set 
themselves was, like that of the Lombard church-builders 
in Italy, to adapt the basilica plan to the exigencies of 
vaulted construction. Massive walls, round arches stepped 
or recessed to lighten their appearance, heavy mouldings 
richly carved, clustered piers and jamb-shafts, capitals 
either of the cushion type or imitated from the Corinthian, 



and strong and effective carving all these are features 
alike of French, German, English, and Spanish Romanesque 

THE FRENCH ROMANESQUE. Though monasticism pro- 
duced remarkable results in France, architecture there did 
not wholly depend upon the monasteries. Southern Gaul 
(Provence) was full of classic remains and classic traditions 
while at the same time it maintained close trade relations 
with Venice and the East.* The church of St. Front at 
Perigueux, built in 1047, reproduced the plan of St. Mark's 
with singular fidelity, but without its rich decoration, and 
with pointed instead of round arches (Figs. 94, 95). The 
domical cathedral of Canon (1 050-1 100), an obvious imitation 

of S. Irene at Constantinople, 
and the later and more Gothic 
Cathedral of Angouleme display 
a notable advance in architec- 
tural skill outside of the mon- 
asteries. Among the abbeys, 
Fontevrault (noi-1119) closely 
resembles Angouleme, but sur- 
passes it in the elegance of its 
choir and chapels. In these 
and a number of other domical 
churches of the same Franco- 
Pyzantine type in Aquitani 
substitution of the Latin crOSS 
in the plan for the Greek cross 
no. 94.-p1.AN of vr. front. use( j i n g t> Front, evinces the 
Gallic tendency to work out to their logical end new 
ideas or new applications of old ones. These striking 
variations on Byzantine themes might have developed 
into an independent local style but for the overwhelming 

* See Viollet-!e-I)uc, DUHomtairt niisonn/, article ARCHITECTURE, vol. 
i. pp. 66 et Mtf.j also dc Yerneilh, V Architatute b ymntim tn Frame, 



tide of Gothic influence which later poured in from the 

Meanwhile, farther south (at Aries, Avignon, etc.), classic 
models strongly influenced the details, if not the>plans, of 
an interesting series of 
churches remarkable es- 
pecially for their porches 
rich with figure sculpt- 
ure and for their elab- 
orately carved details. 
The classic archivolt, 
the Corinthian capital, 
the Roman forms of en- 
riched mouldings, are 
evident at a glance in 
the porches of Notre 
Dame des Doms at Avig- 
non, of the church of St. 
Gilles, and of St. Tro- 
phime at Aries. 

VAULTING. It was in 
Central France, and 
mainly along the Loire, that the systematic development 
of vaulted church architecture began. Naves covered 
with barrel-vaults appear in a number of large churches 
built during the eleventh and twelfth centuries, with ap- 
sidal and transeptal chapels and aisles carried around the 
apse, as in St. Etienne, Nevers, Notre Dame du Port at Cler- 
mont-Ferrand (Fig. 96), and St. Paul at Issoire. The thrust 
of these ponderous vaults was clumsily resisted by half- 
barrel vaults over the side-aisles, transmitting the strain to 
massive side-walls (Fig. 97), or by high side-aisles with trans- 
verse barrel or groined vaults over each bay. In either 
case the clearstory was suppressed a fact which mattered 







little in the sunny southern provinces. In the more cloudy 
North, in Normandy, Picardy, and the Royal Domain, the 
nave-vault was raised higher to admit of 
clearstory windows, and its section was in 
some cases made like a pointed arch, to 
diminish its thrust, as at Anton. But these 
eleventh-century vaults nearly all fell in, 
and had to be reconstructed on new prin- 
ciples. In this work the Clunisians seem 
to have led the way, as at Cluny (1089) and 
Vezelay (1 100). In the latter church, one of 
the finest and most interesting French edi- 
fices of the twelfth century, a groined vault 
replaced the barrel-vault, though the ob- 
long plan of the vaulting-bays, due to the 
nave being wider than the pier-arches, led 
to somewhat awkward twisted surfaces in the vaulting. 
But even here the vaults had insufficient lateral buttressing, 

and began to crack and set- 
tle ; so that in the great 
ante -chapel, built thirty 
years later, the side-aisles 
were made in two stories, 
the better to resist the 
thrust, and the groined 
vaults themselves were 
constructed of pointed sec- 
tion. These seem to be the 
earliest pointed groined 
vaults in France. It wrai 
not till the second half 
of that century, however 
{1 150-1200), that the flying 
buttress was combined with such vaults, so as to permit of 
high clearstories for t lie better lighting of the nave ; and 




the problem of satisfactorily vaulting an oblong space with 
a groined vault was not solved until the following century. 

ONE-AISLED CHURCHES. In the Franco-Byzantine churches 
already described (p. 164) this difficulty of the oblong 
vaulting-bay did not occur, owing to the absence of side- 
aisles and pier-arches. Following this conception of church- 
planning, a number of interesting parish churches and a few 
cathedrals were built in various parts of France in which 
side-recesses or chapels took the place of side-aisles. The 
partitions separating them served as abutments for the 
groined or barrel-vaults of the nave. The cathedrals of 
Autun (1150) and Langres (1160), and in the fourteenth 
century that of Alby, employed this arrangement, common in 
many earlier Provencal churches which have disappeared. 

SIX-FART VAULTING. In the Royal Domain great archi- 
tectural activity does not appear to have begun until the 
beginning of the Gothic 
period in the middle of 
the twelfth century. But 
in Normandy, and es- 
pecially at Caen and 
Mont St. Michel, there 
were produced, between 
1046 and 1 1 20, some re- 
markable churches, in 
which a high clearstory 
was secured in conjunc- 
tion with a vaulted nave, 
by the use of " six-part " 
vaulting (Fig. 98). This 
was an awkward expe- 
dient, by which a square 
vaulting-bay was dividt- 

ed into six parts by the groins and by a middle trans- 
verse rib, necessitating two narrow skew vaults meeting at 


a, a, Transverse ribs (doubleaux) ; b, b, Wall- 
ribs {formerets) ; c, c, Groin-ribs (diagonaux). 
(All the ribs are semicircles.) 


the centre. This unsatisfactory device was retained for 
over a century, and was common in early Gothic churches 
both in France and Great Britain. It made it possible to re- 
sist the thrust by high side-aisles, and yet to open windows 
above these under the cross-vaults. The abbey churches 
of St. Etienne (the Abbaye aux Hommes) and Ste. Trinite 
(Abbaye aux Dames), at Caen, built in the time of William 
the Conqueror, were among the most magnificent churches 
of their time, both in size and in the excellence and ingenu- 
ity of their construction. The great abbey church of 
Mont St. Michel (much altered in later times) should also 
be mentioned here. At the same time these and other 
Norman churches showed a great advance in their internal 
composition. A well-developed triforium or subordinate 
gallery was introduced between the pier-arches and clear- 
story, and all the structural membering of the edifice was 
better proportioned and more logically expressed than in 
most contemporary work. 

ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS. The details of French Roman- 
esque architecture varied considerably in the several prov- 
inces, according as classic, Byzantine, or local influences 
prevailed. Except in a few of the Aquitanian churches, 
the round arch was universal. The walls were heavy and 
built of rubble between facings of stones of moderate size 
dressed with the axe. Windows and doors were widely 
splayed to diminish the obstruction of the massive walls, 
and were treated with jamb - shafts and recessed arches. 
These were usually formed with large cylindrical mould- 
ings, richly carved with leaf ornaments, zigzags, billets, and 
grotesques. Figure-sculpt <ire was more generally used in the 
South than in the North. The interior piers were some- 
times cylindrical, but more often clustered, and where square 
bays of four-part or six-part vaulting were employed, the piers 
were alternately lighter and heavier. Each shaft had its in- 
dependent capital either of the block type or of a form re- 


sembling somewhat that of the Corinthian order. During 
the eleventh century it became customary to carry up to the 
main vaulting one or more shafts of the compound pier to 
support the vaulting ribs. Thus the division of the nave 
into bays was accentuated, while at the same time the hori- 
zontal three-fold division of the height by a well-defined tri- 
forium between the pier-arches and clearstory began to be 
likewise emphasized. 

VAULTING. The vaulting was also divided into bays by 
transverse ribs, and where it was groined the groins them- 
selves began in the twelfth century to be marked by groin- 
ribs. These were constructed independently of the vault- 
ing, and the four or six compartments of each vaulting-bay 
were then built in, the ribs serving, in part at least, to sup- 
port the centrings for this purpose. This far-reaching 
principle, already applied by the Romans in their concrete 
vaults (see p. 84), appears as a re-discovery, or rather an 
independent invention, of the builders of Normandy at the 
close of the eleventh century. The flying buttress was 
a later invention ; in the round-arched buildings of the 
eleventh and twelfth centuries the buttressing was mainly 
internal, and was incomplete and timid in its arrangement. 

EXTERIORS. The exteriors were on this account plain 
and flat. The windows were small, the mouldings simple, 
and towers were rarely combined with the body of the 
church until after the beginning of the twelfth century. 
Then they appeared as mere belfries of moderate height, 
with pyramidal roofs and effectively arranged openings, 
the germs of the noble Gothic spires of later times. Ex- 
ternally the western porches and portals were the most 
important features of the design, producing an imposing 
effect by their massive arches, clustered piers, richly carved 
mouldings, and deep shadows. 

CLOISTERS, ETC. Mention should be made of the other 
monastic buildings which were grouped around the abbey 


churches of this period. These comprised refectories, 
chapter-halls, cloistered courts surrounded by the conven- 
tual cells, and a large number of accessory structures foi 
kitchens, infirmaries, stores, etc. The whole formed an 
elaborate and complex aggregation of connected buildings, 
often of great size and beauty, especially the refectories 
and cloisters. Most of these conventual buildings have 
disappeared, many of them having been demolished daring 
the Gothic period to make way for more elegant structures 
in the new style. There remain, however, a number of 
fine cloistered courts in their original form, especially in 
Southern France. Among the most remarkable of these 
are those of Moissac, Elne, and Montmajour. 

MONUMENTS. Italy. (For basilicas and domical churches of 6th-i 2th 
centuries see pp. 118, no.) Before nth century: Sta. Maria at Toaca* 
nella, altered 1206 ; S. Donato, Zara ; chapel at Friuli ; baptistery at 
Boella. nth century: S. Ciovanni, Viterbo ; Sta. Maria della Pieve, Arez- 
20 ; S. Antonio, Piacenza, 1014 ; Fremiti, 1132, and La Martorana, 1 143. 
both at Palermo ; Duomo at Bari, 1027 (much altered) ; Duomo and baptis- 
tery, Novara, 1030 ; Duomo at Parma, begun 1058 ; Duomo at Pisa, 1063- 
1118; S. Miniato, Florence, io63-i2th century ; S. Micheleat Pavia and 
Duomo at Modena, late nth century. 12th century: to Calabria and 
Apulia, cathedrals of Trani, 1100; Caserta, Vecchia, I100-I153 ; Molfetta, 
1162; Benevento ; chn r ch e t S. (liovanni at Prindisi, S. Xiccolo at Bari, 
1139. In Sicily, Duomo at Monreale, 1174-1189. In Northern Italy, S. 
Tomaso in Limine, B e r g am o, riOO (?) ; Sta. (liulia, Bread*; S. Lorenzo, 
Milan, rebuilt m<) ; Duomo at Piacenza, 1122 ; S. Zeno at Verona, 11 30 ; 
S. Ambrogio, Milan, 1140, vaulted in 13th century; baptistery at I'i-vi, 
1153-1278 ; Leaning Tower, Pfaa, 1174. 14th century: S. Michele, 
Lucca, 1188; S. (.iovanni and S. lrediano, Lucca. In Dalmatia, cathe- 
dral at Zara, 1 192-1204. Many castles and early town-halls, as at Pari, 
Brescia, Lucca, etc. 

Franck: Previous to nth century : St. Cerminy-des-Pres, 806 ; Chapel 
of the Trinity, St. Honorat-dcs-Lcrins ; Ste. Croix de Montmajour. nth 
century: ('e'risy-la-Kon't and abbey church of Mont St. Michel, 1020 (the 
latter altered in 12th and 16th centuries; Yi^nory ; St. Cenou; porch of 
St. Bcnoit-sur-I.oire, 1030; St. Sepulchre at Neuvy, 1045 ; Ste. Trinif; 


(Abbaye aux Dames) at Caen, 1046, vaulted 1140; St. Etienne (Abbaye 
aux Hommes)at Caen, same date ; St. Front at Perigueux, cir. 1150 ; Ste. 
Croix at Quimperle, 1081; cathedral, Cahors, 1050-1110; abbey churches 
of Cluny (demolished) and Vezelay, 1089-1100 ; circular church of Rieux- 
Merinville, church of St. Savin in Auvergne, the churches of St. Paul at 
Issoire and Notre- Dame-du-Port at Clermont, St. Hilaire and Notre-Dame- 
la-Grande at Poitiers ; also St. Sernin (Saturnin) at Toulouse, all at close of 
nth and beginning of 12th century. 12th century: Domical churches of 
Aquitania and vicinity ; Solignac and Fontevrault, 11 20 ; St. Etienne 
(Perigueux), St. Avit-Senieur ; Angouleme, Souillac, Broussac, etc., early 
12th century; St. Trophime at Aries, 1110, cloisters later; church of 
Vaison ; abbeys and cloisters at Montmajour, Tarascon, Moissac (with 
fragments of a 10th-century cloister built into present arcades); St. Paul-du- 
Mausolee ; Puy-en-Velay, with fine church. Many other abbeys, parish 
churches, and a few cathedrals in Central and Northern France especially. 




Books Recommended : As before, HUbsch and Reber. 
Bond, Gothic Architecture in England. Also Brandon, Analysis 
of Gothic Architecture. Boisseree, Xicder Rhein. Ditchfield, 
The Cathedrals of ling/and. Hasak, Die romanische und die 
gotische Baukunst (in Handbuch d. Arch.). Liibke, Die 
Mittelolterliche Kunst in W'estfahn. Moller, Denkmdler det 
deutschen Baukunst. Puttricri, Baukunst des Mittelalters in 
Such sen. Rickman, An Attempt to Discriminate the Styles of 
Architecture. Scott, English Church Architecture. Van Rens- 
selaer, English Cathedrals. 

MEDIAEVAL GERMAN y. Architecture developed less rap- 
idly and symmetrically in Germany than in France, notwith- 
standing the strong centralized government of the empire. 
The early churches were of wood, and the substitution of 
stone for wood proceeded slowly. During the (arolingian 
epoch (800-919), however, a few important building! were 
erected, embodying Byzantine and classic traditions. Among 
these the most notable was the Minster or palatine ehapel 
of Charlemagne at Aix-la-Chapelle, an obvious imitation 
of San Vitale at Ravenna. It consisted of an octagonal 
domed hall surrounded by a vaulted aisle in two stories, 
but without the eight niches of the Ravenna plan. It 
preceded by a porch flanked by turrets. The Byzan- 
tine type thus introduced iras repeated in later churches. 
a> in the Nuns' Choir at Kssen (947) and at < )tttnarsheim 
(1050). In the great monastery at Pulda a basilica with 



transepts and with an apsidal choir at either end was built in 
803. These choirs were raised above the level of the nave, to 
admit of crypts beneath them, as in many Lombard churches ; 
a practice which, with the reduplication of the choir and 
apse just mentioned, became very common in German 
Romanesque architecture. 

early CHURCHES. It was in Saxony that this architecture 
first entered upon a truly national development. The early 
churches of this province and of Hildesheim (where archi- 
tecture flourished under the favor of the bishops, as else- 
where under the royal influence) were of basilican plan and 
destitute of vaulting, except in the crypts. They were 
built with massive piers, sometimes rectangular, sometimes 
clustered, the two kinds often alternating in the same nave. 
Short columns were, however, sometimes used instead of 
piers, either alone, as at Paulinzelle and Limburg-on-the- 
Hardt (1024-39), or alternating with piers, as at Hecklin- 
gen, Gernrode (958-1050), and St. Godehard at Hildesheim 
(1133). A triple eastern apse, with apsidal 
chapels projecting eastward from the tran- 
septs, were common elements in the plans, 
and a second apse, choir, and crypt at the 
west end were not infrequent. Externally 
the most striking feature was the association 
of two, four, or even six square or circular 
towers with the mass of the church, and the 
elevation of square or polygonal turrets or 
cupolas over the crossing. These adjuncts 
gave a very picturesque aspect to edifices 
otherwise somewhat wanting in artistic in- 

RHENISH CHURCHES. It was in the Rhine 
provinces that vaulting was first applied to 
the naves of German churches, nearly a half century after 
its general adoption in France. Cologne possesses an in- 






teresting trio of churches in which the Byzantine dome on 
squinehes or on pendentives, with three apses or niches 
opening into the central area, was associated with a long 
three aisled nave (St. Mary-in-the-Capitol, begun in 9th 
century ; Great St. Martin's, 1 150-70 ; Apostles' Church, 1 160- 
99 : the naves vaulted later). The double chapel at Schwarz- 
Rheindorf, near Bonn (1151), also has the crossing covered 
by a dome on pendentives. 

The vaulting of the nave itself was developed in another 
series of edifices of imposing size, the cathedrals of May- 

ence (1036), Spires (Speyer), and 
Worms, and the Abbey of Laach, 
all built in the nth century and 
vaulted early in the 12th. In the 
first three the main vaulting is in 
square bays, each covering two 
bays of the nave, the piers of 
which are alternately lighter and 
heavier (Figs. 99, 100). At Laach 
the vaulting -bays are oblong, 
both in nave and aisles. There 
was no triforium gallery, and 
stability was secured only by ex- 
cessive thickness in the piers 
and clearstory walls, and by 
bringing down the main vault 
as near to the side-aisle roofs as 


great churches, together with 
of Bonn and Limburg- 

on-the-Lahn and the cathedral 

of Treves (Trier, 1047), are interesting, not only by their 

size and dignity of plan and the somewhat rude massive- 

18 of their construction, but even more so by the pictur- 





esqueness of their external design (Fig. 101). Especially 
successful is the massing of the large and small turrets 
with the lofty nave- * 

roof and with the aps- 
es at one or both ends. 
The systematic use of 
arcading to decorate the 
exterior walls, and the 
introduction of open 
arcaded dwarf galleries 
under the cornices of 
the apses, gables, and 
dome -turrets, gave to 
these Rhenish church- 
es an external beauty 
hardly equalled in oth- 
er contemporary edi- 
fices. This method of 
exterior design, and the 
system of vaulting in 
square bays over double 
bays of the nave, were 
probably derived from 

the Lombard churches of Northern Italy, with which the 
Hohenstauffen emperors had many political relations. 

The Italian influence is also encountered in a number 
of circular churches of early date, as at Fulda (9th- 
11th century), Driigelte, Bonn (baptistery, demolished), 
and in facades like that at Rosheim, which is a copy in lit- 
tle of San Zeno at Verona. 

Elsewhere in Germany architecture was in a backward 
state, especially in the southern provinces. Outside of 
Saxony, Franconia, and the Rhine provinces, very few 
works of importance were erected until the thirteenth 



SECULAR ARCHITECTURE. Little remains to us of ttl< 

alar architecture of this period ill Germany, if we except the 

great feudal castles, especially those of the Rhine, which 
were, after all, rather works of military engineering than of 
architectural art. The palace of Charlemagne at Aix (the 
chapel of which was mentioned on p. 172) is known to have 
been a vast and splendid group of buildings, partly, at least 
of marble ; but hardly a vestige of it remains. Of the ex 
tensive Palace of Henry III. at Goslar there remain well-de- 
fined ruins of an imposing hall of assembly in two aisles 
with triple-arched windows. At Brunswick the east wing of 
the Burg Dankwargerode displays, in spite of modern alter- 
ations, the arrangement of the chapel, great hall, two forti- 
fied towers, and part of the residence of Henry the Lion. 
The Wartburg palace (Ludwig III., cir. 1 150) is more gen- 
erally known a rectangular hall in three stories, with win- 
dows effectively grouped to form arcades ; while at (ielnhau- 
sen and Miinzenberg are ruins of somewhat similar buildings. 
A few of the Romanesque monasteries of Germany have 
left partial remains, as at Maulbronn, which was almost en- 
tirely rebuilt in the Gothic period, and isolated buildings in 
Cologne and elsewhere. There remain also in Cologne a 
number of Romanesque private houses with coupled win- 
dows and stepped gables. 

GREAT BRITAIN. Previous to the Norman conquest (1060) 
there was in the British Isles little or no architecture 
worthy of mention. The few extant remains of Saxon and 
Celtic buildings reveal a singular poverty of ideas and want 
of technical skill. These scanty remains are mostly of 
towers (those in Ireland nearly all round and tapering, with 
conical tops, their use and date being the subjects of much 
controversy) and crypts. The tower of Karl's Barton is 
the most important and best preserved of those in England. 
With the Norman conquest, however, began an extraor- 
dinary activity in the building of churches and abbeys. 



William the Conqueror himself founded a number of these, 
and his Norman ecclesiastics endeavored to surpass on 
British soil the contemporary churches of Normandy. The 
newj churches differed somewhat from their French proto- 
types ; they were narrower and lower, but much longer, 
especially as to the choir and 
transepts. The cathedrals of 
Durham (1096- 1133) and Nor- 
wich (same date) are important 
examples (Fig. 102). They also 
differed from the French churches 
in two important particulars ex- 
ternally ; a huge tower rose usu- 
ally over the crossing, and the 
western portals were small and 
insignificant. Lateral entrances 
near the west end were given 
greater importance and called 
Galilees. At Durham a Galilee 
chapel (not shown in the plan), 
takes the place of a porch at the 
west end, like the ante-churches of 
St. Benoit-sur-Loire and V^zelay. 

Norman builders employed the?, 
same general features as the Ro- 
manesque builders of Normandy, 
but with more of picturesqueness and less of refinement 
and technical elegance. Heavy walls, recessed arches, 
round mouldings, cubic cushion-caps, clustered piers, and in 
doorways a jamb-shaft for each stepping of the arch were 
common to both styles. But in England the Corinthian 
form of capital is rare, its place being taken by simpler forms. 

NORMAN INTERIORS. The interior design of the larger 
churches of this period shows a close general analogy to 


1 7 8 


contemporaneous French Norman churches, as appears by 
comparing the nave of Walthum or Peterboro' with that of 
CeVisy-la-Foret, in Normandy. Although the massiveness 
of the Anglo-Norman piers and walls plainly suggests the 
intention of vaulting the nave, this inten- 
tion seems never to have been carried out 
except in small churches and crypts. All 
the existing abbeys and cathedrals of 
this period had wooden ceilings or were, 
like Durham, Norwich, and Gloucester, 
vaulted at a later date. Completed as 
they were with wooden nave-roofs, the 
clearstory was, without danger, made 
quite lofty and furnished with windows 
of considerable size. These were placed 
near the outside of the thick wall, and a 
passage was left between them and a 
triple arch on the inner face of the wall 
a device imitated from the abbeys at 
Caen. The vaulted side-aisles were low, 
with disproportionately wide pier-arc lies, 
above which was a high triforium gallery 
under the side -roofs. Thus a nearly 
equal height was assigned to each of 
the three stories of the bay, disregarding 
that subordination of minor to major 
parts which gives interest to an archi- 
tectural composition. The piers were quite often round, as 
at Gloucester, Hereford, and Bristol. Sometimes round piers 
alternated with clustered piers, as at Durham and Walthum ; 
and in some cases clustered piers alone were employed, as 
at I'lterboro* and in the transepts of Winchester (Fig. 103). 
FACADES AND DOORWAYS. All the details were of the sim- 
haracter, except in the doorways. These were richly 
adorned with clustered jamb-shafts and elaborately carved 






mouldings, but there was little variety in the details of 
this carving. The zigzag was the most common feature, 
though birds' heads with the beaks pointing toward the 
centre of the arch were not uncommon. In the smaller 
churches (Fig. 104) the doorways were better proportioned 
to the whole facade than in the larger ones, in which they 
appear as relatively insignificant features. Very few ex 
amples remain of impcrtant 
Norman facades in their 
original form, nearly all of 
these having been altered 
after the round arch was 
displaced by the pointed 
arch in the latter part of 
the twelfth century. Iffley 
church (Fig. 104) is a good 
example of the style. 

SPAIN. During the Ro- 
manesque period a large 
part of Spain was under 
Moorish dominion. The 
capture of Toledo, in 1062, 
by the Christians, began 
the gradual emancipation 
of the country from Mos- 
lem rule, and in the north- 
ern provinces a number of important churches were erected 
under the influence of French Romanesque models. The 
use of domical pendentives (as in the Panteon of S. Isidoro, 
at Leon, and in the cimborio or dome over the choir at 
the intersection of nave and transepts in old Salamanca 
cathedral) was probably derived from the domical 
churches of Aquitania and Anjou. Elsewhere the north- 
ern Romanesque type prevailed under various modifica- 
tions, with long nave and transepts, a short choir, and a 



complete chevet with apsidal chapels. The church of 8t. 
Iago at Compostella (1078) is the finest example of this 
class. These churches nearly all had groined vaulting over 
the side-aisles and barrel-vaults over the nave, the con- 
structive system being substantially that of the churches 
of Auvergne and the Loire Valley (p. 165). They differed, 
however, in the treatment of the crossing of nave and tran- 
septs, over which was usually erected a dome or cupola or 
pendentives or squinches, covered externally by an impos 
ing square lantern or tower, as in the Old Cathedral at Sal 
amanca, already mentioned (1120-78) and the Collegi- 
ate Church at Toro. Occasional exceptions to these types 
are met w T ith, as in the basilican wooden-roofed church of S. 
Millan at Segovia ; in S, Isidoro at Leon, with chapels and 
a later-added square eastern end, and the circular church 
of the Templars at Segovia. 

The architectural details of these Spanish churches did 
not differ radically from contemporary French work. As 
i>i France and England, the doorways were the most ornate 
parts of the design, the mouldings being carved with ex- 
treme richness and the jambs frequently adorned with 
statues, as in S. Vincente at Avila. There was no such 
logical and reasoned-out system of external design as in 
France, and there is consequently greater variety in the 
facades. Perhaps the most remarkable thing about the 
architecture of this period is its apparent exemption from 
the influence of the Moorish monuments which abounded 
on every hand. This may be explained by the hatred 
which was felt by the Christians for the Moslems and all 
their works. 

MONUMENTS. C.kkmanv : Previous to nth century: Circular 
churches of Holy Cross at MOnster, and of Fulda ; palace chapel of Charle- 
magne at Aix-la-Chapelle, 804; St. Stephen, Mayence, 990; primitive 
nave and crypt of St. Genoa, Cologne, 10th century; Torsch. nth 
century Churches of Gernrode, Goslar, and Merseburg in Saxony ; cathe- 


dral of Bremen ; first restoration of cathedral of Treves (Trier), ioio, west 
front, 1047 ; Limburg-on-Hardt, 1024 ; St. Willibrod, Echternach, 103 1 ; 
east end of Mayence Cathedral, 1036 ; Church of Apostles and nave St. 
Mary-in-CapitoI at Cologne, 1036 ; cathedral of Spires (Speyer) begun 
1040 ; Cathedral Hildesheim, 1061 ; St. Joseph, Bamberg, 1073 ; Abbey 
of Laach, 1093-1156; round churches of Bonn, Drtlgelte, Nimeguen ; 
cathedrals of Paderborn and Minden. 12th century: Churches of Klus, 
Paulinzelle, Hamersleben, noo-iiio; Johannisberg, 1130 ; St. Godehard, 
Hildesheim, 1133; Worms, the Minster, 1118-83; Jerichau, 1144-60; 
Schwarz-Rheindorf, 1151; St. Michael, Hildesheim, 1162; Cathedral 
Brunswick, 1172-94 ; Lubeck, 1172 ; also churches of Gaudersheim, Wiirz- 
burg, St. Matthew at Treves, Limburg-on-Lahn, Sinzig, St. Castor at 
Coblentz, Diesdorf, Rosheim ; round churches of Ottmarsheim and Rip- 
pen (Denmark) ; cathedral of Basle, cathedral and cloister of Zurich (Swit- 

England: Previous to nth century: Scanty vestiges of Saxon 
church architecture, as tower of Earl's Barton, round towers and small 
chapels in Ireland. nth century: Crypt of Canterbury Cathedral, 1070; 
chapel St. John in Tower of London, 1070 ; Winchester Cathedral, 1076- 
93 (nave and choir rebuilt later) ; Gloucester Cathedral nave, 1089-1100 
(vaulted later) ; Rochester Cathedral nave, west front cloisters, and chap- 
ter-house, 1090-1130; Carlisle Cathedral nave, transepts, 1093-1130 ; 
Durham Cathedral, 1095-1133, vaulted 1233 ; Galilee and chapter-house, 
113353 ; Norwich Cathedral, 1096, largely rebuilt 1118-93 ; Hereford 
Cathedral, nave and choir, 1099-1115. 12th century: Ely Cathedral, 
nave, 1107-33 I St. Alban's Abbey, 1116 ; Peterboro' Cathedral, 11 17-45 '. 
Waltham Abbey, early 12 th century; Church of Holy Sepulchre, Cam- 
bridge, 1130-35; Worcester Cathedral chapter-house, 1140 (?) ; Oxford 
Cathedral (Christ Church), 1150-80; Bristol Cathedral chapter-house 
(square), 11 55 ; Canterbury Cathedral, choir of present structure by 
William of Sens, 1175 ; Chichester Cathedral, 1 180-1204 ; Romsey Abbey, 
late 12th century; St. Cross Hospital near Winchester, 1 190(7). Many 
more or less important parish churches in various parts of England. 

Spain. For principal monuments of gth-i 2th centuries, see text, latter 
part of this chapter. 



Books Recommended : Adamy, Architektonik des gotischt n 
Stils. Corroyer, V Architecture gothique. Enlart, Manuel 
a* archtologie fran$aise. Hasak, Einzelheiten des Kirchenbaues 
(in Hdbuch d. Arch.). Moore, Development and Character of 
Gothic Architecture. Parker, Introduction to Gothic Archi- 
tecture. Scott, Mediaeval Architecture. Viollet-le-Duc, Dis- 
courses on Architecture ; Dictionnaire raisonni de /'architecture 

INTBODUCTOBY. The architectural styles which were de- 
veloped in Western Europe during the period extending 
from about 1150 to 1450 or 1500, received in an unscien- 
tific age the wholly erroneous and inept name of Gothic. 
This name has, however, become so fixed in common usage 
that it is hardly possible to substitute for it any more 
scientific designation. In reality the architecture to which 
it is applied was nothing more than the sequel and out- 
growth of the Romanesque, which we have already studied. 
Its fundamental principles were the same ; it was concerned 
with the same problems. These it took up where the Ro- 
manesque builders left them, and worked out their solution 
under new conditions, until it had developed out of the 
simple and massive models of the early twelfth century the 
splendid cathedrals of the thirteenth and fourteenth cen- 
turies in England, France, Germany, the Low Countries and 

was an era of transition in society, as in architecture. The 
ideas of Church and State were becoming more clearly de- 
fined in the common mind. In the conflict between feudal- 



ism and royalty the monarchy was steadily gaining ground. 
The problem of human right was beginning to present it- 
self alongside of the problem of human might. The re- 
lations between the crown, the feudal barons, the pope, 
bishops, and abbots, differed widely in France, Germany, 
England, and other countries. The struggle among them 
for supremacy presented itself, therefore, in varied aspects ; 
but the general outcome was essentially the same. The 
church began to appear as something behind and above 
abbots, bishops, kings, and barons. The supremacy of 
the papal authority gained increasing recognition, and 
the episcopacy began to overshadow the monastic institu- 
tions ; the bishops appearing generally, but especially in 
France, as the cham- 
pions of popular 
rights. The prerog- 
atives of the crown 
became more firmly 
established, and thus 
the Church and the 
State emerged from 
the social confusion 
as the two institu- 
tions divinely ap- 
pointed for the gov- 
ernment of men. 

Under these in- 
fluences ecclesiasti- 
cal architecture ad- 





hampered by monas- 
tic restrictions, it called into its service the laity, whose 
guilds of masons and builders carried from one diocese to 
another their constantly increasing stores of constructive 

1 84 


knowledge. By a wise division of labor, each man wrought 
only such parts as he was specially trained to undertake. 
The master-builder bishop, abbot, or mason seems to 
have planned only the general arrange- 
ment and scheme of the building, leav- 
ing the precise form of each detail to 
be determined as the work advanced, 
according to the skill and fancy of the 
artisan to whom it was intrusted. Thus 
was produced that remarkable variety 
in unity of the Gothic cathedrals ; thus, 
also, those singular irregularities and 
makeshifts, those discrepancies and 
alterations in the design, which are 
found in every great work of medi- 
aeval architecture. Gothic architec- 
ture was constantly changing, attack- 
ing new problems or devising new- 
solutions of old ones. In this char- 
acter of constant flux and develop- 
ment it contrasts strongly with the 
classic styles, in which the scheme 
and the principles were early fixed and 
remained substantially unchanged for 
STRUCTURAL PRINCIPLES. The pointed arch, so commonly 
regarded as the most characteristic feature of the Gothic 
styl' s, was merely an incidental feature of their develop- 
ment. What really distinguished them most strikingly was 
the systematic application of two principles which the 
Roman and Byzantine builders had recognized and applied, 
but which seem to have been afterward forgotten until 
they were revived by the later Romanesque architects. 
The first of these was the concentration of strains upon iso- 
lated points of support, made possible by the substitution 




of groined for barrel vaults. This led to a corresponding 
concentration of the masses of masonry at these points ; 
the building was constructed as if upon legs (Fig. 105). 
The wall became a mere filling-in between the piers or 
buttresses, and in time was, indeed, practically suppressed, 
immense windows filled with stained glass taking its place. 
This is well illustrated in the Sainte Chapelle at Paris, built 
1242-47 (Figs. 106, 122). In this remarkable edifice, a series 
of groined vaults spring from slender shafts built against 
deep buttresses which receive and resist all the thrusts. 
The wall-spaces between them are wholly occupied by 
superb windows filled with stone tracery and stained glass. 
It would be impossible to combine the materials used more 
scientifically or effectively. 
The cathedrals of Gerona 
(Spain) and of Alby (France ; 
Fig. 123) illustrate the same 
principle, though in them the 
buttresses are internal and 
serve to separate the flanking 

The second distinctive prin- 
ciple of Gothic architecture 
was that of balanced thrusts. 
In Roman buildings the thrust 
of the vaulting was resisted 
wholly by the inertia of mass 
in the abutments. In Gothic 
architecture thrusts were as 
far as possible resisted by 
counter-thrusts, and the final 
resultant pressure was trans- 
mitted by flying half-arches 

across the intervening portions of the structure to external 
buttresses placed at convenient points. This combination 

FIG. 107. 


1 86 


of flying half-arches and buttresses is called the flying-buttress 
(Fig. 107). It reached its highest development in the thir- 
teenth and fourteenth centuries in the cathedrals of central 
and northern France. 

BIBBED VAULTING. These two principles formed the 
structural basis of the Gothic styles. Their application led 
to the introduction of two other elements, second only to 
them in importance, ribbed vaulting and the pointed arch. 

The first of these resulted from the effort to overcome 
certain practical difficulties encountered in the building of 
large groined vaults. As ordinarily constructed, a groined 
vault like that in Fig. 47, must be built as one structure, 
upon wooden centrings supporting its whole extent. The 
Romanesque architects conceived the idea of construct- 
ing an independent skeleton of ribs. 
Two of these were built against the 
wall (wail-ribs), two across the nave 
(transverse ribs) ; and two others 
were made to coincide with the 
groins (Figs. 98, 108). The groin - 
ribs, intersecting at the centre of 
the vault, divided each bay into four 
triangular portions, or compartuients, 
each of which was really an inde- 
pendent vault which could be sepa- 
rately constructed upon light cen- 
trings supported by the groin-ribs themselves. This prin- 
ciple, though identical in essence with the Roman system 
of brick skeleton-ribs for concrete vaults, was, in applica- 
tion and detail, superior to it, both from the scientific and 
artistic point of view. The ribs, richly moulded, became, 
in the hands of the Gothic architects, important decorative 
features. In practice the builder gave to each set of ribs 
independently the curvature he desired. The vaulting-sur- 
faces were then easily twisted or warped so as to fit the va- 

ne. 108. RIBBF.I) VAULT, 
ENGLISH TVI'K, Willi I'l- 


I8 7 

rious ribs, which, being already in place, served as guides 
for their construction. 

THE POINTED ARCH was adopted to remedy the difficulties 
encountered in the construction of oblong vaults. It is 
obvious that where a narrow semi-cylindrical vault inter 
sects a wide one, it produces 
either what are called penetra- 
tions, as at a (Fig. 109), or in- 
tersections like that at b, both 
of which are awkward in as- 
pect and hard to construct. If, 
however, one or both vaults 
be given a pointed section, the 
narrow vault may be made as 
high as the wide one. It is 
then possible, with but little 
warping of the vaulting sur- 
faces, to make them intersect 
in groins e y which are vertical 
plane curves instead of wavy 
loops like a and b. 

The Gothic architects 
availed themselves to the full 
of these two devices. They 
built their groin-ribs of semi-circular or pointed form, but the 
wall-ribs and the transverse ribs were, without exception, 
pointed arches of such curvature as would bring the apex of 
each nearly or quite to the level of the groin intersection. 
The pointed arch, thus introduced as the most convenient 
form for the vaulting-ribs, was soon applied to other parts 
of the structure This was a necessity with the windows and 
pier-arches, which would not otherwise fit well the wall- 
spaces under the wall-ribs of the nave and aisle vaulting. 

TRACERY AND GLASS. With the growth in the size of the 
windows and the progressive suppression of the lateral walls 


a, a, Penetrations by small semi- 
circular vaults sprung from same level, 
b. Intersection by small semi-circular 
vault sprung from higher level ; groins 
form luavy lines, c, Intersection by 
narrow pointed vault sprung from same 
level ; groins are plane curz>es. 

1 88 


of vaulted structures, stained glass came more and more 
generally into use. Its introduction not only resulted in a 
notable heightening and enriching of the colors and scheme 
of the interior decoration, but reacted on the architecture, 
intensifying the very causes which led to its introduction. 
It stimulated the increase in the size of windows, and the 
suppression of the walls, and contributed greatly to the de- 
velopment of tracery. This latter feature was an absolute 
necessity for the support of the glass. Its evolution can 
be traced (Figs, no, in, 112) from the simple coupling 
of twin windows under a single hood-mould, or discharging 
arch, to the florid net-work of the fifteenth century. In 

its earlier forms it consisted 
merely of decorative openings, 
circles, and quatrefoils, pierced 
through slabs of stone {plate- 
traccry), filling the window- 
heads over coupled windows. 
Later attention was bestowed 
upon the form of the stone- 
work, which was made lighter 
and richly moulded (bar-trac- 
ery), rather than upon that of 
the openings (Fig. in). Then 
the circular and geometric pat- 
terns employed were aban- 
doned for more flowing and 
capricious designs {Flamboyant tracery, Fig. 112) or (in 
Kngland) for more rigid and rectangular arrangements 
{Perpendicular, Fig. 134). It will be shown later that the 
periods and styles of Gothic architecture are more easily 
identified by the tracery than by any other feature. 

CHURCH PLANS. The original basilica - plan underwent 
radical modifications during the 12th -15th centuries. 
These resulted in part from the changes in construction 




which have been described, and in part from altered eccle- 
siastical conditions and requirements. Gothic church archi- 
tecture was based on cathedral design ; and the require- 
ments of the cathedral 

differed in many re- 
spects from those of the 
monastic churches of 
the preceding period. 

The most important 
alterations in the plan 
were in the choir and 
transepts. The choir 
was greatly lengthened, 
the transepts often 
shortened. The choir 
was provided with two 
and often four side- 
aisles, and one or both 
of these was commonly 
carried entirely around 
the apsidal termination FIG - 1: 
of the choir, forming a 
single or double ambulatory. This combination of choir, 
apse, and ambulatory was called, in French churches, the 

Another advance upon Romanesque models was the mul- 
tiplication of chapels a natural consequence of the more 
popular character of the cathedral as compared with the 
abbey. Frequently lateral chapels were built at each bay ot 
the side-aisles, filling up the space between the deep but- 
tresses, flanking the nave as well as the choir. They were 
also carried around the chevet in most of the French cathe- 
drals (Paris, Bourges, Reims, Amiens, Beauvais, and many 
others) ; in many of those in Germany (Magdeburg, Co- 
logne, Frauenkirche at Treves), Spain (Toledo, Leon, Bar- 




celona, Segovia, etc.), and Belgium (Tournay, Antwerp). In 
England the choir had more commonly a square eastward 
termination. Secondary transepts occur frequently, and 
these peculiarities, together with the narrowness and great 
length of most of the plans, make of the English cathedrals 
a class by themselves. 

proportions AND composition. Along with these modifi- 
cations of the basilican plan should be noticed a great in- 
crease in the height and slenderness of all parts of the 
structure. The lofty clearstory, the arcaded triforium-pas- 

sage or gallery beneath 
it, the high pointed 
pier-arches, the mul- 
tiplication of slender 
clustered shafts, and 
the reduction in tine 
area of the piers, .gave 
to the Gothic churches 
an interior aspect whol- 
ly different from that 
of the simpler, lower, 
and more massive Ro- 
manesque edifices. The 
perspective effects of 
the plans thus modified, 
especially of the com- 
plex choir and ,/it'vet with their lateral and radial chapels, 
were remarkably enriched and varied. 

The exterior was even more radically transformed by 
these changes, and by the addition of towers and spires to 
the fronts, and sometimes to the transepts and to their in- 
tion with the nave. The deep buttresses, terminating 
in pinnacles, the rich traceries of the great lateral windows, 
the triple portals profusely sculptured, rose-windows of great 
size under the front and transept gables, combined to pro- 



I 9 I 

duce effects of marvellously varied light and shadow, and 
of complex and elaborate structural beauty, totally un- 
like the broad simplicity of the Romanesque exteriors. 

DECORATIVE DETAIL. The mediaeval designers aimed to 
enrich every constructive 
feature with the most ef- 
fective play of lights and 
shades, and to embody in 
the decorative detail the 
greatest possible amount 
of allegory and symbol- 
ism, and sometimes of 
humor besides. The 
deep jambs and soffits of 
doors and pier - arches 
were moulded with a rich 
succession of hollow and 
convex"*" members, and 
adorned with carvings of 
saints, apostles, martyrs, 
and angels. Virtues and 
vices, allegories of re- 
ward and punishment, 
and an extraordinary 
world of monstrous and 
grotesque beasts, devils, 
and goblins filled the 
capitals and door-arches, 
peeped over tower - par- 
apets, or leered and 
grinned from gargoyles 

and corbels. Another source of decorative detail was 
the application of tracery like that of the windows to 
wall-panelling, to balustrades, to open-work gables, to 
spires, to choir-screens, and other features, especially in 




the late fourteenth and fifteenth centuries (cathedrals of 

York, Rouen, Cologne ; Henry VII. 's Chapel, Westminster). 
And finally in the carving of capitals and the ornamentation 
of mouldings the artists of the thirteenth century and their 
successors abandoned completely the classic models and 
traditions which still survived in the early twelfth century. 
The later monastic builders began to look directly to nat- 
ure for suggestions of decorative form. The lay builders 
who sculptured the capitals and crockets and finials of the 
early Gothic cathedrals adopted and followed to its fir.:.lity 
this principle of recourse to nature, especially to plant life. 
At first the budding shoots of early spring were freely imi- 
tated or skilfully conventionalized, as being by their thick 
and vigorous forms the best adapted for translation into 
stone (Fig. 114). During the thirteenth century the more 
advanced stages of plant growth, and leaves more complex 
and detailed, furnished the models for the carver, who dis- 
played his skill in a closer and more literal imitation of 
their minute veinings and indentations (Fig. 115). This 

artistic adaptation of 
natural forms to archi- 
tectural decoration de- 
generated later into a 
minutely realistic copy- 
ing of natural foliage, 
in which cleverness of 
execution took the 
place of original inven- 
tion. The spirit of dis 
play is characteristic 
of all late Gothic work. Slenderness, minuteness of de- 
tail, extreme complexity and intricacy of design, an unre- 
strained profusion of decoration covering every surface, 
a lack of largeness and vigor in the conceptions, are con- 
spicuous traits of Gothic design in the fifteenth century, 




alike in France, England, Germany, Spain, and the Low 
Countries. Having worked out to their conclusion the 
structural principles bequeathed to them by the preceding 
centuries, the authors 
of these later works 
seemed to have devot- 
ed themselves to the 
elaboration of mere 
decorative detail, and 
in technical finish 
surpassed all that had 
gone before (Fig. 1 13). 

light of the preceding 
explanations Gothic 
architecture may be 
defined as that system 
of structural design 
and decoration which 

grew up out of the effort to combine, in one harmonious 
and organic conception, the basilican plan with a complete 
and systematic construction of groined vaulting. Its devel- 
opment was controlled throughout by considerations of 
stability and structural propriety, but in the application of 
these considerations the artistic spirit was allowed full scope 
for its exercise. Refinement, good taste, and great fertility 
of imagination characterize the details and ornaments of 
Gothic structures. While the Greeks in harmonizing the re- 
quirements of utility and beauty in architecture approached 
the problem from the aesthetic side, the Gothic architects 
did the same from the structural side. Their admirably 
reasoned structures express as perfectly the idea of vast- 
ness, mystery, and complexity as do the Greek temples that 
of simplicity and monumental repose. 

:arving, decorated period, 
southwell minster. 


i The excellence of Gothic architecture lay not so much in 
1 its individual details as in its perfect adaptation to the 
purposes for which it was developed its triumphs were 
achieved in the building of cathedrals and large churches. 
In the domain of civil and domestic architecture it produced 
nothing comparable with its ecclesiastical edifices, because 
it was the requirements of the cathedral and not of the 
palace, town-hall, or dwelling, that gave it its form and 

PERIODS. The history of Gothic architecture is commonly 
divided into three periods, which are most readily distin- 
guished by the character of the window-tracery. These 
periods were not by any means synchronous in the different 
countries ; but the order of sequence was everywhere the 
same. They are here given, with a summary of the charac- 
teristics of each. 

Early Pointed Period. [Early French ; Early English 
or Lancet Period in England ; Early German, etc.] Simple 
groined vaults ; general simplicity and vigor of design and 
detail ; conventionalized foliage of small plants ; plate tra- 
cery, and narrow windows coupled under pointed arch with 
circular foiled openings in the window-head. (In France, 
n6o to 1275.) 

Middle Pointed Period. [Fayonnant in France ; Deco- 
rated or Geometric in England.] Vaults more perfect ; in 
Kngland multiple ribs and liernes ; greater slenderness 
and loftiness of proportions ; decoration much richer, less 
vigorous ; more naturalistic carving of mature foliage ; 
walls nearly suppressed, windows of great size, bar tracery 
with slender moulded or columnar mullions and geometric 
combinations (circles and cusps) in window-heads, circular 
(rose) windows. (In France, 1275 to 1375.) 

Florid Gothic PERIOD. \ Flamboyant m France ; Ferpen- 
Jicular in England.] Vaults of varied and richly decorated 
design ; fan-vaulting and pendants in England, vault-ribs 


curved into fanciful patterns in Germany an J Spain ; pro- 
fuse and minute decoration and cleverness of technical ex- 
ecution substituted for dignity of design ; highly realistic 
carving and sculpture, flowing or flamboyant tracery in 
France ; perpendicular bars with horizontal transoms and 
four-centred arches in England : " branch-tracery " in Ger- 
many. (In France, 1375 to 1525.) 



Books Recommended : As before, Adamy, Corroyer, Enlart, 
Hasak, Moore, Reber, Viollet-le-Duc* Also Chapuy, Le 
tnoyen age monumental. Chateau, Hisioire et carac teres de 
rarchitecture francaise. Davies, Architectural Studies in 
France. Ferree, The Chronology of the Cathedral Churches 
of France. Johnson, Early French Architecture. King, The 
Study book of Mediaeval Architecture and Art. Lassus and 
Viollet-le-Duc, Notre Dame de Paris. Nesfield, Specimens of 
Mediaeval Architecture. Pettit, Architectural Studies in France. 

cathedral-building IN FRANCE. In the development of 
the principles outlined in the foregoing chapter the church- 
builders of France led the way. They surpassed all their 
contemporaries in readiness of invention, in quickness and 
directness of reasoning, and in artistic refinement. These 
qualities were especially manifested in the extraordinary 
architectural activity which marked the second half of the 
twelfth century and the first half of the thirteenth. This 
was the great age of cathedral-building in France. Th( 
adhesion of the bishops to the royal cause, and their posi- 
tion in popular estimation as the champions of justice am 
human rights, led to the rapid advance of the episcopacy ii 
power and influence. The cathedral, as the throne-churcl 
of the bishop, became a truly popular institution. Ne\ 
cathedrals were founded on every side, especially in the 

* Consult especially articles Architkcture, Catheurale, Chapelli 
Construction, Eglise, Maison, VoOte. 



Royal Domain and the adjoining provinces of Normandy, 
Burgundy, and Champagne, and their construction was 
warmly seconded by the people, the communes, and the 
municipalities. " Nothing to-day," says Viollet-le-Duc,* 
" unless it be the commercial movement which has covered 
Europe with railway lines, can give an idea of the zeal with 
which the urban populations set about building cathedrals ; 
. . . a necessity at the end of the twelfth century be- 
cause it was an energetic protest against feudalism." The 
collapse of the unscientific Romanesque vaulting of some of 
the earlier cathedrals and the destruction by fire of others 
stimulated this movement by the necessity for their imme- 
diate rebuilding. The entire reconstruction of the cathe- 
drals of Bayeux, Bayonne, Cambray, Evreux, Laon, Lisieux, 
Le Mans, Noyon, Poitiers, Senlis, Soissons, and Troyes was 
begun between 1 130 and izoo.f The cathedrals of Bourges, 
Chartres, Paris, and Tours, and the abbey of St. Denis, all of 
the first importance, were begun during the same period, 
. and during the next quarter-century those of Amiens, Au- 
xerre, Rouen, Reims, Seez, and many others. After 1250 
the movement slackened and finally ceased. Few impor- 
tant cathedrals were erected during the latter half of the 
thirteenth century, the chief among them being at Beauvais 
(actively begun 1247), Clermont, Coutances, Limoges, Nar- 
bonne, and Rodez. During this period, and through the 
fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, French architecture was 
concerned rather with the completion and remodelling of 
existing cathedrals than the founding of new ones. There 
were, however, many important parish churches and civil 
or domestic edifices erected within this period. 

the twelfth century the use of barrel-vaulting over the nave 
had been generally abandoned and groined vaulting with 

* Dictionnaire raisonnd 'de V architecture francaise,xo\. ii., pp. 280, 281. 
f See Ferree, Chronology of Cathedral Churches of France. 



its isolated points of support and resistance had taken its 
place. The timid experiments of the Clunisian architects 
at Ve'zelay in the use of the pointed arch and vault-ribs 
also led, in the second half of the twelfth century, to far- 
reaching results. The builders of the great Abbey Church 
of St. Denis, near Paris, begun in 1140 by the Abbot Suger, 
appear to have been the first to develop these tentative de- 
vices into a system. In the original choir of this noble 
church all the arches, alike of the vault-ribs (except the 
groin-ribs, which were semi-circles) and of the openings, 
were pointed and the vaults were throughout constructed 
with cross-ribs, wall-ribs, and groin-ribs. 
Of this early work only the chapels re- 
main. In other contemporary monu- 
ments, as for instance in the cathedral 
of Sens, the adoption of these devices 
was only partial and hesitating. 


great step in advance was taken in the 

cathedral of Notre Dame* at Paris (Figs. 

116, 117, 125). This was begun, under 

Maurice <le Sully in 1 163, on the site of 

the twin cathedrals of Ste. Marie and St. 

Ktienne, and the choir was, as usual, the 

first portion erected. By 1 196 the choir, 

transepts, and one or two bays of the 

nave were substantially finished. The 

\,f, completeness, harmony, and vigor of 

no.,.6.-Pi.AN ok notre conception of this remarkable church 

damk, pakis. contrast strikingly with the makeshifts 

and hesitancy displayed in many contemporary monuments 

* This cathedral will be hereafter referred to, for the sake of brevity, by 

the name of Nitre Dmme. other cathedrals having the same name will 

be distinguished by the addition of the name of the city, as " Notre 
]>ame at Clermont- I'errand." 



in other provinces. The difficult vaulting over the radiat- 
ing bays of the double ambulatory was here treated with 
great elegance. By doubling the number of supports in 
the exterior circuit of each aisle (Fig. 116) each trapezoidal 
bay of the vaulting was divided into three easily managed 
triangular compartments. Circular shafts were used be- 
tween the central and side aisles. The side aisles were 


doubled and those next the centre were built in two stories, 
providing ample galleries behind a very open triforium. 
The nave was unusually lofty and covered with six-part 
vaults of admirable execution. The vault-ribs were vigor- 
ously moulded and each made to spring from a distinct 
vaulting-shaft, of which three rested upon the cap of each 
of the massive piers below (Fig. 117). The Cathedral of 
Bourges, begun 1190, closely resembled that of Paris in 
plan. Both were designed to accommodate vast throngs in 
their exceptionally broad central aisles and double side 
aisles, but Bourges has no side-aisle galleries, though the 
inner aisles are much loftier than the outer ones. Though 



later in date the vaulting of Bourges is inferior to that of 

Notre Dame, especially in the treatment of the trapezoidal 

bays of the ambulatory. 

The masterly examples set by the vault-builders of St. 

Denis and Notre Dame were not at once generally followed. 

Noyon,Senlis, and Sois- 
sons, contemporary with 
these, are far less com- 
pletely Gothic in style. 
At Le Mans the groined 
vaulting which in 1158 
was substituted for the 
original barrel-vault of 
the cathedral is of very 
primitive design, singu- 
larly heavy and awk- 
ward, although nearly 
contemporary with that 
of Notre Dame (Kig. 

VAULTING. The build- 
ers of the South and 
West, influenced by Aquitanian models, adhered to the 
square plan and domical form of vaulting-bay, even after 
they had begun to employ groin-ribs. The latter, as at 
first used by them in imitation of Northern examples, had 
no organic function in the vault, which was still built like a 
dome. About 1145-1160 the cathedral of St. Maurice at 
Angers was vaulted with square, groin-ribbed vaults, dom- 
ical in form but not in construction. The joints no longer 
described horizontal circles as in a dome, but oblique 
perpendicular to the groins and meeting in zig- 

tag lints at the ridge (Kig. 119). This method became 
common in the West and was afterward generally adoptee' 

j^M Hi, 







20 1 

by the English architects. The Cathedrals of Poitiers (1 162) 
and Laval (La Tri,nit, 11 80-1 185) are examples of this sys- 
tem, which at Le Mans met with the Northern system and 
produced in the cathe- 
dral the awkward com- 
promise described above. 

VAULTING. Early in the 
thirteenth century the 
church - builders of 
Northern France aban- 
doned the use of square 
vaulting - bays and six- 
part vaults. By the adop- 
tion of groin-ribs and the 
pointed arch, the building 
of vaults in oblong bays 
was greatly simplified. 
Each bay of the nave 
could now be covered with its own vaulting-bay, thus doing 
away with all necessity for alternately light and heavy piers. 
It is not quite certain when and where this system was first 
adopted for the complete vaulting of a church. It is, how- 
ever, probable that the Cathedral of Chartres, begun in 
1 194 and completed before 1240, deserves this distinction, 
although it is possible that the vaults of Soissons and 
Noyon may slightly antedate it. Troyes ( 1 1 70-1 267), Rouen 
(1202-1220), Reims (1212-1242), Auxerre (1215-1234, nave 
fourteenth century), Amiens (1 220-1 288), and nearly all the 
great churches and chapels begun after 1200, employ the 
fully developed oblong vault. 

BUTTRESSING. Meanwhile the increasing height of the 
clearstories and the use of double aisles compelled the be- 
stowal of especial attention upon the buttressing. The 
nave and choir of Chartres, the choirs of Notre Dame, 


a shows a small section of filling with courses 
parallel to the ridge, for comparison with the 
other compartments. 


Bourges, Rouen, and Reims, the chevet and later the choir 
of St. Denis, afford early examples of the flying-buttress 
(Fig. 107). These were at first simple and of moderate 
height. Single half-arches spanned the side aisles ; in No- 
tre Dame they crossed the double aisles in a single leap. 
Later the buttresses were given greater stability by the 
added weight of lofty pinnacles. An intermediate range of 
buttresses and pinnacles was built over the intermediate 
piers where double aisles flanked the nave and choir, thus 
dividing the single flying arch into two arches. At the 
same time a careful observation of statical defects in the 
earlier examples led to the introduction of subordinate 
arches and of other devices to stiffen and to beautify the 
whole system. At Reims and Amiens these features re- 
ceived their highest development, though later examples are 
frequently much more ornate. 

INTERIOR DESIGN. The progressive change outlined in 
the last chapter, by which the wall was practically sup- 
pressed, the windows correspondingly enlarged, and every 
part of the structure made loftier and more Blender, resulted 
in the evolution of a system of interior design well repre- 
sented by the nave of Amiens. The second story or gal- 
lery over the side aisle disappeared, but the aisle itself was 
very high. The triforium was no longer a gallery, but a rich- 
ly arcaded passage in the thickness of the wall, correspond- 
ing to the roofing-space over the aisle, and generally treated 
like a lower stage of the clearstory. Nearly the whole 
space above it was occupied in each bay by the vast clear- 
story window filled with simple but eff< ometric tra- 
cery over slender mullions. The side aisles were lighted 
by windows which, like those in the clearstory, occupied 
nearly the whole available wall-space under the vaulting. 
The piers and shafts were all ( Ill8t< red and remarkably 
slender. The whole construction < -t edifice, which 
c<>ver> nearly eighty thousand t, is a marvel of 



lightness, of scientific combinations, and of fine execution. 
Its great vault rises to a height of one hundred and forty 
feet. The nave of St. Denis, though less lofty, resembles 
it closely in style (Fig. 120). Earlier cathedrals show less of 
the harmony of proportion, the perfect working out of the 
relation of all parts of the composi- 
tion of each bay, so conspicuous in the 
Amiens type, which was followed in 
most of the later churches. 

WINDOWS: TKACERY. The clearstory 
windows of Noyon, Soissons, Sens, and 
the choir of Vezelay (1200) were simple 
arched openings arranged singly, in 
pairs, or in threes. In the cathedral of 
Chartres (1 194-1220) they consist of 
two arched windows with a circle above 
them, forming a sort of plate tracery 
under a single arch. In the chapel 
windows of the choir at Reims (12 15) 
the tracery of mullions and circles was 
moulded inside and out, and the inter, 
mediate triangular spaces all pierced 
and glazed. Rose windows were early 
used in front and transept facades. 
During the thirteenth and fourteenth 
centuries they were made of vast size 
and great lightness of tracery, as in 
the transepts of Notre Dame (1257) and the west front of 
Amiens (1288). From the design of these windows is de- 
rived the name Rayonnant, often applied to the French 
Gothic style of the period 1275-1375. 

THE SAINTE CHAPELLE. In this beautiful royal chapel at 
Paris, built 1242-47, Gothic design was admirably exempli- 
fied in the noble windows 15 by 50 feet in size, which per- 
haps furnished the models for those of Amiens and St. 




Denis. Each was divided by slender mullions into four 
lancet-like lights gathered under the rich tracery of the 
window - head. They were filled with stained glass of 
the most brilliant but harmonious hues. They occupy 

the whole available wall- 
space, so that the ribbed 
vault internally seems al- 
most to rest on walls of 
glass, so slender are the 
visible supports and so 
effaced by the glow of 
color in the windows. 
Certainly lightness of 
construction and the sup- 
pression of the wall-ma- 
sonry could hardly be 
carried further than here 
(Fig. 121). Among other 
chapels of the same type 
are those in the palace 
of St. (lermain-en-Laye 
(1240), and a later exam- 
ple in the chateau of Vin- 
cennes, begun by Charles 
VI., but not finished till 

i5 2 5- 
PLANS. The most radical change from the primitive 
basil ican type was, as already explained in the last chapter, 
the continuation of the side aisles around the apse to form 
a chart ; and later, the addition of chapels between the ex- 
ternal buttresses. Radiating chapels, usually semi-octagons 
or semi-decagoni in plan, early appeared as additions to the 
chn<ft (Fig. 12a). These may have originated in the apsidal 
chapels of Romanesque churches in Auvergneand the South, 
as at Issoire, Clermont - l'crrand, Le l'uy, and Toulouse 

FIO. 121. THK STK. (HMKI.l.E, I'ARIS. 



They generally superseded the transept-chapels of earlier 
churches, and added greatly to the beauty of the interior 
perspective, especially when the encircling aisles of the 
chevet were doubled. Notre Dame, as at first erected, 
had a double ambulatory, but no chapels. Bourges has 
only five very small semicircular chapels. Chartres (choir 
1220) and Le Mans, as reconstructed about the same date, 
have double ambulatories and radial chapels. After 1220 
the second ambulatory no longer appears. Noyon, Soissons, 
Reims, Amiens, Troyes, and Beauvais, Tours, Bayeux, and 
Coutances, Clermont, Limoges, and Narbonne all have the 
single ambulatory and radiating chevet-chapels. The Lady- 
chapel in the axis of the church was 
often made longer and more important 
than the other chapels, as at Amiens, 
Le Mans, Rouen, Bayeux, and Coutan- 
ces. Chapels also flanked the choir in 
most of the cathedrals named above, 
and Notre Dame and Tours also have 
side chapels to the nave. The only 
cathedrals with complete double side 
aisles alike to nave, choir, and chevet, 
were Notre Dame and Bourges. It is 
somewhat singular that the German 
cathedral of Cologne is the only one 
in which all these various character- 
istic French features were united in 
one design (see Fig. 140). 

Local considerations had full sway 
in France, in spite of the tendency 
toward unity of type. Thus Dol, Laon, and Poitiers have 
square eastward terminations ; Ch&ions has no ambulatory ; 
Bourges no transept. In Notre Dame the transept was 
almost suppressed. At Soissons one transept, at Noyon 
both, had semicircular ends. Alby, a late cathedral of brick, 




founded in 1280, but mostly built during the fourteenth 
century, has neither side aisles nor transepts, its wide nave 

being flanked by chapels sepa- 
rated by internal buttresses (Fig. 


SCALE. The French cathedrals 
were nearly all of imposing di- 
mensions. Noyon, one of the 
smallest, is 333 feet long ; Sens 
measures 354. Laon, Bourges, 
Troyes, Notre Dame, Le Mans, 
Rouen, and Chartres vary from 
396 to 437 feet in extreme length ; 
Reims measures 483, and Amiens, 
the longest of all, 521 feet. Notre 
Dame is 124 feet wide across the 
five aisles of the nave ; Bourges, 
somewhat wider. The central 
aisles of these two cathedrals, and 
of Laon, Amiens, and Beauvais, have a span of not far from 
40 feet from centre to centre of the piers ; while the ridge 
of the vaulting, which in Notre Dame is 108 feet above the 
pavement, and in Bourges 125, reaches in Amiens a height 
of 140 feet, and of nearly 160 in Beauvais. This emphasis 
of the height, from 3 to 3)A times the clear width of the 
nave or choir, is one of the most striking features of the 
French cathedrals. It produces an impressive effect, but 
tends to dwarf the great width of the central aisle. 

EXTEEIOE DESIGN. Here, as in the interior, every feature 
had its constructive raison d'etre, and the total effect was 
determined by the fundamental structural scheme. This 
was especially true of the lateral elevations, in which the 
pinnacled buttresses, the flying arches, and the traceried 
windows of the side aisle and clearstory, repeated uniform- 
ly at each bay, were the principal elements of the design 

FIG. 123. 




The transept facades and main front allowed greater scope 
for invention and fancy, but even here the interior mem- 
bering gave the key to the composition. Strong buttresses 
marked the division of the aisles and resisted the thrust of 
the terminal pier arches, and rose windows filled the greater 
part of the wall space under the end of the lofty vaulting. 
The whole structure was crowned by a steep-pitched ro.of of 
wood, covered with lead, copper, or tiles, to protect the vault 
from damage by snow and moisture. This roof occasioned 
the steep gables which 
crowned the transept 
and main facades. The 
main front was fre- 
quently adorned, above 
the triple portal, with 
a gallery of niches or 
tabernacles filled with 
statues of kings. Dif- 
ferent types of com- 
position are represent- 
ed by Chartres, Notre 
Dame, Amiens, Reims, 
and Rouen, of which 
Notre Dame (Fig. 124) 
and Reims are per- 
haps the finest. Notre 
Dame is especially re- 
markable for its state- 
ly simplicity and the 
even balancing of hori- 
zontal and vertical ele- 

PORCHES. In most French church facades the porches 
were the most striking features, with their deep shadows 
and sculptured arches. The Romanesque porches were 




usually limited in depth to the thickness of the front wall. 
The Gothic builders secured increased depth by projecting 
the portals out beyond the wall, and crowned them with 
elaborate gables. The vast central door was divided in two 
by a pier adorned with a niche and statue. Over this the 
tympanum of the arch was carved with scriptural reliefs ; 


the jambs and arches were profusely adorned with figures 
of saints, apostles, martyrs, and angels, under elaborate 
canopies. The porches of Laon, Bourges, Amiens, and 
Reims are especially deep and majestic in effect, the last- 
named (built 1380) being the richest of all. Some of 
the transept facades also had imposing portals. Those of 
Chartres (1 210-1245) rank among the finest works of 
Gothic decorative architecture, the south porch in some 
ts surpassing that of the north transept. The portals 


of the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries were remark- 
able for the extraordinary richness and minuteness of their 
tracery and sculpture, as at Abbeville, Alencon, the cathe- 
dral and St. Maclou at Rouen (Fig. 125), Tours, Troyes, 
Vendome, etc. 

towers AND SPIRES. The emphasizing of vertical ele- 
ments reached its fullest expression in the towers and 
spires of the churches. What had been at first merely a 
lofty belfry roof was rapidly developed into the spire, ris- 
ing three hundred feet or more into the air. This develop- 
ment had already made progress in the Romanesque period, 
and the south spire of Chartres is a notable example of late 
twelfth-century steeple design. The transition from the 
square tower to the slender octagonal pyramid was skil- 
fully effected by means of corner pinnacles and dormers. 
During and after the thirteenth century the development 
was almost wholly in the direction of richness and com- 
plexity of detail, not of radical constructive modification. 
The northern spire of Chartres (15 15) and the spires of 
Bordeaux, Coutances, Senlis, and the Flamboyant church of 
St. Maclou at Rouen, illustrate this development. In Nor- 
mandy central spires were common, rising over the cross- 
ing of nave and transepts. In some cases the designers 
of cathedrals contemplated a group of towers ; this is evi- 
dent at Chartres, Coutances, and Reims. This intention 
was, however, never realized ; it demanded resources be- 
yond even the enthusiasm of the thirteenth century. Only 
in rare instances were the spires of any of the towers com- 
pleted, and the majority of the French towers have square 
terminations, with low-pitched wooden roofs, generally in- 
visible from below. In general, French towers are marked 
by their strong buttresses, solid lower stories, twin win- 
dows in each side of the belfry proper these windows be- 
ing usually of great size and a skilful management of the 
transition to an octagonal plan for the belfry or the spire. 



CAKVING AND SCULPTUBE. The general superiority of 
French Gothic work was fully maintained in its decorative 
details. Especially fine is the figure sculpture, which in the 
thirteenth and fourteenth centuries attained true nobility 
of expression, combined with great truthfulness and deli- 
cacy of execution. Some of its finest productions are 
found in the great doorway jambs of the west portals of 
the cathedrals, and in the ranks of throned and adoring 

fig. 126. nam a Go t hic capitals. 

a, From Saintc Chapelle, Paris, 13th century. />, 14th-century capital from transept of 
Notre Dame, Paris. <-, 15th-century capital from north spire of Char 

angels which adorned their deep arches. These reach 
their highest beauty in the portals of Reims (1380). The 
tabernacles or carved niches in which such statues were set 
were important elements in the decoration of the exteriors 
of churches. 

Foliage forms were used for nearly all the minor carved 
ornaments, though grotesque and human figures sometimes 
took their place. The gargoyles through which th< 
water was discharged clear of the building, we; 
always composed in the form of hideous monsti 
symbolic beasts, like the oxen in the towers of 
monsters like those which peer from the to v. 


trades of Notre Dame, were employed with some mystical 
significance in various parts of the building. But the cap- 
itals, corbels, crockets, and finials were mostly composed of 
floral or foliage forms. Those of the twelfth and thirteenth 
centuries were for the most part simple in mass, and crisp 
and vigorous in design, imitating the strong shoots of early 
spring. The capitals were tall and slender, concave in 
profile, with heavy square or octagonal abaci. With the 
close of the thirteenth century this simple and forcible 
style of detail disappeared. The carving became more 
realistic ; the leaves, larger and more mature, were treated 
as if applied to the capital or moulding, not as if they 
grew out of it. The execution and detail were finer and 
more delicate, in harmony with the increasing slenderness 
and lightness of the architecture (Fig. 126 a, b). Tracery 
forms now began to be profusely applied to all manner of 
surfaces, and open-work gables, wholly unnecessary from 
the structural point of view, but highly effective as decora- 
tions, adorned the portals and crowned the windows. 

LATE GOTHIC MONUMENTS. So far our attention has been 
mainly occupied with the masterpieces erected previous to 
1250. Among the cathedrals, relatively few in number, 
whose construction is referable to the second half of the 
century, that of Beauvais stands first in importance. De- 
signed on a colossal scale, its foundations were laid in 1225, 
but it was never completed, and the portion built the 
choir and chapels belonged really to the second half of 
the century, having been completed in 1270. But the col- 
lapse in 1284 of the central tower and vaulting of this in- 
complete cathedral, owing to the excessive loftiness and 
slenderness of its supports, compelled its entire reconstruc- 
tion, the number of the piers being doubled and the span of 
the pier arches correspondingly reduced. As thus rebuilt, 
the cathedral aisle was 47 feet wide from centre to centre 
of opposite piers, and 163 feet high to the top of the vault. 


Transepts were added after 1500. Limoges and Narbonne, 
begun in 1272 on a large scale (though not equal in size 
to Beauvais), were likewise never completed. Both had 
choirs of admirable plan, with well-designed chevet-chapels. 
Many other cathedrals begun during this period were com- 
pleted only after long delays, as, for instance, Meaux, Rodez 
(1277), Toulouse (1272), and Alby (1282J, finished in the 
sixteenth century, and Clermont (1248), completed under 
Napoleon III. But between 1260 or 1275 and 1350, work 
was actively prosecuted on many still incomplete cathe- 
drals. The choirs of Beauvais (rebuilding), Limoges, and 
Narbonne were finished after 1330 ; and towers, transept- 
facades, portals, and chapels added to many others of ear- 
lier date. 

The style of this period is sometimes designated as Ray- 
onnant, from the characteristic wheel tracery of the rose- 
windows, and the prevalence of circular forms in the lateral 
arched windows, of the late thirteenth and early fourteenth 
centuries. The great rose windows in the transepts of 
Notre Dame, dating from 1257, are typical examples of the 
style. Those of Rouen cathedral belong to the same cat- 
egory, though of later date. The facade of Amiens, com- 
pleted by 1288, is one of the finest works of this style, of 
which an early example is the elaborate parish church of 
St. Urbain at Troves. 

THE flamboyant STYLE. The geometric treatment of 
the tracery and the minute and profuse decoration of this 
period gradually merged into the fantastic and unrestrained 
extravagances of the Flamboyant style, which prevailed 
until the advent of the Renaissance say 1525. The con- 
tinuous logical development of forms ceased, and in its place 
caprice and display controlled the arts of design. The 
finest monument of this long period is the fifteenth-century 
nave and central tower of the church of St Ouen at Rouen, 
parish church of the first rank, begun in 13 18, but not fi 



ished until 1515. The tracery of the lateral windows is still 
chiefly geometric, but the western rose window (Fig. 112) 
jmdjthe__jiiag-*ficent central tower or lantern, exhibit in 
their tracery the florid decoration and wavy, flame-like lines 
of this style. Slenderness of supports and the suppression of 
horizontal lines are here carried to an extreme ; and the 
church, in spite of its great elegance of detail, lacks the 
vital interest and charm of the earlier Gothic churches. 
The cathedral of Alencon and the church of St. Marion at 
Rouen, have portals with unusually elaborate detail of tra- 
cery and carving; while the facade of Rouen cathedral 
(1509) surpasses all other examples in the lace-like minute- 
ness of its open-work and its profusion of ornament. The 
churches of St. Jacques at Dieppe, and of St. Wulfrand at 
Abbeville, the facades of Tours and Troyes, are among the 
masterpieces of the style. The upper part of the facade 
of Reims (1 380-1428) belongs to the transition from the 
Rayonnant to the Flamboyant. While some works of this 
period are conspicuous for the richness of their ornamenta- 
tion, others are noticeably bare and poor in design, like St. 
Merri and St. SeVerin in Paris. 

cathedrals did not absorb all the architectural activity of 
the French during the Gothic period, nor did it by any 
means put an end to monastic building. While there are 
few Gothic cloisters to equal the Romanesque cloisters of 
Puy-en-Velay, Montmajour, Elne, and Moissac, many of the 
abbeys either rebuilt "their churches in the Gothic style 
after 1150, or extended and remodelled their conventual 
buildings. The cloisters of Fontfroide, Chaise-Dieu, and 
the Mont St. Michel rival those of Romanesque times, 
while many new refectories and chapels were built in the 
same style with the cathedrals. The most complete of 
these Gothic monastic establishments, that of the Mont St 
Michel in Normandy, presented a remarkable aggregation 


of buildings clustering around the steep isolated rock on 
which stands the abbey church. This was built in the 
eleventh century, and the choir and chapels remodelled in 
the sixteenth. The great refectory and dormitory, the 
cloisters, lodgings, and chapels, built in several vaulted 
stories against the cliffs, are admirable examples of the 
vigorous pointed-arch design of the early thirteenth cen- 

Hospitals like that of St. Jean at Angers (late twelfth cen- 
tury), or those of Chartres, Ourscamps,Tonnerre,and Beaune, 
illustrate how skilfully the French could modify and adapt 
the details of their architecture to the special requirement* 
of civil architecture. Great numbers of charitable institu- 
tions were built in the middle ages asylums, hospitals, 
refuges, and the like but very few of those in France are 
now extant. Town halls were built in the fifteenth century 
in some places where a certain amount of popular inde- 
pendence had been secured. The florid fifteenth-century 
Palais de Justice at Rouen (1499-1508) is an example of 
another branch of secular Gothic architecture. In all these 
monuments the adaptation of means to ends is admirable. 
Wooden ceilings and roofs replaced stone, wherever required 
by great width of span or economy of construction. There 
was little sculpture ; the wall-spaces were not suppressed 
in favor of stained glass and tracery; while the roofs were 
usually emphasized and adorned with elaborate crestings 
and finials in lead or terra-cotta. 

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE. These same principles con- 
trolled the designing of houses, farm buildings, barns, 
granaries, and the like. The common closely-built Freni h 
city house of the twelfth and thirteenth century is illus- 
trated by many extant examples at Cluny, Provins, and 
other towns. A shop opening on the street by a large arch, 
a narrow stairway, and two or three stories of rooms lighted 
by clustered, pointed-arched windows, constituted the com- 



mon type. The street front was usually gabled and the 
roof steep. In the fourteenth or fifteenth century half- 
timbered construction began to supersede stone for town 
houses, as it permitted of encroaching upon the street by 
projecting the upper stories. Many of the half-timbered 
houses of the fifteenth century were of elaborate design. 
The heavy oaken uprights were carved with slender colon- 


(After Viollet-le-Duc.) 

nettes ; the horizontal sills, bracketed out over the street, 
were richly moulded ; picturesque dormers broke the sky- 
line, and the masonry filling between the beams was fre- 
quently faced with enamelled tiles. 

The more considerable houses or palaces of royalty, 
nobles, and wealthy citizens rivalled, and in time surpassed, 
the monastic buildings in richness and splendor. The 
earlier examples retain the military aspect, with moat and 
donjon, as in the Louvre of Charles V., demolished in 


the sixteenth century. The finest palaces are of late date, 
and the type is well represented by the Ducal Palace at 
Nancy (1476), the Hotel de Cluny (1485) at Paris, the Hotel 
Jacques Coeur at Bourges (Fig. 127), and the east wing of 
Blois (1498-15 15). These palaces are not only excellently 
and liberally planned, with large halls, many staircases, and 
handsome courts; they are also extremely picturesque with 
their square and circular towers, slender turrets, elaborate 
dormers, and rich carved detail. 

MONUMENTS : (C. = cathedral ; A. ss abbey ; trans. = transept ; cadi 
edifice is given under the date of its commencement ; subsequent altera- 
tions in parentheses.) Between 1130 and 1200: Vezelay A., ante-chapel, 
1130; St. Germer-de-FIy C, n 30-1 150 (chapel later) ; St. Denis. A. . choir . 
I i^o(choir rebuilt, nave and trans., 1240) ; SensC, 1 140-68 (\V. front, 13th 
century ; chapels, spire, 14th) ; SenlisC. 1 14 583 (trans., spire, 13th cen- 
^tUjjO.; NoyonC, M4q-I20o(W. front, vaults, 13th century) ; St. ( lermain- 
9 A., Paris, choir, 1 1 50 (Romanesque nave) ; Angers C, 1 1 50 (choir, 
trans., 1274); Langres, 1150-1200; I.aonC, 1150-1200; l.e Mans C, nave, 
1 1 50-58 (choir, 1217-54); SoissoosC, 1 160-70 (choir, 1212; nave chapels, 
14th century); Poitiers C, 1 162-1204; ^otrellanie^-l'aris^cixoir, 1163-96 
(nave, W. front finished, 1235 ; trans, fronts, and chapels, 1257-75); Char- 
-l rr s C^_YY\ejuL J-L70 |_jje*U-iiiaily~j 194-98 (trans, porches. W. rose, 1210- 
Ilte; N. spire, 1506) ; Tours C, H7o(rebuilt, 1267 ; trans., portals, 1375; 
W. portals, chapels, 15th century; towers finished, 1507-47); Laval C, 
1180-85 (choir, 1 6th century) ; Mantes, church Notre Dame, 1 180-1200 ; 
Bourges C M 1100-95 (E. end, 1210; W. end, 1275); St. Nicholas at 
Caen, 1190 (vaults, 15th century) ; Reims, church St. Re'my, choir, end of 
I2th century (Romanesque nave); church St. Leu d'Esserent, choir late 
12th century (nave, 13th century) ; Lyons ('., choir, end of 12th century 
(nave. 13th and 14th centuries) ; Etampes, church Notre Dame, 12th and 
13th centuries. 13th century : Evreux C, 1202-75 (trans., central tower, 
1417 ; \V. front rebuilt, 16th century) ; Rouen C, 1202-20 (trans, portals, 
1280; W. front, 1507); Nevers, 121 1, N. portal, 1280 (chapels, S. por- 
tal, 15th century); Reims ('., 1212-42 (YV. front, 13S0 ; \Y. towers, 
1420) ; Piyonnc <'., 1213 (nave, vaults, YV. portal, 14th century) ; Troyes 
C M choir, 1214 (central tower, nave, YV. portal, and towers, 15th century) ; 
Auxerre C, 1215-34 (nave, W. end, trans., 14th century); Amiens C, 
1220-88 ; St. Etienne at Chalons-sur-Marne, 1230 (spire, 1520) ; SeezC, 


1230, rebuilt 1260 (remodelled 14th century) \ Notre Dame de Dijon, 
1230 ; Reims, Lady chapel of Archbishop's palace, 1230 ; Chapel Royal 
at St. Germain-en-Laye, 1240; Ste. Chapelle at Paris, 1242-47 (W. rose, 
15th century) ; Coutances C, 1254-74 ; Beauvais C, 1247-72 (rebuilt 
1337-47 ; trans, portals, 1500-48) ; Notre Dame de Grace at Clermont, 
1248 (finished 1350) ; Dol C, 13th century; St. Martin-des-Champs at 
Paris, nave 13th century (choir Romanesque) ; Bordeaux C, 1260 ; 
Narbonne C, 1272-1320; Limoges, 1273 (finished 16th century); St. 
Urbain, Troyes, 1264; Rodez C, 1277-1385 (altered, completed 16th 
century) ; church St. Quentin, 1280-1300 ; St. Benigne at Dijon, 1280-91 ; 
Alby C, 1282 (nave, 14th ; choir, 15th century ; S. portal, 1473-1500) ; 
Meaux C, mainly rebuilt 1284 (W. end much altered 15th, finished 16th 
century) ; Cahors C, rebuilt 1285-93 (W. front, 15th century); Orleans, 
1287-1328 (burned, rebuilt 1601-1829). 14th century : St. Bertrand de 
Comminges, 1304-50 ; St. Nazaire at Carcassonne, choir and trans, on 
Romanesque nave; Montpellier C, 1364; St. Ouen at Rouen, choir, 
1318-39 (trans., 1400-39 ; nave, 1464-91 ; W. front, 1515) ; Royal Chapel 
at Vincennes, 1385 (?)-i525. 15th and 16th century : St. Nizier at Lyons 
rebuilt ; St. Severin, St. Merri, St. Germain l'Auxerrois, all at Paris ; Notre 
Dame de l'Epine at Chalons-sur-Marne ; choir of St. Etienne at Beauvais ; 
Saintes C, rebuilt, 1450 ; St. Maclou at Rouen (finished 16th century) ; 
church at Brou ; St. Wulfrand at Abbeville ; abbey of St. Riquier these 
three all early 16th century. Houses, Castles, and Palaces : Bishop's 
palace at Paris, 1160 (demolished) ; castle of Coucy, 1220-30; Louvre at 
Paris (the original chateau), 1225-1350 ; Palais de Justice at Paris, originally 
the royal residence, 1225-1400 ; Bishop's palace at Laon, 1245 (addition 
to Romanesque hall) ; castle Montargis, 13th century ; castle Pierrefonds, 
Bishop's palace at Narbonnne, palace of Popes at Avignon all 14th cen- 
tury donjon of palace at Poitiers, 1395 ; Hotel des Ambassadeurs at 
Dijon, 1420 ; house of Jacques Cceur at Bourges, 1443 ; Palace, Dijon, 
1467 ; Ducal palace at Nancy, 1476 ; Hotel Cluny at Paris, 1490 ; castle 
of Creil, late 15th century, finished in 16th ; E. wing palace of Blois, 1498- 
1515, for Louis XII.; Palace de Justice at Rouen, 1499-1508. 



Books Recommended : As before, Corroyer, Parker, 
Reber. Also, Bell's Series of Handbooks of English Cathedrals. 
Billings, The Baronial and Ecclesiastical A ntiam ties of Scotland. 
Bond, Gothic Architecture in England. Brandon, Analysis of 
Gothic Architecture. Britton, Cathedral Antiquities of Great 
Britain. Ditchfield, The Cathedrals of England. Murray, Hand- 
books of the English Cathedrals. Parker, Introduction to Gothic 
Architecture ; Glossary of Architectural Terms ; Companion to 
Glossary, etc. Rickman, An Attempt to Discriminate the .Styles 
of English Architecture. Sharpe, Architectural Parallels ; 
The Seven Periods of English Architecture. Van Rensse- 
laer, English Cathedrals. Winkles and Moule, Cathedral 
Churches of England and Wales. Willis, Architectural His- 
tory of Canterbury Cathedral ; ditto of Winchester Cathedral ; 
Treatise on Vaults. 

GENERAL CHARACTER. Gothic architecture was developed 
in England under a strongly established royal power, with 
an episcopate in no sense hostile to the abbots or in arms 
against the barons. Many of the cathedrals had monastic 
chapters, and not infrequently abbots were invested with 
the episcopal rank. 

English Gothic architecture was thus by no means pre- 
dominantly an architecture of cathedrals. If architectural 
activity in England was on this account less intense and 
widespread in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries than in 
France, it was not, on the other hand, so soon exhausted. 
Fewer new cathedrals were built, but the progressive re- 
building of those already existing seems not. to have ceased 
until the middle or end of the fifteenth century. Architect- 


ure in England developed more slowly, but more uniform- 
ly, than in France. It contented itself with simpler prob- 
lems ; and if it failed to rival Amiens in boldness of construc- 
tion and in lofty majesty, it at least never perpetrated a 
folly like Beauvais. In richness of internal decoration, es- 
pecially in the mouldings and ribbed vaulting, and in the 
picturesque grouping of simple masses externally, the Brit- 
ish builders went far toward atoning for their structural 

EARLY GOTHIC BUILDINGS. The pointed arch and ribbed 
vault were importations from France. 
Early examples appear in the Cistercian 
abbeys of Furness and Kirkstall, and 
in the Temple Church at London 
(1185). But it was in the Choir of 
Canterbury, as rebuilt by William of 
Sens, after the destruction by fire in 
1 1 70 of Anselm's Norman choir, that 
these PVench Gothic features were 
first applied in a thoroughgoing man- 
ner. In plan this choir resembled that 
of the cathedral of Sens ; and its 
coupled round piers, with capitals 
carved with foliage, its pointed arches, 
its six-part vaulting, and its chevet, 
were distinctly French. The Gothic 
details thus introduced slowly sup- 
planted the round arch and other Nor- 
man features. For fifty years the styles were more or less 
mingled in many buildings, though Lincoln Cathedral, as re- 
built in 1 185-1200, retained nothing of the earlier round- 
arched style. But the first church to be designed and built 
from the foundations in the new style was the cathedral 
of Salisbury (1220-1258 ; Fig. 128). Contemporary with 
Amiens, it is a homogeneous and typical example of the 



Early English style. The predilection for great length ob- 
servable in the Anglo-Norman churches (as at Norwich and 
Durham) still prevailed, as it continued to do throughout 
the Gothic period ; Salisbury is 480 feet long. The double 
transepts, the long choir, the square east end, the rela- 
tively low vault (84 feet to the ridge), the narrow grouped 
windows, all are thoroughly English. Only the simple 
four-part vaulting recalls French models. Westminster 
Abbey (1245-1269), on the other hand, betrays in a marked 
manner the French influence in its internal loftiness (100 
feet), its polygonal chevet and chapels, and its strongly 
accented exterior flying-buttresses (Fig. 137). 

MIXTURE OF STYLES. Very few English cathedrals are as 
homogeneous as the two just mentioned, nearly all having 
undergone repeated remodellings in successive periods. 
Durham, Norwich, and Oxford are wholly Norman but for 
their Gothic vaults. Ely, Rochester, Gloucester, and Here- 
ford have Norman naves and Gothic choirs. Peterborough 
has an early Gothic facade and late Gothic retro-choir added 
to an otherwise completely Norman structure. Winchester 
is a Norman church remodelled with early Perpendicular de- 
tails. The purely Gothic churches and cathedrals, except 
parish churches in which England is very rich are not 
marly as numerous in England as in France. 

PERIODS. The development of English Gothic archi- 
tecture followed the same general sequence as the French, 
and like it the successive stages were most conspicuously 
characterized by the forms of the tracery. 

The Early English or Lancet period extended roundly 
from 1 1 75 or 1 1 80 to 1280, and was marked by simplicity, 
dignity, and purity of design. 

The Decorated or Geometric period covered another 
century, 1280 to 1380, and was characterized by its decora- 
tive richness and greater lightness of construction. 

The Pi Kit period extended from 1380, or 


thereabout, well into the sixteenth century. Its salient 
features were the use of fan-vaulting, four-centred arches, 
and tracery of predominantly vertical and horizontal lines. 
The tardy introduction of Renaissance forms finally put 
an end to the Gothic style in England, after a long period 
of mixed and transitional architecture. 

VAULTING. The richness and variety of English vaulting 
contrast strikingly with the persistent uniformity of the 
French. A few of the early 
Gothic vaults, as in the aisles 
of Peterborough, and later 
the naves of Durham, Salis- 
bury, and Gloucester, were 
simple four -part, ribbed 
vaults substantially like the 
French. But the English 
disliked and avoided the 
twisted and dome-like sur- 
faces of the French vaults, 
preferring horizontal ridges, 
and, in the filling-masonry, 
straight courses meeting at 
the ridge in zigzag lines, as 
in southwest France (see p. 
200). This may be seen in 
Westminster Abbey. The 
idea of ribbed construction 

was then seized upon and given a new application. By 
springing a large number of ribs from each point of sup- 
port, the vaulting-surfaces were divided into long, narrow, 
triangles, the filling of which was comparatively easy 
(Fig. 129). The ridge was itself furnished with a straight 
rib, decorated with carved rosettes or bosses at each inter- 
section with a vaulting-rib. The naves and choirs of 
Lincoln, Lichfield, Exeter, and the nave of Westminster 




illustrate this method. The logical corollary of this 
practice was the introduction of minor ribs called Hemes, 
connecting the main ribs and forming complex reticulated 
and star-shaped patterns. Vaults of this description are 
among the most beautiful in England. One of the richest 
is in the choir of Gloucester (1337-1377). Less correct 
constructively is that over the choir of Wells, while the 
choir of Ely, the nave of Tewkesbury Abbey (Fig. 130), and 


all the vaulting of Winchester as rebuilt by William of 
Wykeham (1390), illustrate the same system. Such vaults 
are called Heme or star vaults. 

FAN-VAULTING. The next step in the process may be ob- 
served in the vaults of the choir of Oxford Cathedral (Christ 
Church), of the retro-choir of Peterborough, of the clois- 
ters of Gloucester, and many other examples. The di- 
verging ribs being made of uniform curvature, the severeys 
(the inverted pyramidal vaulting-masses springing from each 
support) became a species of < on< ave conoids, meeting at the 


ridge in such a way as to leave a series of flat lozenge-shaped 
spaces at the summit of the vault (Fig. 136). The ribs were 
multiplied indefinitely, and losing thus in individual and 
structural importance became a mere decorative pattern of 
tracery on the severeys. To conceal the awkward flat loz- 
enges at the ridge, elaborate panelling was resorted to ; or, 
in some cases, long stone pendents were inserted at those 
points a device highly decorative but wholly unconstruc- 
tive. At Cambridge, 
in King's College 
Chapel, at Windsor, 
in St. George's Chap- 
el, and in the Chapel 
of Henry VII. at 
Westminster, this 
sort of vaulting re- 
ceived its most elab- 
orate development. 
The fan-vault, as it 
is called, illustrates 
the logical evolution 
of a decorative ele- 
ment from a struct- 
ural starting-point, 
leading to results far 
removed from the 

original conception. Rich and sumptuous as are these 
ceilings, they are with all their ornament less satisfactory 
than the ribbed vaults of the preceding period. 

CHAPTER-HOUSES. One of the most beautiful forms of 
ribbed vaulting was developed in the polygonal halls erect- 
ed for the deliberations of the cathedral chapters of Lincoln 
(1225), Westminster (1250), Salisbury (1250), and Wells 
(1292), in which the vault-ribs radiated from a central col- 
umn to the sides and angles of the polygon (Fig. 131). If 



these vaults were less majestic than domes of the same di- 
ameter, they were far more decorative and picturesque, while 
the chapter-houses themselves were the most original and 
striking products of English Gothic art. Every feature 
was designed with strict regard for the structural system 
determined by the admirable vaulting, and the Sainte Cha- 
pelle was not more logical in its exemplification of Gothic 
principles. To the four above-mentioned examples should 
be added that of York (1280-1330), which differs from 
them in having no central column : by some critics it is 
esteemed the finest of them all. Its ceiling is a Gothic 
dome, 57 feet in diameter, but unfortunately executed in 
wood. Its geometrical window-tracery and richly canopied 
stalls are admirable. 

OCTAGON AT ELY. The magnificent Octagon of Ely Cathe- 
dral, at the intersection of the nave and transepts, belongs in 
the same category with these polygonal chapter-house 
vaults. It was built by Alan of Walsingham in 1337, after 
the fall of the central tower and the destruction of the ad- 
jacent bays of the choir. It occupies the full width of the 
three aisles, and covers the ample space thus enclosed with 
a simple but beautiful groined and ribbed vault of WOOfj 
reaching to a central octagonal lantern, which rises much 
higher and shows externally as well as internally. Unfort- 
unately, this vault is of wood, and would require important 
modifications of detail if carried out in stone. But it is so 
noble in general design and total effect, that one wonders 
the type was not universally adopted for the crossing in all 
cathedrals, until one observes that no cathedral of impor- 
tance was built after Walsingham's time, nor did any other 
central towers opportunely fall to the ground. 

WINDOWS AND TEACEBY. In the Early English Period 
(1 200-1 280 or 1300) the windows were tall and narrow 
{lancet windows), and generally grouped by twos and thn 
though sometimes four and even five are seen together (as 


the "Five Sisters" in the N. transept of York). In the 
nave of Salisbury and the retro-choir of Ely the side aisles 
are lighted by coupled windows and the clearstory by triple 
windows, the central one higher than the others a surviv- 
ing Norman practice. Plate-tracery was, as in France, an 
intermediate step leading to the development of bar-tra- 
cery (see Fig. no). The English followed here the same 
reasoning as the French. At first the openings constituted 
the design, the intervening stonework being of secondary 
importance. Later the forms of the 
openings were subordinated to the 
pattern of the stone framework of 
bars, arches, circles, and cusps. Bar- 
tracery of this description prevailed 
in England through the greater part 
of the Decorated Period (i 280-1380), 
and somewhat resembled the con- 
temporary French geometric tracery, 
though more varied and less rigidly 
constructive in design. An early 
example of this tracery occurs in 
the cloisters of Salisbury (Fig. 132) ; 
others in the clearstories of the 
choirs of Lichfield, Lincoln, and Ely, 

the nave of York, and the chapter-houses mentioned above, 
where, indeed, it seems to have received its earliest develop- 
ment. After the middle of the fourteenth century lines of 
double curvature were introduced, producing what is called 
flowing tr&czry, somewhat resembling the French flamboyant, 
though earlier in date (Fig. 111). Examples of this style 
are found in Wells, in the side aisles and triforium of the 
choir of Ely, and in the S. transept rose-window of Lincoln. 
THE PERPENDICULAR STYLE. Flowing tracery was, how- 
ever, a transitional phase of design, and was soon super- 
seded by Perpendicular tracery, in which the mullions were 




carried through to the top of the arch and intersected by 
horizontal transoms. This formed a very rigid and me- 
chanically correct system of stone framing, but lacked the 
grace and charm of the two preceding periods. The ear- 
liest examples are seen in the work of Edington and of 
Wykeham in the reconstructed cathedral of Winchester 

(i 360-1 394), where the 
tracery was thus made 
to harmonize with the 
accentuated and multi- 
plied vertical lines of 
the interior design. It 
was at this late date 
that the English seem 
first to have fully ap- 
propriated the Gothic 
ideas of emphasized 
vertical elements and 
wall surfaces reduced 
to a minimum. The 
development of fan- 
vaulting had led to the 
adoption of a new form 
of arch, the four-cen- 
tred or Tint or arch (Fig. 
I 33)> to fit under the 
depressed apex of the 
vault. The whole design internally and externally was 
thenceforward controlled by the form of the vaulting and 
of the openings. The windows were made of enormous 
size, especially at the east end of the choir, which was 
square in nearly all English churches, and in the west win- 
dows over the entrance. These windows had already 
reached, in the Decorated Period, an enormous size, as 
York ; in the Perpendicular Period the two ends of tl 



church were as nearly as possible converted into walls of 
glass. The East Window of Gloucester reaches the pro- 
digious dimensions of 38 by 72 feet. The most complete 
examples of the Perpendicular tracery and of the style in 
general are the three chapels already mentioned (p. 223) ; 
those, namely, of King's College at Cambridge, of St. George 
at Windsor, and of Henry VII. in Westminster Abbey. 

CONSTKTJCTIVE DESIGN. The most striking peculiarity of 
English Gothic design was its studious avoidance of temer- 
ity or venturesomeness in construction. Both the height 
and width of the nave were kept within very moderate 
bounds, and the supports were never reduced to extreme 
slenderness. While much impressiveness of effect was un- 
doubtedly lost thereby, there was some gain in freedom of 
design, and there was less obtrusion of constructive ele- 
ments in the exterior composition. The flying-buttress be- 
came a feature of minor importance where the clearstory 
was kept low, as in most English churches. In many cases 
the flying arches were hidden under the aisle roofs. The 
English cathedrals and larger churches are long and low, 
depending for effect mainly upon the projecting masses of 
their transepts, the imposing square central towers which 
commonly crown the crossing, and the grouping of the 
main structure with chapter-houses, cloisters, and Lady- 

FRONTS. The sides and east ends were, in most cases, 
more successful than the west fronts. In these the Eng- 
lish displayed a singular indifference or lack of creative 
power. They produced nothing to rival the majestic 
facades of Notre Dame, Amiens, or Reims, and their portals 
are almost ridiculously small. The front of York Cathe- 
dral is the most notable in the list for its size and elaborate 
decoration. Those of Lincoln and Peterborough are, how- 
ever, more interesting in the picturesqueness and singularity 
of their composition. The first-named forms avast arcaded 



screen, masking the bases of the two western towers, and 
pierced by three huge Norman arches, retained from the 
original facade. The west front of Peterborough is likewise 
a mask or screen, mainly composed of three colossal re- 
cessed arches, whose vast scale completely dwarfs the little 

porches which give ad- 
mittance to the church. 
Salisbury has a curious- 
ly illogical and ineffec- 
tive facade. Those of 
Lichfield and Wells are, 
on the other hand, im- 
posing and beautiful 
designs, the first with 
its twin spires and rich 
arcading (Fig. 134), the 
second with its unu- 
sual wealth of figure- 
sculpture, and massive 
square towns. 

These are the most 
successful features of 
English exterior de- 
sign. Most of them form lanterns internally over the < p * 
ing, giving to that point a considerable increase of dignity. 
Externally tiny are usually massive and lofty square tow its, 
and having been for the most part completed during 
the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries they are marked 
by great richness and elegance of detail. Durham, York, 
Ely, Canterbury, Lincoln, and Gloucester may be mentioned 
as notable examples of such square towers ; that of Canter- 
bury is the finest. Two or three have lofty spires over 
the lantern. Among these, that of Salisbury is chief, rising 
424 feet from the ground, admirably designed in every de- 



tail. It was not completed till the middle of the four- 
teenth century, but most fortunately carries out with great 
felicity the spirit of the earlier style in which it was begun. 
Lichfield and Chichester have somewhat similar central 
spires, but less happy in propor- 
tion and detail than the beautiful 
Salisbury example. 

man churches the pier -arches, 
triforium, and clearstory were 
practically equal. In the Gothic 
churches the pier-arches gener- 
ally occupy the lower half of the 
height, the upper half being divid- 
ed nearly equally between the tri- 
forium and clearstory, as in Lin- 
coln, Lichfield (nave), Ely (choir). 
In some cases, however (as at 
Salisbury, Westminster, W i n- 
chester, choir of Lichfield), the 
clearstory is magnified at the ex- 
pense of the triforium (Fig. 135). 
Three peculiarities of design 
sharply distinguish the English 
treatment of these features 
from the French. The first is 

the multiplicity of fine mouldings in the pier-arches ; 
the second is the decorative elaboration of design in 
the triforium ; the third, the variety in the treatment of 
the clearstory. In general the English interiors are much 
more ornate than the French. Black Purbeck marble is 
frequently, used for the shafts clustered around the central 
core of the pier, giving a striking and somewhat singular 
effect of contrasted color. The rich vaulting, the highly 
decorated triforium, the moulded pier-arches, and at the 



end of the vista the great east window, produce an impres- 
sion very different from the more simple and lofty state- 
liness of the French cathedrals. The great length and low- 
ness of the English interiors combine with this decorative 
richness to give the impression of repose and grace, rather 
than of majesty and power. This tendency reached its 
highest expression in the Perpendicular churches and 
chapels, in which every surface was covered with minute 

CAKVINO. In the Early English Period the details were 
carved with a combined delicacy and vigor deserving of the 
highest praise. In the capitals and corbels, crockets and 
finials, the foliage was crisp and fine, curling into convex 
masses and seeming to spring from the surface which it 
decorated. Mouldings were frequently ornamented with 
foliage of this character in the hollows, and another orna- 
ment, the dog-tooth or pyramid, often served the same pur- 
pose, introducing repeated points of light into the shadows 
of the mouldings. These were fine and Complex, deep hol- 
lows alternating with round mouldings (bdwtets) sometimes 
made pear-shaped in section by a fillet on one side. Cuspin* 
the decoration of an arch or circle by triangular projec- 
tions on its inner edge was introduced during this period, 
and became an important decorative resource, especially in 
tracery design. In the Decorated Period the foliage wis 
less crisp ; sea-weed and oak-leaves, closely and confusedly 
bunched, were used in the capitals, while crockets were 
larger, double-curved, with leaves swelling into convexities 
like oak-galls. Geometrical and flowing tracery were de- 
veloped, and the mouldings of the tracery-bars, as of other 
features, lost somewhat in vigor and sharpness. The Imll- 
flower or button replaced the dog's-tooth, and the hollows 
were less frequently adorned with foliage. 

In the Perpendicular Period nearly all flat surfaces were 
panelled in designs resembling the tracery of the windows. 


The capitals were less important than those of the preced- 
ing periods, and the mouldings weaker and less effective. 
The Tudor rose appears as an ornament in square panels 
and on fiat surfaces ; and moulded battlements, which first 
appeared in Decorated work, now become a frequent crown- 
ing motive in place of a cornice. There is less originality 
and variety in the ornament, but a great increase in its 
amount (Fig. 136). 


PLANS. English church plans underwent, during the 
Gothic Period, but little change from the general types es- 
tablished previous to the thirteenth century. The Gothic 
cathedrals and abbeys, like the Norman, were very long 
and narrow, with choirs often nearly as long as the nave, and 
almost invariably with square eastward terminations. There 
is no example of double side aisles and side chapels, and 
apsidal chapels are very rare. Canterbury and Westminster 
(Fig. 137) are the chief exceptions to this, and both show 
clearly the French influence. Another striking peculiarity 
of the English plans is the frequent occurrence of second- 



ary transepts, adding greatly to the external picturesqueness. 
These occur in rudimentary form in Canterbury, and at 
Durham the Chapel of the Nine Altars, added 1 242-1 290 to 
the eastern end, forms in reality a secondary transept. This 

feature is most per- 
fectly developed in the 
cathedral of Salisbury 
(Fig. 128), and appears 
also at Lincoln, Worces- 
ter, Wells, and a few 
other examples. The 
English cathedral plans 
are also distinguished 
by the retention or in- 
corporation of many 
conventual features, 
such as cloisters, libra- 
ries, and halls, and by 
the grouping of chap- 
ter-houses and Lady- 
chapels with the main 
edifice. Thus the Eng- 
lish cathedral plans and 
those of the great ab- 
bey churches present a 
marked contrast with 
those of France and the 
Continent generally. While Amiens, the greatest of French 
cathedrals, is 521 feet long, and internally 140 feet high, Ely 
measures 565 feet in length, and less than 75 feet in height. 
Notre Dame is 148 feet wide ; the English naves are usu- 
ally under 80 feet in total width of the three aisles. 

PARISH CHURCHES. Many of these were of exceptional 
beauty of composition and detail. They display the great- 
est variety of plan, churches with two equal-gabled naves 


tf, Henry VH.U chapel. 


side by side being not uncommon. A considerable propor- 
tion of them date from the fourteenth and fifteenth cen- 
turies, and are chiefly interesting for their square, single, 
west towers and their carved wooden ceilings (see below). 
The tower was usually built over the central western 
porch ; broad and square, with corner buttresses terminat- 
ing in pinnacles, it was usually finished without spires. 
Crenelated battlements crowned the upper story. When 
spires were added the transition from the square tower to 
the octagonal spire was effected by broaches or portions of 
a square pyramid intersecting the base of the spire, or by 
corner pinnacles and flying-buttresses. 

WOODEN CEILINGS. The English treated woodwork with 
consummate skill. They invented and developed a variety 
of forms of roof-truss 
in which the proper 
distribution of the 
strains was combined 
with a highly decora- 
tive treatment of the 
several parts by carv- 
ing, moulding, and ar- 
cading. The ceiling 
surfaces between the 
trusses were handled 
decoratively, and the 
oaken open - timber 
ceilings of many of the 
English churches and fig. 138. roof of nave, st. mary's, westonzoy- 
civic or academic halls LAND- 

(Christ Church Hall, Oxford ; Westminster Hall, London) 
are such noble and beautiful works as quite to justify the 
substitution of wooden for vaulted ceilings (Fig. 138). The 
hammer-beam truss was in its way as highly scientific, and 
aesthetically as satisfactory, as any feature of French Gothic 


stone construction. Without the use of tie-rods to keep 
the rafters from spreading, it brought the strain of the roof 
upon internal brackets low down on the wall, and produced 
a beautiful effect by the repetition of its graceful curves in 
each truss. 

CHAPELS AND HALLS. Many of these rival the cathedrals 
in beauty and dignity of design. The royal chapels at 
Windsor and Westminster have already been mentioned, as 
well as King's College Chapel at Cambridge, and Christ 
Church Hall at Oxford. To these college halls should be 
added the chapel of Merton College at Oxford, and the 
beautiful chapel of St. Stephen at Westminster, most un- 
fortunately demolished when the present Parliament House 
was erected. The Lady-chapels of Gloucester and Ely, 
though connected with the cathedrals, are really indepen- 
dent designs of late date, and remarkable for the richness 
of their decoration, their great windows, and elaborate 
ribbed vaulting. Some of the halls in mediaeval castles and 
manor-houses are also worthy of note, especially for their 
timber ceilings. 

minor monuments. The student of Gothic architecture 
should also give attention to the choir-screens, tombs, and 
chantries which embellish many of the abbeys and cathe- 
drals. The rood-screen at York is a notable example of 
the first ; the tomb of De Gray in the same cathedral, and 
tombs and chantries in Canterbury, Winchester, Westmin- 
ster Abbey, Ely, St. Alban's Abbey, and other churches are 
deservedly admired. In these the English love for orna- 
ment, for minute carving, and for the contrast of white and 
colored marble, found unrestrained expression. To these 
should be added the market-crosses of Salisbury and Win- 
chester, and Queen Eleanor's Cross at Waltham. 

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE. The mediaeval castles of Great 
Britain belong to the domain of military engineering rather 
than of the history of art, though occasionally presenting 


to view details of considerable architectural beauty. The 
growth of peace and civic order is marked by the erection 
of manor - houses, the residences of wealthy landowners. 
Some of these houses are of imposing size, and show the 
application to domestic requirements, of the late Gothic 
style which prevailed in the period to which most of them 
belong. The windows are square or Tudor-arched, with 
stone mullions and transoms of the Perpendicular style, 
and the walls terminate in merlons or crenelated parapets, 
recalling the earlier military structures. The palace of 
the bishop or archbishop, adjoining the cathedral, and 
the residences of the dean, canons, and clergy, together 
with the libraries, schools, and gates of the cathedral en- 
closure, illustrate other phases of secular Gothic work. 
Few of these structures are of striking architectural merit, 
but they possess a picturesque charm which is very attrac- 

Not many stone houses of the smaller class remain from 
the Gothic period in England. But there is hardly an old 
town that does not retain many of the half-timbered dwell- 
ings of the fifteenth or even fourteenth century, some of 
them in excellent preservation. They are for the most 
part wider and lower than the French houses of the same 
class, but are built on the same principle, and, like them, 
the woodwork is more or less richly carved. 

MONUMENTS : (A. = abbey church ; C. = cathedral ; r. = ruined ; 
trans. = transept ; each monument is given under the date of the earliest 
extant Gothic work upon it, with additions of later periods in parentheses.) 

Early English: Kirkstall A., 1152-82, first pointed arches; Canter- 
bury C, choir, 1175-84 (nave, 1378-1411 ; central tower, 1500) ; Lincoln 
C, choir, trans., 1 192-1200 (vault, 1250: nave and E. end, 1260-80); Lich- 
field C, 1200-50 (W. front, 1275 ; presbytery, 1325) ; Worcester C, choir, 
1203-18, nave partly Norman (W. end, 1375-95) ; Chichester C, 1204-44 
(spire rebuilt 17th century) ; FountainsA., 1205-46; SalisburyC, 1220-58 
(cloister, chapter-h., 1263-84; spire, 1331); Elgin C, 1224-44 ; Wells C, 
H75-i2o6(\V. front 1225, choirlater, chapter-h., 1292) ; RochesterC.,1225- 


39 (nave Norman) ; York C, S trans., 1225 ; N. trans., 1260 (nave, chap- 
ter-h., 1291-1345 ; \V. window, 1338 ; central tower, 1389-1407 ; E. win- 
dow, 1407) ; Southwell Minster, 1233-94 (nave Norman) ; Ripon C, 1233- 
94 (central tower, 1459) ; Ely C, choir, 1229-54 (nave Norman ; octagon 
and presbytery, 1323-62) ; Peterborough C, W. front, 1237 (nave Norman ; 
retro-choir, late 14th century) ; Netley A., 1239 (r.) ; Durham C, " Nine 
Altars" and E. end choir, 1235-90 (nave, choir, Norman; W. window, 
1 341 ; central tower finished, 1480) ; Glasgow C. (with remarkable Early 
English crypt), 1242-77 ; Gloucester C, nave vaulted, 1239-42 (nave 
mainly Norman ; choir, 1337-51 ; cloisters, 1375-1412 ; W. end, 1420- 
37 ; central tower, 1450-57) ; Westminster A., 1245-69; St. Mary's A., 
York, 1272-92 (r.). 

Decorated: Merton College Chapel, Oxford, 1 274-1 300 ; Hereford 
C, N. trans., chapter-h., cloisters, vaulting, 1275-92 (nave, choir, Nor- 
man) ; Exeter C, choir, trans., 1279-91 ; nave, 1331-50 (E. end re- 
modelled, 1390) ; Lichfield C, Eady-chapel. 1310 ; Ely C, Lady-chapel,' 
1321-49; Melrose A., 1327-99 (nave, 1500; r.) ; St Stephen's Chapel. 
Westminster, 1349-64 (demolished) ; Edington church, 1352-61 ; Carlisle 
C, E. end and upper parts, 1352-95 (nave in part and S. trans. Norman ; 
tower finished, 1419) ; Winchester C, W. end remodelled, 1360-66 (nave 
and aisles, 1394-1410; trans, partly Norman); York C, Lady-chapel, 
1362-72 ; churches of Patrington and Hull, late 14th century. 

Perpendicular : Holy Cross Church, Canterbury, 1380; St. Mary's, 
Warwick, 1381-91 ; Manchester C, 1422; St. Mary's, P.ury St. Ed- 
munds, 1424-33; Beauchamp Chapel, Warwick, 1439; Kind's CoUagjj 
Chapel, Cambridge, 1440 ; vaults, 1508-15 ; St. Mary's Redcliffe, Bristol, 
1442 ; Roslyn Chapel, Edinburgh, 1446-90; Gloucester C, Lady chapel, 
1457-98 : St. Mary's, Stratford-on-Avon, 1465-91 ; Norwich C, upper 
part and E. end of choir, 1472-99 (the rest mainly Norman) ; St. George's 
Chapel, Windsor, 1481-1508 ; choir vaulted, 1507-20; Path A., 1500-39; 
Chapel of Henry VII., Westminster, 1503-20. 

Academic and Secular Buildings : Winchester Castle Hall, 1222- 
35 ; Merton College Chapel, Oxford, 1274-1300 ; Library Merton College, 
1354-78 ; Norborough Hall, 1356 j Windsor Castle, upper ward, 1359-73 I 
Winchester College, 1387-93; Wardour Castle, 1392 ; Westminster Hall. 
rebuilt, 1397-99 ; St. Mary's Hall, Coventry, 1401 14 ; Warkworth Castle, 
1440 ; St. John's College, All Soul's College, Oxford, 1437 ', Eton College, 
1441-1522; Divinity Schools, Oxford, 1445-54; Magdalen College, Ox- 
ford, 1475-80, tower, 1500 ; Christ Church Hall, Oxford, 1529. 



Books Recommended : As before, Corroyer, Reber. 
Also, Adler, Mittelalterliche Backstein-Bauwerke des preus- 
sischen Staates. Essenwein (Hdbuch. d. Arch.), Die romanische 
und die gothische Baukunst; der Wohnbau. Hasak, Die ro- 
manische und die gothische Baukunst ; Kirchenbau; Einzelheiten 
des Kirchenbaues (both in Hdbuch. d. Arch.). Hase and others, 
Die mittelalterlichen Baudenkmaler Niedersachsens. Kallen- 
bach, Chronologic der deutschen mittelalterlichen Baukunst. 
Liibke, Ecclesiastical Art in Germany during the Middle Ages. 
Redtenbacher, Leitfaden turn Studium der mittelalterliche?i 
Baukunst. Street, Gothic Architecture in Spain. Uhde, Bau- 
denkmaler in Spanien. Ungewitter, Lehrbuch der gothischen 
Constructional. Villa Amil, Hispania Artistica y Monumental. 

EARLY GOTHIC WORKS. The Gothic architecture of Ger- 
many is less interesting to the general student than that of 
France and England, not only because its development was 
less systematic and more provincial, but also because it 
produced fewer works of high intrinsic merit. The intro-^ 
duction into Germany of the pointed style was tardy, and 
its progress slow. Romanesque architecture had created 
imposing types of ecclesiastical architecture, which the con- 
servative Teutons were slow to abandon. The result was 
a half-century of transition and a mingling of Romanesque 
and Gothic forms. St. Castor, at Coblentz, built as late as 
1208, is wholly Romanesque. Even when the pointed arch 
and vault had finally come into general use, the plan and 
the constructive system still remained predominantly Ro- 
manesque. The western apse and short sanctuary of the 
earlier plans were retained. There was no triforium, the 


clearstory was insignificant, and the whole aspect low 
and massive. The Germans avoided, at first, as did the 
English, the constructive audacities and difficulties of the 
French Gothic, but showed less of invention and grace 
than their English neighbors. When, however, through 
the influence of foreign models, especially of the great 
French cathedrals, and through the employment of for- 
eign architects, the Gothic styles were at last thoroughly 
domesticated, a spirit of ostentation took the place of the 
earlier conservatism. Technical cleverness, exaggerated 
ingenuity of detail, and constructive tours de force charac- 
terize most of the German Gothic work of the late four- 
teenth and of the fifteenth century. This is exemplified 
in the slender mullions of Ulm, the lofty and complicated 
spire of Strasburg, and the curious traceries of churches 
and houses in Nuremberg. 

PERIODS. The periods of German mediaeval architecture 
corresponded in sequence, though not in date, with the 
movement elsewhere. The maturing (, f the true Gothic 
styles was preceded by more than a half-century <>f transi- 
tion. Chronologically the periods may be broadly Stated 
as follow- : 

Thk Transitional, 1 170-1225. 

Thk Early Pow 1 1 1>, 1225-1275. 

Thk Middle <>k Drcoratkd, 1275-1350. 

Thk Florid, 1350-1530. 

These divisions are, however, far less clearly defined 
than in France and England. The development of forms 
was less logical and consequential, and less uniform in the 
different provinces, than in those western lands. 

CONSTRUCTION. As already remarked, a tenacious hold of 
Romanesque methods is observable in many German (iothic 
monuments. Broad trail-surfaces with small windows and 
a general massiveness and lowness of proportions were long 
preferred to the more slender and lofty forms of true 



Gothic design. Square vaulting-bays were persistently ad- 
hered to, covering two aisle-bays. The six-part system 
was only rarely resorted to, as at Schlettstadt, and in St. 
George at Limburg-on-the-Lahn (Fig. 139). The ribbed 
vault was an imported idea, and was never systematically 
developed. Under the final dominance of French models 
in the second half of the thir- 
teenth century, vaulting in ob- 
long bays became more gen- 
eral, powerfully influenced by 
buildings like Freiburg, Co- 
logne, Oppenheim, and Ratis- 
bon cathedrals. In the four- 
teenth century the growing 
taste for elaboration and rich 
detail led to the introduction 
of multiplied decorative ribs. 
These, however, did not come 
into use, as in England, through 
a logical development of con- 
structive methods, but purely as 
decorative features. The Ger- 
man multiple-ribbed vaulting is, 
therefore, less satisfying than 
the English, though often ele- 
gant. Conspicuous examples of 
its application are found in the 

cathedrals of Freiburg, Ulm, Prague, and Vienna ; in St. 
Barbara at Kuttenberg, and many other important churches. 
But with all the richness and complexity of these net-like 
vaults the Germans developed nothing like the fan-vaulting 
or chapter-house ceilings of England. 

SIDE AISLES. The most notable structural innovation of 
the Germans was the raising of the side aisles to the same 
height as the central aisle in a number of important 




churches. They thus created a distinctly new type, to 
which German writers have given the name of hall-church. 
The result of this innovation was to transform completely 
the internal perspective of the church, as well as its struct- 
ural membering. The clearstory disappeared ; the central 

aisle no longer dominated 
the interior ; the pier-arch- 
es and side-walls were 
greatly increased in height, 
and flying buttresses were 
no longer required. The 
whole design appeared in- 
ternally more spacious, but 
lost greatly in variety and 
in interest. The cathedral 
of St. Stephen at Vienna 
is the most imposing in- 
stance of this treatment, 
which first appeared in the 
church of St. Elizabeth at 
Marburg (1235-83; Figs 
140). St. Barbara at Kuttenberg, St. Martin's at Landshut 
(1404), and the cathedral of Munich are others among 
many examples of this type. 

TOWEBS AND SPIRES. The same fondness for spires which 
had been displayed in the Rhenish Romanesque churches 
produced in the Gothic period a number of strikingly beau- 
tiful church steeples, in which openwork tracery was sub- 
stituted for the solid stone pyramids of earlier examples. 
The most remarkable of these spires are those of Freiburg 
(1300), Strasburg, and Cologne cathedrals, of the church at 
Ksslingen, St. Martin's at Landshut, and the cathedral of 
Vienna. In these the transition from the simple square 
tower below to the octagonal belfry and spire is generally 
managed with skill. In the remarkable tower of the cathe- 



dral at Vienna (1433) the transition is too gradual, so that 
the spire seems to start from the ground and lacks the 
vigor and accent of a simpler square lower portion. The 
over-elaborate spire of Strasburg (1429, by Junckher of 
Cologne ; lower parts and facade, 1277-1365, by Erwin von 
Steinbach and his sons) reaches a height of 468 feet ; the 
spires of Cologne, completed in 1883 from the original 
fourteenth-century drawings, long lost but recovered by a 
happy accident, are 500 feet high. The spires of Ratisbon 
and Ulm cathedrals have also been recently completed in 
the original style. 

DETAILS. German window tracery was best where it 
most closely followed French patterns, but it tended al- 
ways towards the faults of mechanical stiffness and of tech- 
nical display in over-slenderness of shafts and mullions. 
The windows, especially in the " hall-churches," were apt 
to be too narrow for their height. In the fifteenth century 
ingenuity of geometrical combinations took the place of 
grace of line, and later the tracery was often tortured into 
a stone caricature of rustic-work of interlaced and twisted 
boughs and twigs, represented with all their bark and knots 
{branch-tracery). The execution was far superior to the de- 
sign. The carving of foliage in capitals, finials, etc., calls 
for no special mention for its originality or its departure 
from French types. 

PLANS. In these there was more variety than in any 
other part of Europe except Italy. Some churches, like 
Naumburg, retained the Romanesque system of a second 
western apse and short choir. The Cistercian churches 
generally had square east ends, while the polygonal east- 
ern apse without ambulatory is seen in St. Elizabeth at 
Marburg, the cathedrals of Ratisbon, Ulm and Vienna, and 
many other churches. The introduction of French ideas 
in the thirteenth century led to the adoption in a number of 
cases of the chevet with a single ambulatory and a series of 





-. A . /-. / \ n\ 


radiating apsidal chapels. Magdeburg cathedral (i* | 

was the first erected on this plan, which was later followed 
at Altenburg, Cologne, Freiburg, Lubeck, Prague and 
Zwettl, in St. Francis at Salzburg and some other churches. 

Side chapels to nave or choir 
appear in the cathedrals of 
LUbeck, Munich, Oppenheim, 
Prague and Zwettl. Cologne 
Cathedral, by far the largest 
and most magnificent of all, is 
completely French in plan, unit- 
ing in one design the leading 
characteristics of the most not- 
able French churches (Fig. 141). 
It has complete double aisles in 
both nave and choir, three- 
aisled transepts, radial chevet- 
chapels and twin western tow- 
ers. The ambulatory is, how- 
ever, single, and there are no 
lateral chapels. A typical Ger- 
man treatment was the east- 
ward termination of the church by polygonal chapels, one 
in the axis of each aisle, the central one projecting beyond 
its neighbors. Where there were five aisles, as at Xanten, 
the effect was particularly fine. The plan of the curious 
polygonal church of Our Lady (Liebfrauenkirche ; 1227-43) 
built on the site of the ancient circular baptistery at Treves, 
would seem to have been produced by doubling such an ar- 
rangement on either side of the transverse axis (Fig. 142). 

historical development. The so-called Golden Portal 
of Freiburg in the Erzgebirge is perhaps the first distinct- 
ively (iothic work in Germany, dating from 1190. From 
that time on, (iothic details appeared with increasing fre- 
quency, especially in the Rhine provinces, as shown in many 





transitional structures. Gelnhausen and Aschaffenburg are 
early 13th-century examples ; pointed arches and vaults 
appear in the Apostles' and St. Martin's churches at Co- 
logne ; and the great church of St. Peter and St. Paul at 
Neuweiler in Alsace has an almost purely Gothic nave of 
the same period. The churches of Bamberg, Fritzlar, and 
Naumburg, and in Westphalia those of Mtinster and Osna- 
briick, are important examples of the transition. The 
French influence, especially the Burgundian, appears as 
early as 12 12 in the cathedral of Magdeburg, imitating the 
choir of Soissons, and in the structural design of the Lieb- 
frauenkirche at Treves as already mentioned ; it reached 
complete ascendancy in Alsace at Strasburg (nave 1240- 
75), in Baden at Freiburg (nave 1270) and in Prussia at 
Cologne (1 248-1320). Stras- 
burg Cathedral is especially 
remarkable for its facade, the 
work of Ervvin von Steinbach 
and his sons (1277-1346), de- 
signed after French models, 
and its north spire, built in 
the fifteenth century. Cologne 
Cathedral, begun in 1248 by 
Gerhard of Riel in imitation 
of the newly completed choir 
of Amiens, was continued by 
Master Arnold and his son 
John, and the choir was conse- 
crated in 1322. The nave and 
W. front were built during the 

first half of the 14th century, though the towers were not 
completed till 1883. In spite of its vast size and slow 
construction, it is in style the most uniform of all great 
Gothic cathedrals, as it is the most lofty (excepting the 
choir of Beauvais) and the largest excepting Milan and 




Seville. Unfortunately its details, though pure and cor- 
rect, are singularly dry and mechanical, while its very uni- 
formity deprives it of the picturesque and varied charm 
which results from a mixture of styles recording the labors 
of successive generations. The same criticism may be 
raised against the late cathedral of Ulm (choir, 1377-1449 ; 
nave, 1477; Fig. 143). The Cologne influence is observable 
in the widely separated cathedrals of 
Utrecht in the Netherlands, Metz in the 
W., Minden and Halberstadt (begun 
1250 ; mainly built after 1327) in Saxony, 
and in the S. in the church of St. Cath- 
erine at Oppenheim. To the E. and S., 
in the cathedrals of Prague (Bohemia) by 
Matthew of Arras (1344-52) and Ratis- 
bon (or Regensburg, 1275) the French in- 
fluence predominates, at least in the de- 
tails and construction. The last-named 
is one of the most dignified and beautiful 
of German Gothic churches German in 
plan, French in execution. The French 
influence also manifests itself in the de- 
tails of many of the peculiarly German 
churches with aisles of equal height (see 
I). 240). 
More peculiarly German are the brick churches of Nor 
Germany, where stone was almost wholly lacking. In these, 
flat walls, square towers, and decoration by colored tiles 
and bricks are characteristic, as at Brandenburg (St. Gode- 
hard and St. Catherine, 1346-1400), at Prentzlau, Tiinger- 
miinde, Konigsberg, &c. Lubeck possesses notable monu- 
ments of brick architecture in the churches of St. Mary 
and St. Catherine, both much alike in plan and in the flat 
and barren simplicity of their exteriors. St. Martin's at 
Landghut in the South is also a notable brick church. 

FIG. 143. PLAN OF 


LATE GOTHIC. As in France and England, the fourteenth 
and fifteenth centuries were mainly occupied with the com- 
pletion of existing churches, many of which, up to that time, 
were still without naves. The works of this period show 
the exaggerated attenuation of detail already alluded to, 
though their richness and elegance sometimes atone for 
their mechanical character. The complicated ribbed vaults 
of this period are among its most striking features (see p. 
239). Spire-building was as general as was the erection of 
central square towers in England, during the same period. 
To this time also belong the overloaded traceries and mi- 
nute detail of the St. Sebald and St. Lorenz churches and 
of several secular buildings at Nuremberg, the facade of 
Chemnitz Cathedral, and similar works. The nave and 
tower of St. Stephen at Vienna (1359-1433), the church of 
Sta. Maria in Gestade in the same city, and the cathedral 
of Kaschau in Hungary, are Austrian masterpieces of late 
Gothic design. 

SECULAR BUILDINGS. Germany possesses a number of im- 
portant examples of secular Gothic work, chiefly municipal 
buildings (gates and town halls) and castles. The first 
completely Gothic castle or palace was not built until 1280, 
at Marienburg (Prussia), " and was completed a century 
later. It consists of two courts, the earlier of the two 
forming a closed square and containing the chapel and 
chapter-house of the Order of the German knights. The 
later and larger court is less regular, its chief feature being 
the Great Hall of the Order, in two aisles. All the vaulting 
is of the richest multiple-ribbed type. Other castles are at 
Marienwerder, Heilsberg (1350) in E. Prussia, Karlstein in 
Bohemia (1347), and the Albrechtsburg at Meissen in Sax- 
ony (1471-83). 

Among town halls, most of which date from the fourteenth 
and fifteenth centuries may be mentioned those of Ratis- 
bon (Regensburg), Munster .and Hildesheim, Halberstadt, 


Brunswick, Liibeck, and Bremen the last two of brick. 
These, and the city gates, such as the Spahlenthor at Basle 
(Switzerland) and others at Liibeck and Wismar, are gen- 
erally very picturesque edifices. Many fine guildhalls 
were also built during the last two centuries of the Gothic 
style ; and dwelling-houses of the same period, of quaint 
and effective design, with stepped or traceried gables, lofty 
roofs, openwork balconies and corner turrets, are to be 
found in many cities. Nuremberg is especially rich in these. 

THE NETHERLANDS, as might be expected from their 
position, underwent the influences of both France and 
Germany. During the thirteenth century, largely through 
the intimate monastic relations between Tournay and No- 
yon, the French influence became paramount in what is now 
Belgium, while Holland remained more strongly German in 
style. Of the two countries Belgium developed by far the 
most interesting architecture. Some of its cathedrals, no- 
tably those of Tournay, Antwerp, Brussels, Malines (Mech- 
lin), Mons and Louvain, rank high among structures of 
their class, both in scale and in artistic treatment. The 
Flemish town halls and guildhalls merit particular atten- 
tion for their size and richness, exemplifying in a worthy 
manner the wealth, prosperity, and independence of the 
weavers and merchants of Antwerp, Ypres, Ghent (Gand), 
Louvain, and other cities in the fifteenth century. 

CATHEDRALS AND CHURCHES. The earliest purely Gothic 
edifice in Belgium was the choir of Ste. Gudule (1225) at 
Brussels, followed in 1242 by the choir and transepts of 
Tournay, designed with pointed vaults, side chapels, and a 
complete chevet. The transept-ends are round, as at No- 
yon. It was surpassed in splendor by the Cathedral 
Antwerp (1352-1422), remarkable for its seven -aisled 
nave and narrow transepts. It rovers some 70,000 square 
feet, but its great size is not as effective internally as it 
should be, owing to the poverty of the details and the lacl 



of finely felt proportion in the various parts. The late 
west front (1422-15 18) displays the florid taste of the 
wealthy Flemish burgher population of that period, but is 
so rich and elegant, especially its lofty and slender north 
spire, that its over-decoration is pardonable. The cathe- 
dral of St. Rombaut 
at Marlines (choir, 
1366; nave, 1454-64) 
is a more satisfactory 
church, though small- 
er and with its west- 
ern towers incom- 
plete. The cathedral 
of Louvain belongs to 
the sameperiod(i373- 
1433). St. Wandru 
at Mons (1450-15 28) 
and St. Jacques at 
Liege (1522-58) are 
interesting parish 
churches of the first 
rank, remarkable es- 
pecially for the use of 
color in their inter- 
nal decoration, for 
their late tracery and ribbed vaulting, and for the absence 
of Renaissance details at that late period. 

TOWN HALLS: GUILDHALLS. These were really the most 
characteristic Flemish edifices, and are in most cases the 
most conspicuous monuments of their respective cities. 
The Cloth Hall of Ypres (1304) is the earliest and most 
imposing among them ; similar halls were built not much 
later at Bruges, Louvaiu, Malines and Ghent. The town 
halls were mostly of later date, the earliest being that of 
Bruges (1377). The town halls of Brussels with its impos- 



ing and graceful tower, of Louvain (1448-63 ; Fig. 144) and 
of Oudenarde (early 16th century) are conspicuous monu- 
ments of this class. 

In general, the Gothic architecture of Belgium presents 
the traits of a borrowed style, which did not undergo at the 
hands of its borrowers any radically novel or fundamental 
development. The structural design is usually lacking in 
vigor and organic significance, but the details are often 
graceful and well designed, especially on the exterior. The 
tendency was often towards over-elaboration, particularly 
in the later works. 

The Gothic architecture of Holland and of the Scandi- 
navian countries offers so little that is highly artistic or 
inspiring in character, that space cannot well be given 
in this work, even to an enumeration of its chief monu- 

SPAIN AND PORTUGAL. The beginnings of Gothic archi- 
tecture in Spain followed close on the series of campaigns 
from 1 21 7 to 1252, which began the overthrow of the Moor- 
ish dominion. With the resulting spirit of exultation and 
the wealth accruing from booty, came a rapid development 
of architecture, mainly under French influence. Gothic 
architecture was at this date, under St. Louis, producing in 
France some of its noblest works. The great cathedrals of 
Toledo and Burgos, begun between 1220 and 1230, were 
the earliest purely Gothic churches in Spain. San Vincente 
at Avila and the Old Cathedral at Salamanca, of somewhat 
earlier date, present a mixture of round- and pointed-arched 
forms, with the Romanesque elements predominant. To- 
ledo Cathedral, planned in imitation of Notre Dame and 
Bourges, but exceeding them in width, covers 75,000 square 
feet, and thus ranks among the largest of European cathe- 
drals. Internally it is well proportioned and well detailec 
recalling the early French masterworks, but its exterior 
less commendable. 



In the contemporary cathedral of Burgos the exterior is at 
least as interesting as the interior. The west front, of Ger- 
man design, suggests Cologne by its twin openwork spires 
(Fig. 145) ; while the crossing is embellished with a sump- 
tuous dome and lantern or cimborio, added as late as 1567. 
The chapels at the east end, especially that of the Condest- 
abile (1487), are or- 
nate to the point of 
overloading, a fault to 
which late Spanish 
Gothic work is pecu- 
liarly prone. Other 
thirteenth- century 
cathedrals are those 
of Leon (1260), Va- 
lencia (1262), and 
Barcelona (1298), all 
exhibiting strongly 
the French influence 
in the plan, vaulting, 
and vertical propor- 
tions. The models 
of Bourges and Paris 
with their wide naves, 
lateral chapels and 
semicircular chevets 
were followed in the cathedral of Barcelona, in a number of 
fourteenth-century churches both there and elsewhere, and 
in the sixteenth-century cathedral of Segovia. In Sta. 
Maria del Pi at Barcelona, in the collegiate church at 
Manresa, and in the imposing nave of the Cathedral of 
Oerona (1416, added to choir of 1312, the latter by a 
Southern French architect, Henri de Narbonne), the in- 
fluence of Alby in southern France (see p. 206) is dis- 
cernible. These are one-aisled churches with internal 

145. FAC/ 



buttresses separating the lateral chapels. The nave of 
Gerona is 73 feet wide, or double the average clear width 
of French or English cathedral naves. The resulting effect 
is not commensurate with the actual dimensions, and shows 
the inappropriateness of Gothic details for compositions so 
Roman in breadth and simplicity. 

SEVILLE. The largest single edifice in Spain, and the larg- 
est church built during the Middle Ages in Europe, is the 
Cathedral of Seville, begun in 1401 on the site of a Moor- 
ish mosque. It covers 124,000 square feet, measuring 415 
X 298 feet, and is a simple rectangle comprising five aisles 
with lateral chapels. The central aisle is 56 ft. wide and 
145 high ; the side aisles and chapels diminish gradually in 
height, and with the uniform piers in six rows produce an 
imposing effect, in spite of the lack of transepts or chevet. 
The somewhat similar New Cathedral of Salamanca (15 10- 
1560) shows the last struggles of the Gothic style against 
the incoming tide of the Renaissance. 

LATER MONUMENTS. These all partake of the over-decor- 
ation which characterized the fifteenth century throughout 
Europe. In Spain this decoration was even less construc- 
tive in character, and more purely fanciful and arbitrary, 
than in the northern lands ; but this very rejection of all 
constructive pretense gives it a peculiar charm and 
far to excuse its extravagance (Fig. 146). Decorative 
vaulting-ribs were made to describe geometric patterns 
of great elegance. Some of the late Gothic vaults by 
the very exuberance of imagination shown in their de- 
signs, almost disarm criticism. Instead of suppressing the 
walls as far as possible, and emphasizing all the vertical 
lines, as was done in France and England, the later Gothic 
architects of Spain delighted in broad wall-surfaces and 
multiplied horizontal lints. Upon these surfaces they lav- 
ished carving without restraint and without any organic 
relation to the structure of the building. The arcades 



cloisters and interior courts {patios) were formed with arches 
of fantastic curves resting on twisted columns ; and internal 
chapels in the cathedrals were covered with minute carving 
of exquisite workman- 
ship, but wholly irra- 
tional design. Prob- 
ably the influence of 
Moorish decorative art 
accounts in part for 
these extravagances. 
The eastern chapels in 
Burgos cathedral, the 
votive church of San 
Juan de los Reyes at 
Toledo and many por- 
tals of churches, con- 
vents and hospitals 
illustrate these ten- 

POBTUGAL is an al- 
most unknown land 
architecturally. It 
seems to have adopted 
the Gothic styles very 
late in its history. 
Two monuments, how- 
ever, are conspicuous, 
the convent church- 
es of Batalha (1390- 

K1G. 146.- 



1520) and Belem, both 
marked by an extreme 
overloading of carved ornament. The Mausoleum of King 
Manoel in the rear of the church at Batalha is, however, a 
noble creation, possibly by an English master. It is a poly- 
gonal domed edifice, some 67 feet in diameter, and well 


designed, though covered with a too profuse and somewhat 
mechanical decoration of panels, pinnacles, and carving. 

MONUMENTS: Gkrmany (C = cathedral ; A = abbey ; tr. = tran- 
septs). 13th century: Transitional churches: Bamberg C. ; Naumburg 
C; Collegiate Church, Fritzlar ; St. George, Limburg-on-Lahn ; St. Cas- 
tor, Coblentz ; Heisterbach A.; all in early years of 13th century. St. 
Gereon, Cologne, choir 1212-27 ; Liebfrauenkirche, Treves, 1227-44 ; 
St. Elizabeth, Marburg, 1235-83 ; Sts. Peter and Paul, Neuweiler, 1250; 
Cologne C, choir 1248-1322 (nave 14th century ; towers finished 1883) ; 
Strasburg C, 1250-75 (E. end Romanesque ; facade 1277-1365 ; tower 
1429-39) ; Halberstadt C, nave 1250 (choir 1327 ; completed [490) ; 
Altenburg C, choir 1255-65 (finished 1379) ; Wimpfen-im-Thal church 
1259-78 ; St. Lawrence, Nuremberg, 1260 (choir 1439-77) ; St. Cathe- 
rine, Oppenheim, 1262-1317 (choir 1439) ; Xanten, Collegiate Church, 
1263 ; Freiburg C, 1270 (W. tower 1300; choir 1354); Toul C, 1272 ; 
Meissen C, choir 1274 (nave 1312-42) ; Ratisbon C, 1275 ; St. Mary's, 
Lubeck, 1276 ; Dominican churches at Coblentz, Cebweiler ; and in Swit- 
zerland at Basle, Berne, and Zurich 14th century : Wiesenkirche, Sost, 
1313 ; Osnabrtick C, 1318 (choir 1420) ; St. Mary's, Prentzlau, 1325 ; 
Augsburg C, 1321-1431 ; Metz C, 1330 rebuilt (choir i486) ; St. Stephen's 
C, Vienna, 1340 (nave 15th century ; tower 1433) ; ZwetteC. , 1343 ; Prague 
C, 1344; church at Thann, 1351 (tower finished 16th century); Lieb- 
frauenkirche, Nuremberg, 1355-61 ; St. Sebaldus Church, Nuremberg, 
1361-77 (nave Romanesque) ; Minden C, choir 1361 ; Ulm C, 1377 
(choir 1449 ; nave vaulted 147 1 ; finished 16th century) ; Sta. Barbara, Kut- 
tenberg, 1386 (nave 1483) ; Erfurt C. ; St. Elizabeth, Kaschau ; Schlett- 
stadt C. 15th century : St. Catherine's, Brandenburg, 1401 ; Frauen- 
kirche, Esslingen, 1406 (finished 1522); Minster at Berne, 1421 ; Peter- 
Paulskirche, Gorlitz, 1423-97 ; St. Mary's, Stendal, 1447 ; Frauenkirchc, 
Munich, 1468-88 ; St. Martin's, I.andshut, 1473. 

I \k Mom mkms. Schloss Marienburg, 1341 ; Moldau-brid^c 
and tower, Prague, 1344 ; Karlsteinburg, 1348-57; Albrechtsburg, Meis- 
sen, 1471-83; Nassau House, Nuremberg, 1350; Council houses (Kath- 
hauser) at Brunswick, 1393 ; Cologne, 1407-15 ; Basle ; Breslau ; LUbeck ; 
MUnster; Prague ; Ulm ; City Gates of Basle, Cologne, Ingolstadt, Lu- 

Tin NHHSBLAMM Brussels C. (Ste. Gudule). 1226-80; Tournai 
C, choir 1242 (nave finished 1380); Notre Dame, Bruges, 1239-97; 
Notre Dame, Tongres, 1240 ; Utrecht C, 1251 ; St. Martin, Ypres, 1254; 
Notre Dame, Diuant, 1255 ; church at Dordrecht ; church at Aerscl 


1337 ; Antwerp C, 1352-1411 (W. front 1422-1518) ; St. Rombaut, Ma- 
lines, 1355-66 (nave 1456-64); St. Wandru, Mons, 1450-1528; St. 
Lawrence, Rotterdam, 1472 ; other 15th century churches St. Bavon, 
Haarlem; St. Catherine, Utrecht; St. Walpurgis, Sutphen ; St. Bavon, 
Ghent (tower 1461) ; St. Jaques, Antwerp ; St. Pierre, Louvain ; St. 
Jacques, Bruges ; churches at Arnheim, Breda, Delft ; St. Jacques, Liege, 
1522. Secular : Cloth-hall, Ypres, 1200-1304 ; cloth-hall, Bruges, 1284 ; 
town hall, Bruges, 1377 ; town hall, Brussels, 1401-55 ; town hall, Lou- 
vain, 1448^-63 ; town hall, Ghent, 1481 ; town hall, Oudenarde, 1527 ; 
Stiindehuis, Delft, 1528 ; cloth-halls at Louvain, Ghent, Malines. 

Spain. 13th century : Burgos C, 1221 (facade 1442-56 ; chapels 1487 ; 
cimborio 1567); Toledo C, 1227-90 (chapels 14th and 15th centuries); 
Tarragona C, 1235 ; Leon C, 1250 (facade 14th century) ; Valencia C. , 
1262 (N. transept 1350-1404 ; facade 1381-1418); Avila C, vault and N. 
portal 1292-1353 (finished 14th century) ; St. Esteban, Burgos; church at 
Las Huelgas. 14th century : Barcelona C, choir 1298-1329 (nave and 
transepts 1448 ; facade 16th century) ; Gerona C, 1312-46 (nave added 
1416) ; S. M. del Mar, Barcelona, 1328-83 ; S. M. del Pino, Barcelona, 
same date; Collegiate Church, Manresa, 1328; Oviedo C, 1388 (tower 
very late); Pampluna C, 1397 (mainly 15th century). 15th century : 
Seville C, 1403 (finished 16th century ; cimborio 1517-67) ; La Seo, 
Saragossa (finished 1505) ; S. Pablo, Burgos, 1415-35 ; El Parral, Segovia, 
1459; Astorga C.,.1471; San Juan de los Reyes, Toledo, 1476; Car- 
thusian church, Miraflores, 1488 ; San Juan, and La Merced, Burgos. 
16th century: Huesca C, 1515 ; Salamanca New Cathedral, 1510-60; 
Segovia C, 1522 ; S. Juan de la Puerta, Zamorra. 

Secular. Porta Serranos, Valencia, 1349 ; Casa Consistorial, Barce- 
lona, 1369-78 ; Casa de la Disputacion, same city ; Casa de las Lonjas, 
Valencia, 1482. 

Portugal. At Batalha, church and mausoleum of King Manoel, fin- 
ished 15 1 5 ; at Belem, monastery, late Gothic. 


Books Recommended ; As before, Corroyer, Reber. 
Also, Cummings, A History of Architecture in Italy. I)e 
Fleury, La Toscane an meyen age. Gruner, The Terra 
Cotta Architecture of Northern Italy. Mothes, Die Bau- 
kunst des Mittelalters in Italien. Norton, Historical Studies 
of Church Building in the Middle Ages. Osten, Bairwerke 
der Lomhardei. Street, Brick and Marble Architecture of 
Italy. Willis, Remarks on the Architecture of the Middle 
Ages, especially of Italy. 

OENEEAL CHAEACTEE. The various Romanesque styles 
which had grown up in Italy before 1200 lacked that unity 
of principle out of which alone a new and homogeneous na- 
tional style could have been evolved. Each province prac- 
tised its own style and methods of building, long after the 
Romanesque had given place to the Gothic in Western 
Europe. The Italians were better decorators than build- 
ers, and cared little for Gothic structural principles. Mo- 
saic and carving, sumptuous altars and tombs, veneering! 
and inlays of colored marble, broad flat surfaces to be 
covered with painting and ornament to secure these they 
were content to build crudely, to tie their insufficiently 
buttressed vaults with unsightly iron tie-rods, and to make 
their church facades mere screen-walls, in form wholly un- 
related to the buildings behind them. 

When, therefore, under foreign influences pointed arches, 
tracery, clustered shafts, crockets and fmials came in 
use, it was merely as an imported fashion. Even wh 
foreign architects (usually Germans) were employed, t 




composition, and in large measure the details, were still 
Italian and provincial. The church of St. Francis at Assisi 
(1228-53, by Jacobus of Meruan, a German, superseded 
later by an Italian, Campello), and the cathedral of Milan 
(begun 1389, perhaps by Henry of Gtniind), are conspicu- 
ous illustrations of this. Rome built basilicas all through 
the Middle Ages. Tuscany continued to prefer flat walls 
veneered with marble to the broken surfaces and deep but- 
tresses of France and Germany. Venice developed a 
Gothic style of facade-design wholly her own (see p. 267). 
Nowhere but in Italy could two such utterly diverse struct- 
ures as the Certosa at Pavia and the cathedral at Milan 
have been erected at the same time. 

CLIMATE AND TRADITION. Two further causes militated 
against the domestication of Gothic art in Italy. The first 
was the brilliant atmosphere, which made the vast traceried 
Windows of Gothic design, and its suppression of the wall- 
surfaces, wholly undesirable. Cool, dim interiors, thick 
walls, small windows and the exclusion of sunlight, all 
necessary to Italian comfort, were incompatible with Gothic 
ideals and methods. The second obstacle was the persist- 
ence of classic traditions of form, both in construction and 
decoration. The spaciousness and breadth of interior 
planning which characterized Roman design, and its ampli- 
tude of scale in every feature, seem never to have lost 
their hold on the Italians. The narrow lofty aisles, multi- 
plied supports and minute detail of the Gothic style were 
repugnant to the classic predilections of the Italian build- 
ers. The Roman acanthus and Corinthian capital were 
constantly imitated in their Gothic buildings, and the 
round arch continued all through the Middle Ages to be 
used in conjunction with the pointed arch (Figs. 149, 150). 

EARLY BUILDINGS. It is hard to determine how and by 
whom Gothic forms were first introduced into Italy, but it 
was most probably through the agency of the monastic or- 



ders. Cistercian churches like that at Chiaravalle near 
Milan (1208-21), and most of those erected by the mendi- 
cant orders of the Franciscans (founded 1210) and Domini- 
cans (1216), were built with ribbed vaults and pointed 
arches. The example set by these orders contributed 
greatly to the general adoption of the foreign style. S. 
Francesco at Assisi, already mentioned, was the first com- 
pletely Gothic Franciscan church, although S. Francesco at 
Bologna, begun a few years later, was finished a little ear- 
lier. The Dominican church of SS. Giovanni e Paolo and 
the great Franciscan church of Sta. Maria Gloriosa dei 
Frari, both at Venice, were built a little later. Sta. Maria 

Novella at Florence (1278), and 
Sta. Maria sopra Minerva at 
Rome (1280), both by the broth- 
ers Sis to and Ristoro, and S. An- 
astasia at Verona (1261) are the 
masterpieces of the Dominican 
builders. S. Andrea at Vercelli in 
North Italy, begun in 1 2 1 9 under 
a foreign architect, is an iso- 
lated early example of lay Gothic 
work. Though somewhat Eng- 
lish in its plan, and (unlike most 
Italian churches) provided with 
two western spires in the Eng- 
lish manner, it is in all other re- 
spects thoroughly Italian in as- 
pect. The church at Asti, begun 
in 1229, suggests German models 
by its high side walls and narrow 
CATHEDRALS. The greatest monuments of Italian Gothic 
design are the cathedrals, in which, even more than was the 
case in France, the highly developed civic pride of the 



a. Campanile. 



municipalities expressed itself. Chief among these half 
civic, half religious monuments are the cathedrals of Sienna 
(begun in 1243), Arezzo (1278), Orvieto (1290), Florence 
(the Duomo, Sta. Maria del Fiore, begun 1294 by Arnolfo 
di Cambio), Lucca (S. 
Martino, 1350), Milan 
(1389-1418), and S. 
Petronio at Bologna 
(1390). They are all 
of imposing size ; 
Milan is the largest 
of all Gothic ca- 
thedrals except Se- 
ville. S. Petronio was 
planned to be 600 
feet long, the present 
structure with its 
three broad aisles 
and flanking chap- 
els being merely the 
nave of the intend- 
ed edifice. The Du- 
omo at Florence (Fig. 
147) is 500 feet long 
and covers 82,000 
square feet, while the octagon at the crossing is 143 feet in 
diameter. The effect of these colossal dimensions is, how- 
ever, as in a number of these large Italian interiors, singu- 
larly belittled by the bareness of the walls, by the great size 
of the constituent parts of the composition, and by the lack 
of architectural subdivisions and multiplied detail to serve 
as a scale by which to gauge the scale of the ensemble. 

INTERIOR TREATMENT. It was doubtless intended to 
cover these large unbroken wall-surfaces and the vast ex- 
panse of the vaults over naves of extraordinary breadth, 




with paintings and color decoration. This would have rem- 
edied their present nakedness and lack of interest, but it 
was only in a very few instances carried out. The double 
church of S. Francesco at Assisi, decorated by Cimabue, 

Giotto, and other early Tuscan 
painters, the Arena Chapel at 
Padua, painted by Giotto, the 
Spanish Chapel of S. M. Novella, 
Florence, and the east end of S. 
Croce, Florence, are illustra- 
tions of the splendor of effect 
possible by this method of dec- 
oration. The bareness of effect 
in other, unpainted interiors was 
emphasized by the plainness of 
the vaults destitute of minor ribs. 
The transverse ribs were usually 
broad arches with flat soffits, and 
the vaulting was often sprung 
from so low a point as to leave 
no room for a triforium. Mere 
bull's-eyes often served for clear- 
story windows, as in S. Anas* 
tasia at Verona, S. Petronio at 
Bologna, and the Florentine Du- 
omo. The cathedral of S. Martino at Lucca (Fig. 149) is 
one of the most complete and elegant of Italian Gothic in- 
teriors, having a genuine triforium with traceried arches. 
Even here, however, there are round arches without mould- 
ings, flat pilasters, broad transverse ribs recalling Roman 
arches, and insignificant bull's-eyes in the clearstory. 

The failure to produce adequate results of scale in the 
interiors of the larger Italian churches, has been already al- 
luded to. It is strikingly exemplified in the Duonio 
Florence, the nave of which is 72 feet wide, with four pier- 




arches each over 55 feet in span. The immense vault, in 
square bays, starts from the level of the tops of these 
arches. The interior (Fig. 148) is singularly naked and cold, 
giving no conception of its vast dimensions. The colossal 
dome is an early work of the Renaissance (see p. 276). It 
is not known how Fr. Ta/enti, who in 1357 enlarged and 
vaulted the nave and planned the east end, proposed to 
cover the great octagon. The east end is the most effec- 
tive part of the design both internally and externally, owing 
to the relatively moderate scale of the 15 chapels which 
surround the apsidal arms of the cross. In S. Petronio at 
Bologna, begun 1390 by Master Antonio ; the scale is better 
handled. The nave, 
300 feet long, is divid- 
ed into six bays, each 
embracing two side 
chapels. It is 46 feet 
wide and 132 feet high, 
proportions which ap- 
proximate those of the 
French cathedrals, and 
produce an impression 
of size somewhat un- 
usual in Italian church- 
es. Orvieto has inter- 
nally little that sug- 
gests Gothic archi- 
tecture ; like many 
Franciscan and Dominican churches it is really a timber- 
roofed, basilica with a few pointed windows. The mixed 
Gothic and Romanesque interior of Sienna Cathedral (Fig. 
150), with its round arches and six-sided dome, unsym- 
metrically placed over the crossing, is one of the most 
impressive creations of Italian mediaeval art. Alternate 
courses of black and white marble add richness but not 



repose to the effect of this interior : the same is true of 
OrvietO, and of some other churches. The basement bap- 
tistery of S. Giovanni, under the east end of Sienna Cathe- 
dral, is much more purely Gothic in detail. 

in these, and indeed in most Italian interiors, the main 
interest centres less in the excellence of the composition 
than in the accessories of pavements, pulpits, choir-stalls, 
and sepulchral monuments. In these the decorative fancy 
and skill of the Italians found unrestrained exercise, and 
produced works of surpassing interest and merit. 

external DESI0N> The greatest possible disparity gen- 
erally exists between the sides and west fronts of the Ital- 
ian churches. With few exceptions the flanks present 
nothing like the variety of sky-line and of light and shade 
customary in northern and western lands. The side walls 
are high and flat, plain, or striped with black and white 
masonry (Sienna, Orvieto), or veneered with marble (Duomo 
at Florence) or decorated with surface-ornament of thin 
pilasters and arcades (Lucca). The clearstory is low ; the 
roof low - pitched and hardly visible from below. Color, 
rather than structural richness, is generally sought for : 
Milan Cathedral is almost the only exception, and goes to 
the other extreme, with its seemingly countless buttresses, 
pinnacles and statues. 

The facades, on the other hand, were treated as inde- 
pendent decorative compositions, and were in many cas 
remarkably beautiful works, though having little or no or- 
ganic relation to the main structure. The most celebrate 
are those of Sienna (cathedral begun 1243 ; facade 1284 
Giovanni Pisano ; Fig. 151) and Orvieto (begun 1290 by 
renzo Maitani ; facade 1310). Both of these are sumptuoi 
polychromatic compositions in marble, designed on some 
what similar lines, with three high gables fronting the thre 
aisles, with deeply recessed portals, pinnacled turrets flanl 
ing nave and aisles, and a central circular window. '11 



of Orvieto is furthermore embellished with mosaic pictures, 
and is the more brilliant in color of the two. The mediae- 
val facades of the Florentine Gothic churches were never 
completed ; but the elegance of the panelling and of the 
tracery with twisted shafts in the flanks of the cathedral, 
and the florid beauty of its side doorways (late 14th cen- 
tury) would doubt- 
less if realized with 
equal success on the 
facades, have pro- 
duced strikingly beau- 
tiful results. The 
modern facade of the 
Duomo, by the late De 
Fabris (1887) is a cor- 
rect if not highly im- 
aginative version of 
the style so applied. 
The front of Milan 
cathedral (soon to be 
replaced by a new 
facade), shows a mix- 
ture of Gothic and 
Renaissance forms. 
Ferrara Cathedral, al- 
though internally transformed in the last century, retains 
its fine 13th-century three-gabled and arcaded screen front ; 
one of the most Gothic in spirit of all Italian facades. 
The Cathedral of Genoa presents Gothic windows and deeply 
recessed portals in a facade built in black and white bands, 
like Sienna cathedral and many churches in Pistoia and Pisa. 
Externally the most important feature was frequently a 
cupola or dome over the crossing. That of Sienna has al- 
ready been mentioned ; that of Milan is a sumptuous many- 
pinnacled structure terminating in a spire 300 feet high. 




The Certosa at Pavia (Fig. 152) and the earlier Carthusian 
church of Chiaravalle have internal cupolas or domes cov- 
ered externally by many-storied structures ending in a tower 
dominating the whole edifice. These two churches, like 
many others in Lombardy, the ^Emilia and Venetia, are 
built of brick, moulded terra-cotta being effectively used for 
the cornices, string-courses, jambs and ornaments of the 


exterior. The Certosa at Pavia is contemporary with the 
cathedral of Milan, to which it offers a surprising contrast, 
both in style and material. It is wholly built of brick and 
terra-cotta, and, save for its ribbed vaulting, possessi 
hardly a single Gothic feature or detail. Its arches, mouk 
ings, and cloisters suggest both the Romanesque and tl 
Renaissance styles by their semi-classic character. 

PLAN8. The wide diversity of local styles in Italian archi 
tecture appears in the plans as strikingly as in the details 



In general one notes a love of spaciousness which expresses 
itself in a sometimes disproportionate breadth, and in the 
wide spacing of the piers. The polygonal chevet with its 
radial chapels is but rarely seen ; S. Lorenzo at Naples, Sta. 
Maria dei Servi and S. Francesco at Bologna are among the 
most important examples. More frequently the chapels 
form a range along the east side of the transepts, especially 
in the Franciscan churches, which otherwise retain many 
basilican features. A comparison of the plans of S. An- 
drea at Vercelli, the Duomo at 
Florence, the cathedrals of Si- 
enna and Milan, S. Petronio at 
Bologna and the Certosa at 
Pavia (Fig. 153), sufficiently il- 
lustrates the variety of Italian 
Gothic plan-types. 

ORNAMENT. Applied decora- 
tion plays a large part in all 
Italian Gothic designs. Inlaid 
and mosaic patterns and pan- 
elled veneering in colored mar- 
ble are essential features of 
the exterior decoration of most 
Italian churches. Florence of- 
fers a fine example of this treat- 
ment in the Duomo, and in its accompanying Campanile or 
bell-tower, designed by Giotto (1335), and completed by Gad- 
di and Talenti. This beautiful tower is an epitome of 
Italian Gothic art. Its inlays, mosaics, and veneering are 
treated with consummate elegance, and combined with in- 
crusted reliefs of great beauty. The tracery of this monu- 
ment and of the side windows of the adjoining cathedral is 
lighter and more graceful than is common in Italy. Its 
beauty consists, however, less in movement of line than in 
richness and elegance of carved and inlaid ornament. In 



the Or San Michele a combined chapel and granary in 
Florence dating from 1330 the tracery is far less light 
and open. In general, except in churches like the Cathe- 
dral of Milan, built under German influences, the tracery in 
secular monuments is more successful than in ecclesiastical 
structures. Venice developed the designing of tracery to 
greater perfection in her palaces than any other Italian 
city (see below). 

MINOR WORKS. Italian Gothic art found freer expression 
in semi-decorative works, like tombs, altars and votive chap- 
els, than in more monumental structures. The fourteenth 
century was particularly rich in canopy tombs, mostly in 
churches, though some were erected in the open air, like 
the celebrated Tombs of the Scaligers in Verona (1329-13K0). 
Many of those in churches in and near Rome, and Others 111 
south Italy, are especially rich in inlay of opus Alexandrinum 
upon their twisted columns and panelled sarcophagi. The 
family of the Cosmati acquired great fame for work of this 
kind during the thirteenth century. 

The little marble chapel of Sta. Maria della Spina, on the 
Arno, at Pisa, is an instance of the successful decorative use 
of Gothic forms in minor buildings. 

TOWERS. The Italians always preferred the square tower 
to the spire, and in most cases treated it as an independent 
campanile. Following Early Christian and Romanesque 
traditions, these square towers were usually built with plain 
Bides unbroken by buttresses, and terminated in a flat roof 
or a low and inconspicuous cone or pyramid. The Campa- 
nile at Florence already mentioned is by far the most beau- 
tiful of these designs (Fig. 154). The campaniles of Sienna, 
Lucca, and Pistoia are built in alternate white and black 
courses, like the adjoining cathedrals. Verona and Man- 
tua have towers with octagonal lanterns. In g ene r a l, these 
Gothic towers differ from the earlier Romanesque models 
only in the forms of their openings. Though dignified in 



their simplicity and size, and usually well proportioned, they 
lack the beauty and interest of the French, English, and 
German steeples and towers. 
their public halls, open log- 
gias y and domestic architec- 
ture the Italians were able 
to develop the application of 
Gothic forms with greater 
freedom than in their church- 
building, because unfettered 
by traditional methods of de- 
sign. The early and vigorous 
growth of municipal and pop- 
ular institutions led, as in the 
Netherlands, to the building 
of two classes of public halls 
the town hall proper or 
Podesta, and the council hall, 
variously called Palazzo Com- 
munal?, Pubblico, or del Con- 
siglio. The town halls, as the 
seat of authority, usually 
have a severe and fortress- 
like character ; the Palazzo 
Vecchio at Florence is the 
most important example 
(1298, by Arnolfo di Cam- 
bio ; Fig. 155). It is espe- 
cially remarkable for its tow- 
er, which, rising 308 feet in 
the air, overhangs the street nearly 6 feet, its front wall 
resting on the face of the powerfully corbelled cornice of 
the palace. The court and most of the interior were re- 
modelled in the sixteenth century. At Sienna is a somewhat 




similar structure in brick, the Palazzo Pubblico. At Pistoia 
the Podesta and the Communal Palace Stand opposite each 
other ; in both of these the courtyards still retain their orig- 
inal aspect. At Perugia, Bologna, and Viterbo are others of 
some importance ; while in Lom- 
bardy, Bergamo, Como, Cremona, 
1'iacenza and other towns possess 
smaller halls with open arcades 
below, of a more elegant and 
pleasing aspect. Mofe^uccessful 
still are the open loggias or trib- 
unes erected for the gatherings of 
public bodies. The Loggia dei 
Lanzi at Florence (1376, by Benci 
di done and Simonc di TaUnti] 
is the largest and most famouj 
of these open vaulted 
halls, of which several 
exist in Florence and 
Sienna. Gothic only 
in their minor details, 
they are Romanesque 
or semi - (lassie in 
their broad round 
arches and strong 
horizontal lines and 
( orni< i - ( 1 ijf. 1 56). 

PALACES AND H0U8ES : VENICE. The northern cities, espe- 
cially Pisa, Florence, Sienna, Hologna, and Venice, are ric 
in medieval public and private palaces and dwellings 11 
brick or marble, in which pointed windows and open 
cades are used with excellent effect. In Bologna and Sien- 
na brick is used, in conjunction with details executed in 
moulded terra-cotta, in a highly artistic and effective way. 
Viterbo, nearer Rome, also possesses many interestii 

JJL' Mi, 





houses with street arcades and open stairways or stoops 
leading to the main entrance. 

The security and prosperity of Venice in the Middle 
Ages, and the ever present influence of the sun -loving 
East, made the massive and fortress-like architecture of the 
inland cities unnecessary. Abundant openings, large win- 
dows full of tracery of great lightness and elegance, pro- 

FIG. 156. LOC 

jecting balconies and the freest use of marble veneering 
and inlay a survival of Byzantine traditions of the 12th 
century (see p. 133) give to the Venetian houses and pal- 
aces an air of gayety and elegance found nowhere else. 
While there are few Gothic churches of importance in 
Venice, the number of mediaeval houses and palaces is 
very large. Chief among these is the Doge's Palace (Fig. 
157), adjoining the church of St. Mark. The two-storied 
arcades of the west and south fronts date from 1354, and 
originally stood out from the main edifice, which was 



widened in the next century, when the present somewhat 
heavy walls, laid up in red, white and black marble in a 
species of quarry-pattern, were built over the arcades. 
These arcades are beautiful designs, combining massive 
strength and grace in a manner quite foreign to Western 

Gothic ideas. Light- 
er and more ornate 
is the Ca d'Oro, on the 
Grand Canal ; while 
the Foscari, Conta- 
rini - Fasan, Cavalli, 
and l'isani palaces, 
among many others, 
are admirable exam- 
ples of the style, [n 
most of these a tra- 
ceried loggia occu- 
pies the central part, 
flanked by walls in- 
crusted with marble 
and pierced by Gothic 
windows with carved 
mouldings, borders, 
and balconies. The 
Venetian Gothic owes its success largely to the absence 
of structural difficulties to interfere with the purely deco- 
rative development of Gothic details. 

ru.. 157. -west ramrr 0* DOGS'! IALACE, VENICE. 

MONUMENTS. 13th Century : Cistercian abbeys FOMBDOVB and 
mari, dr. 1208; S. Andrea. Vercelli. 1209; S. FfBDCCSOO, Aadaf, 1228- 
53: Church at .Wi. 1229; Sienna C, 1243-59 (cupola 1259-64; facade 
1284); S. M. Oloriosa dd Frari, Venice, 1250-80 (finished 1388); Sta. 
Chiara, Assisi. 1250; Sta. Trinita. Florence, 12:0; S. Antonio, Pads 
begun 1256; SS. Giovanni e Paolo, Venice, 1260 (?)- 1400 ; Sta. Anas- 
t.isi.i, Venma, I20J ; Naples <'., 1272 -I ',14 (facade 129'): portal 1407; 
much altered later) ; S. Lorenzo, Naples, 1275 ; Campo Santo, I'isa, 1278 


83; Arezxo C, 1278; S. M. Novella, Florence, 1278; S. Eustorgio, 
Milan, 1278; S. M. sopra Minerva, Rome, 1280; Orvieto C, 1290 (fa- 
cade 1310; roof 1330); Sta. Croce, Florence, 1294 (facade 1863); S. 
M. del Fiore, or C, Florence, 1294-1310 (enlarged 1357 ; E. end 
1366; dome 1420-64; facade 1887); S. Francesco, Bologna. 14th 
century: Genoa C, early 14th century; S. Francesco, Sienna, 1310 ; 
San Domenico, Sienna, about same date ; S. Giovanni in Fonte, Sienna, 
1317 ; S. M. della Spina, Pisa, 1323; Campanile, Florence, 1335; Or 
San Michele, Florence, 1337 ; Milan C, 1386 (cupola 16th century ; fa- 
cade 1 6th -1 9th century ; new facade building 1895) ; S. Petronio, Bo- 
logna, 1390 ; Certosa, Pavia, 1396 (choir, transepts, cupola, cloisters, 15th 
and 16th centuries) ; Como C, 1396 (choir and transepts 15 13) ; Lucca 
C. (S. Martino), Romanesque building remodelled late in 14th century ; 
Verona C; S. Fermo, Maggiore ; S. Francesco, Pisa; S. Lorenzo, Vi- 
cenza. 15th century : Perugia C. ; S. M. delle Grazie, Milan, 1470 
(cupola and exterior E. part later). 

Sit tlar Buildings : Pal. Pubblico, Cremona, 1245 ; Pal. Podesta 
(Bargello), Florence, 1255 (enlarged 1333-45) ; Pal. Pubblico, Sienna, 
1289-1305 (many later alterations) ; Pal. Giureconsulti, Cremona, 1292 ; 
Broletto, Monza, 1293; Loggia dei Mercanti, Bologna, 1294; Pal. 
Vecchio, Florence, 1298; Broletto, Como; Pal. Ducale (Doge's Palace), 
Venice, 1310-40 (great windows 1404 ; extended 1423-38 ; courtyard 15th 
and 16th centuries) ; Loggia dei Lanzi, Florence, 1335 ; Loggia del Bi- 
gallo, 1337 ; Broletto, Bergamo, 14th century ; Loggia dei Nobili, Sienna, 
1407 ; Pal. Pubblico, Udine, 1457 ; Loggia dei Mercanti, Ancona ; Pal. del 
Governo, Bologna ; Pal. Pepoli, Bologna ; Palaces Conte Bardi, Davanzati, 
Capponi, all at Florence ; at Sienna, Pal. Tolomei, 1205 ; Pal. Saracini, 
Pal. Buonsignori ; at Venice, Pal. Contarini-Fasan, Cavalli, Foscari, Pisani, 
and many others ; others in Padua and Vicenza. 



Rooks Recommended : Anderson, Architecture of the Re* 

naissance in Italy. Rurckhardt. The Civilization of the Renais- 
sance ; Geschichte der Renaissance in Italien ; Der Cicerone. 
Cellesi, K ei Fibhrieke iii Firenze. Cicognara, Le Fabbriche 
/>/// eospicue iti Venezia. Durm, Die Baukunst der Renaissance 
in Italien (in Hdbuch. d. Arch.). Fergusson, History of Mod- 
ern Architecture, (leymiiller, La Renaissance en Toscane. 
Montigny et Famin, Architecture Toscane. Moore, Character 
of Renaissance Architecture. Miintz, La Renaissance en Italie 
,t en France a Vepoque de Charles VIII. Palustre, L' Architec- 
ture de la Renaissance. Pater, Studies in the Renaissance. 
Symonds, 'The Renaissance of the Fine Arts in Italy. Tosi and 
Becchio, Altars, Tabernacles, and Tombs. 

THE CLASSIC REVIVAL The abandonment of Gothic ar- 
chitecture in Italy and the substitution in its place of tonus 
derived from classic models were occasioned by no sudden 
or merely local revolution. /The Renaissance was the re- 
sult of a profound and universal intellectual movement, 
whose roots may be traced far back into the Middle Ages, 
and which manifested itself first in Italy simply because 
there the conditions were most propitious.. It spread 
through Europe just as rapidly as similar conditions ap- 
pearing in other countries prepared the way for it. The es- 
sence of this far-reaching movement was the protest of the 
individual reason against the trammels of external and ar- 
bitrary authority a protest which found its earliest organ- 
ized expression in the Humanists. In its assertion of the 
intellectual and moral rights of the individual, the Renais- 
sance laid the foundations of modern civilization. The 
same spirit, in rejecting the authority and teachings of the 


Church in matters of purely secular knowledge, led to the 
questionings of the precursors of modern science and 
the discoveries of the early navigators. But in nothing 
did the reaction against mediaeval scholasticism and asceti- 
cism display itself more strikingly than in the joyful en- 
thusiasm which marked the pursuit of classic studies. The 
long - neglected treasures of classic literature were re- 
opened, almost rediscovered, in the fourteenth century by 
the immortal trio Dante, Petrarch, and Boccaccio. The 
joy of living, the hitherto forbidden delight in beauty and 
pleasure for their own sakes, the exultant awakening to 
the sense of personal freedom, which came with the burst- 
ing of mediaeval fetters, found in classic art and literature 
their most sympathetic expression. It was in Italy, where 
feudalism had never fully established itself, and where the 
municipalities and guilds had developed, as nowhere else, 
the sense of civic and personal freedom, that these symp- 
toms first manifested themselves. In Italy, and above all 
in the Tuscan cities, they appeared throughout the four- 
teenth centuryin the growing enthusiasm for all that re- 
called the antique culture, and in the rapid advance of lux- 
ury and refinement in both public and private life. 

THE RENAISSANCE OF THE ARTS. Classic Roman architect- 
ure had never lost its influence on the Italian taste. Gothic 
art, already declining in the West, had never been in Italy 
more than a borrowed garb, clothing architectural concep- 
tions classic rather than Gothic in spirit. The antique mon- 
uments which abounded on every hand were ever present 
models for the artist, and to the Florentines of the early 
fifteenth century the civilization which had created them 
represented the highest ideal of human culture. They 
longed to revive in their own time the glories of ancient 
Rome, and appropriated with uncritical and undiscriminat- 
ing enthusiasm the good ami the bad, the early and the late 
forms of Roman art. Naiveiy unconscious of the disparity 


between their own architectural conceptions and those they 
fancied they imitated, they were, unknown to themselves, 
creating a new style, in which the details of Roman art 
were fitted in novel combinations to new requirements. 
In proportion as the Church lost its hold on the culture of 
the age, this new architecture entered increasingly into the 
service of private luxury and public display. It created, it 
is true, striking types of church design, and made of the 
dome one of the most imposing of external features ; but 
its most characteristic products were palaces, villas, coun- 
cil halls, and monuments to the great and the powerful. 
The personal element in design asserted itself as never be- 
fore in the growth of schools and the development of 
styles. Thenceforward the history of Italian architecture 
becomes the history of the achievements of individual ar- 

EAKLY BEGINNINGS. Already in the 13th century the pul- 
pits of Niccolo Pisano at Sienna and l'isa had revealed 
that master's direct recourse to antique monuments for in- 
spiration and suggestion. In the frescoes of Giotto and 
his followers, and in the architectural details of many nom- 
inally Gothic buildings, classic forms had appeared with 
increasing frequency during the fourteenth century. This 
was especially true in Florence, which was then the artistic 
capital of Italy. Never, perhaps, since the days of 1'eri- 
< lea, had there been another community so permeated with 
the love of beauty in art, and so endowed with the capac- 
ity to realize it. Nowhere else in Europe at that time ui> 
there such strenuous life, such intense feeling, or such ft 
course for individual genius as in Florence. Her artist 
with unexampled versatility, addressed themselves wit 
equal success to goldsmiths' work, sculpture, architecture 
and engineering often to painting and poetry as well ; and 
they were quick to catch in their art the spirit of the clas- 
sic revival The new movement achieved its first archi- 


tectural triumph in the dome of the cathedral of Florence 
(1420-64) ; and it was Florentine or at least Tuscan ar- 
tists who planted in other centres the seeds of the new 
art that were to spring up in the local and provincial 
schools of Sienna, Milan, Pavia, Bologna, and Venice, of 
Brescia, Lucca, Perugia, and Rimini, and many other North 
Italian cities. The movement asserted itself late in Rome 
and Naples, as an importation from Northern Italy, but it 
bore abundant fruit in these cities in its later stages. 

periods. The classic styles which grew up out of the 
Renaissance may be divided for convenience into four pe- 

The Early Renaissance or Formative Period, 1420- 
90 ; characterized by the grace and freedom of the deco- 
rative detail, suggested by Roman prototypes and applied 
to compositions of great variety and originality. 

The High Renaissance or Formally Classic Period, 
1490-1550. During this period classic details were copied 
with increasing fidelity, the orders especially appearing in al- 
most all compositions ; decoration meanwhile losing some- 
what in grace and freedom. 

The Decline (called also the Baroque), 1550-1600 ; a 
period of classic formality characterized by the use of co- 
lossal orders, engaged columns and rather scanty decora- 

The Rococo, 1600-1700 ; a period marked by poverty 
of invention in the composition and a predominance of 
vulgar sham and display in the decoration. Broken pedi- 
ments, huge scrolls, florid stucco-work and a general dis- 
regard of architectural propriety were universal. 

During the eighteenth century there was a reaction from 
these extravagances, which showed itself in a return to the 
servile copyingof classic models, sometimes not without a cer- 
tain dignity of composition and restraint in the decoration. 

By many writers the name Renaissance is confined to the 


first period. This is correct' from the etymological point 
of view ; but it is impossible to dissociate the first period 
historically from those which followed it, down to the final 
exhaustion of the artistic movement to which it gave birth, 
in the heavy extravagances of the Rococo. 

Another division is made by the Italians, who give the 
name of the" Quattrocento to the period which closed with 
the end of the fifteenth century, Cinquecento to the six- 
teenth cenury, and Seicento to the seventeenth century or 
Rococo. It has, however, become common to confine the 
use of the term Cinquecento to the first half of the six- 
teenth century. 

CONSTRUCTION AND DETAIL. The architects of the Re- 
naissance occupied themselves more with form than with 
construction, and rarely set themselves constructive prob- 
lems of great difficulty. Although the new architecture 
began with the colossal dome of the cathedral of Florence, 
and culminated in the stupendous church of St. IVtcr at 
Rome, it was pre-eminently an architecture of palaces and 
villas, of facades and of decorative display. Constructive 
difficulties were reduced to their lowest terms, and the 
constructive framework was concealed, not emphasized, by 
the decorative apparel of the design. Among the master- 
pieces of the early Renaissance are many buildings of small 
dimensions, such as gates, < hapels, tombs and fountains. 
In these the individual fancy had full sway, and produced 
surprising results by the beauty of enriched mouldings, of 
carved friezes with infant genii, wreaths of fruit, griffins, 
masks and scrolls ; by pilasters covered with arabesques 
as delicate in modelling as if wrought in silver ; by inlays 
of marble, panels of glazed terra-cotta, marvellously carved 
doors, fine stucco-work in relief, capitals and cornices of 
wonderful richness and variety. The Roman orders ap- 
peared only in free imitations, with panelled and carved 
pilasters for the most part instead of columns, and cap- 



itals of fanciful design, recalling remotely the Corinthian 
by their volutes and leaves (Fig. 158). Instead of the low- 
pitched classic pediments, there appears frequently an 
arched cornice enclosing a sculptured lunette. Doors and 
windows were en- 
closed in richly carved 
frames, sometimes 
arched and sometimes 
square. Facades were 
flat and unbroken, de- 
pending mainly for 
effect upon the dis- 
tribution and adorn- 
ment of the openings, 
and the design of 
doorways, courtyards 
and cornices. Inter- 
nally vaults and flat 
ceilings of wood and 
plaster were about 
equally common, the 
barrel vault and dome 
occurring far more frequently than the groined vault. 
Many of the ceilings of this period are of remarkable rich- 
ness and beauty. 

the year 141 7 a public competition was held for complet- 
ing the cathedral of Florence by a dome over the immense 
octagon, 143 feet in diameter. Filippo Brunelleschi, sculptor 
and architect (1377-1446), who with Donatello had jour- 
neyed to Rome to study there the masterworks of ancient 
art, after demonstrating the inadequacy of all the solutions 
proposed by the competitors, was finally permitted to un- 
dertake the gigantic task according to his own plans. 
These provided for an octagonal dome in two shells, con- 









1 \ 




nected by eight major and sixteen minor ribs, and crowned 
by a lantern at the top (Fig. 159). This wholly original 
conception, by which for the first time (outside of Mos- 
lem art) the dome was made an 
external feature fitly terminating 
in the light forms and upward 
movement of a lantern, was carried 
out between the years 1420 and 
1464. Though in no wise an imi- 
tation of Roman forms, it was 
classic in its spirit, in its vastness 
and its simplicity of line, and was 
made possible solely by Brunel- 
leschi's studies of Roman design 
and construction (Kig. 160). 

OTHER churches. From Bru- 
nelleschi's designs were also erect- 
ed the Pazzi Chapel in Sta. Croce, 
a charming design of a Creek cross 
covered with a dome at the inter- 
section, and preceded by a vestibule with a richly decorated 
vault ; ami the two great churches of S. Lorenzo (1425) and 
S. Spirito (1433-1476, Fig. 161). Both reproduced in a 
measure the plan of the I'isa Cathedral, having a three- 
aisled nave and transepts, with a low dome over the cross- 
ing. The side aisles were covered with domical vaults and 
the central aisles with flat wooden or plaster (filings. All the 
details of columns, arches and mouldings were imitated from 
Roman models, and yet the result was something entirely 
new. Consciously or unconsciously, Brunelleschi was re- 
viving Byzantine rather than Roman conceptions in the 
planning and structural design of these domical churches, 
but the ^arb in which he clothed them was Roman, at least 
in detail. The Old Sacristy of S. Lorenzo was another 
domical design of great beauty. 

ui 1.1 
duomo, no 



From this time on the new style was in general use for 
church designs. L. B. Alberti (1404-73), who had in Rome 
mastered classic details more thoroughly than Brunel- 
leschi, remodelled the church of S. Francesco at Rimini 
with Roman pilasters and arches, and with engaged orders 
in the facade, which, however, was never completed. His 
great work was the church of S. Andrea at Mantua, a Latin 
cross in^)lan, with a dome at the intersection (the present 
high dome dating however, only from the 18th century) 
and a facade to which the conception of a Roman tri- 
umphal arch was skilfully 
adapted*. His facade of 
incrusted marbles for the 
church of S. M. Novella 
at Florence was a less 
successful work, though 
its flaring consoles over 
the side aisles established 
an unfortunate precedent 
frequently imitated in 
later churches. 

A great activity in 
church-building marked 
the period between 1475 
and 1490. The plans 
of the churches erected 
about this time through- 
out north Italy display an 
interesting variety of ar- 
rangements, in nearly all 
of which the dome is combined with the three-aisled cruci- 
form plan, either as a central feature at the crossing or as 
a domical vault over each bay. Bologna and Ferrara possess 
a number of churches of this kind. Occasionally the basilican 
arrangement was followed, with columnar arcades separat- 




ing the aisles. More often, however, the pier-arches were 
of the Roman type, with engaged columns or pilasters be- 
tween them. The interiors, presumably intended to re- 
ceive painted decorations, were in most cases somewhat 

bare of ornament, 
pleasing rather by 
happy proportions and 
effective vaulting or 
rich flat ceilings, pan- 
elled, painted and gild- 
ed, than by elaborate 
architectural detail. 
A similar scantiness 
of ornament is to be 
remarked in the ex- 
teriors, excepting the 
facades, which were 
sometimes highly or- 
nate ; the doorways, 
with columns, pedi- 
ments, sculpture and 
carving, receiving es- 
pecial attention. High 
external domes did 
not come into general 
use until the next period. In Milan, Pavia, and some other 
Lombard cities, the internal cupola over the crossing was, 
however, i overed externally by a lofty structure in dimin- 
ishing stages, like that <>f the Certosa at Pavia (Fig. 152), or 
that erected by Bramante for the church of S. M. delle 
Grazie at Milan. At Prato, in the church of the Madonna 
delle Carceri (1495-1516), by GiuUano da S. Gallo, the type 
of the I'az/.i chapel reappears in ;i larger scale ; the' plai 

is cruciform, with equal or nearly equal arms covert 
by barrel vaults, at whose intersection rises a dome 




moderate height on pendentives. This charming edifice, 
with its unfinished exterior of white marble, its simple and 
dignified lines, and internal embellishments in della-Robbia 
ware, is one of the masterpieces of the period. 

In the designing of chapels and oratories the architects 
of the early Renaissance attained conspicuous success, 
these edifices presenting fewer structural limitations and 
being more purely decorative in character than the larger 
churches. Such facades as that of S. Bernardino at Peru- 
gia and of the Frati di S. Spirito at Bologna are among 
the most delightful products of the decorative fancy of the 
15th century. 

FLORENTINE PALACES. While the architects of this period 
failed to develop any new and thoroughly satisfactory ec- 
clesiastical type, they 
attained conspicuous 
success in palace- 
architecture. The 
Riccardi palace in 
Florence (1430) marks 
the first step of the 
Renaissance in this 
direction. It was built 
for the great Cosimo 
di Medici by Miche- 
lozzi (I397-M73), a 
contemporary of Bru- 
nelleschi and Alberti, 
and a man of great 
talent. Its imposing 
rectangular facade, 
with widely spaced 
mullioned windows in 
two stories over a massive basement, is crowned with a 
classic cornice of unusual and perhaps excessive size. In 





19 II II 

spite of the bold and fortress-like character of the rusti- 
cated masonry of these facades, and the mediaeval look they 
seem to present to modern eyes, they marked a revolution 
in style and established a type frequently imitated in later 
years. The courtyard, in contrast with this stern exterior, 
appears light and cheerful (Fig. 162). Its wall is carried on 
round arches borne by columns with Corinthianesque cap- 
itals, and the arcade is enriched with sculptured medal- 
lions. The Pitti Palace, by Brunelleschi (1435), embodies 

the same ideas on a 
more colossal scale, 
but lacks the grace of 
an adequate cornice. 
A lighter and more 
ornate style appeared 
in 1460 in the P. Ru- 
cellai, by Alberti, in 
which for the first 
time classical pilas- 
ters in superposed 
stages were applied 
to a street facade. 
To avoid the dilemma 
of either insufficiently crowning the edifice or making the 
cornice too heavy for the upper range of pilasters, Alberti 
made use of bra< kets, occupying the width of the upper 
frieze, and converting the whole upper entablature into a 
cornice. Hut this compromise was not quite successful, and 
it remained for later architects in Venice, Verona, and Rome 
to work OUt more satisfactory methods of applying the 
orders to many-storied palace fagades. In the great P. 
Strozzi (Fig. 163), erected in 1490 by Benedetto ,/a Majatld 
and Croncua, the architects reverted to the earlier type of 
Riccardi, treating it with greater refinement and pro- 
ducing one of the noblest palaces of Italy. 



COURTYARDS ; ARCADES. These palaces were all built 
around interior courts, whose walls rested on columnar ar- 
cades, as in the P. Riccardi (Fig. 162). The origin of these 
arcades may be found in the arcaded cloisters of mediaeval 
monastic churches, which often suggest classic models, as 
in those of St. Paul-beyond-the-Walls and St. John Lateran 
at Rome. Brunelleschi not only introduced columnar ar- 
cades into a number of cloisters and palace courts, but also 
used them effectively as exterior features in the Loggia S. 
Paolo and the Foundling Hospital (Ospedale degli Inno- 
centi) at Florence. The chief drawback in these light ar- 
cades was their inability to withstand the thrust of the 
vaulting over the space behind them, and the consequent 
recourse to iron tie-rods where vaulting was used. The 
Italians, however, seemed to care little about this disfigure- 

MINOR WORKS. The details of the new style were devel- 
oped quite as rapidly in purely decorative work's as in 
monumental buildings. Altars, mural monuments, taber- 
nacles, pulpits and ciboria afforded scope for the genius of 
the most distinguished artists. Among those who were 
specially celebrated in works of this kind should be named 
Lucca della Robbia (1400-82) and his successors, Mino da 
Fiesole (1431-84) and Benedetto da Majano (1442-97). Pos- 
sessed of a wonderful fertility of invention, they and their 
pupils multiplied their works in extraordinary number and 
variety, not only throughout north Italy, but also in Rome 
and Naples. Among the most famous examples of this 
branch of design may be mentioned a pulpit in Sta. Croce 
by B. da Majano ; a terra-cotta fountain in the sacristy of 
S. M. Novella, by the della Robbias; the Marsupini tomb 
in Sta. Croce, by Desiderio da Settignano (all in Florence) ; 
the della Rovere tomb in S. M. del Popolo, Rome, by Mino 
da Fiesole, and in the Cathedral at Lucca the Noceto 
tomb and the Tempietto, by Matteo Civitali. It was in 



works of this character that the Renaissance oftenest made 
its first appearance in a new; centre, as was the case in 

Sienna, Pisa, Lucca, 
Naples, etc. 

tween 1450 and 1490 
the Renaissance pre- 
sented in Sienna, in a 
number of important 
palaces, a sharp con- 
trast to the prevalent 
Gothic style of that 
city. The P. Picco- 
lomini a somewhat 
crude imitation of the 
P. Riccardi in Flor- 
ence dates from 
1463 ; the P. del Go- 
verno was built 1469, 
and the Spannoccl 
Palace in 1470. In 
1463 Ant. Federighi 
built there the Log- 
gia del Papa. About 
the same time Bet 
north H Lorenzo wsa 
building for Pope Pius 
11. (.l'.neas Sylvius 
Piccolomini) an er 

... *. -, , M mo ,., ..,K,. ucol tire, y new cit y> 

enza, with a catht 
dral, archbishop's palace, town hall and Papal residence 
(the P. Piccolomini), which are interesting if not strikingly 
original works. Pisa possesses tew early Renaissan< I 
structures, owing to the utter prostration of her fortune 


in the 15th century, and the dominance of Pisan Gothic tra- 
ditions. In Lucca, besides a wealth of minor monuments 
(largely the work of Matteo Civitali, 1435-1501) in various 
churches, a number of palaces date from this period, the 
most important being the P. Pretorio and P. Bernardmi. 
To Milan the Renaissance was carried by the Florentine 
masters Michelozzi and Filarete, to whom are respectively due 
the Portinari Chapel in S. Eustorgio (1462) and the earlier 
part of the great Ospedale Maggiore (1457). In the latter, 
an edifice of brick with terra-cotta enrichments, the windows 
were Gothic in outline an unusual mixture of styles, even 
in Italy. The munificence of the Sforzas, the hereditary 
tyrants of the province, embellished the semi-Gothic Certosa 
of Pavia with a new marble facade, begun 1476 or 1491, 
which in its fanciful and exuberant decoration, and the small 
scale of its parts, belongs properly to the early Renaissance. 
Exquisitely beautiful in detail, it resembles rather a magni- 
fied altar-piece than a work of architecture, properly speak- 
ing. Bologna and Ferrara developed somewhat late in the 
century a strong local school of architecture, remarkable 
especially for the beauty of its courtyards, its graceful street 
arcades, and its artistic treatment of brick and terra-cotta 
(P. Bevilacqua, P. Fava,at Bologna ; P. Scrofa. P. Roverella, at 
Ferrara). About the same time palaces with interior ar- 
cades and details in the new style were erected in Verona, 
Vicenza, Mantua, and other cities. 

VENICE. In this city of merchant princes and a wealthy 
bourgeoisie, the architecture of the Renaissance took on a 
new aspect of splendor and display. It was late in appear- 
ing, the Gothic style with its tinge of Byzantine decorative 
traditions having here developed into a style well suited to 
the needs of a rich and relatively tranquil community. These 
traditions the architects of the new style appropriated in a 
measure, as in the marble incrustations of the exquisite 
little church of S. M. dei Miracoli (1480-89), and the facade 


of the Scuola di S. Marco (1485-1533), both by Pietro Lorn- 
bardo. Nowhere else, unless on the contemporary facade 
of the Certosa at Pavia, were marble inlays and delicate 
carving, combined with a framework of thin pilasters, finely 
profiled entablatures and arched pediments, so lavishly be- 
stowed upon the street fronts of churches and palaces. 
The family of the Lombardi (Martino, his sons Moro and 
Pietro, and grandsons Antonio and Tullio), with Ant. Bregm 
and Bart. Buo/i, were the leaders in the architectural Re- 
naissance of this period, and to them Venice owes her 
choicest masterpieces in the new style. Its first appear- 
ance is noted in the later portions of the church of S. Zac- 
caria (1456-1515), partly Gothic internally, with a facade 
whose semicircular pediment and small decorative arcades 
show a somewhat timid but interesting application of clas- 
sic details. In this church, and still more so in S. (iiobbe 
(1451-93) and the Miracoli above mentioned, the decora- 
tive element predominates throughout. It is hard to im- 
agine details more graceful in design, more effective in the 
suing of their movement, or more delicate in exe< tit inn 
than the mouldings, reliefs, wreaths, scrolls, and capital 
one encounters in these buildings. Vet in structural inter 
est, in scale and breadth of planning, these early Renail 
sauce Venetian buildings hold a relatively inferior rank. 

palaces. The great Court of the Doge's Palace, begut 
1483 by Ant. Rizzio, belongs only in part to the first peril 
It shows, however, the lack of constructive principle am 
of largeness of composition just mentioned, but its decor 
tive effect and picturesque variety elicit almost univer^ 
admiration. Like the neighboring facade of St. Mark's, 
violates nearly every principle of correct composition, anc 
yet in a measure atones for this capital defect by its charm 
of detail. Far more satisfactory from the purely architect- 
ural point of view is the facade of the P. Vendramini (Ver 
dramin-Calergi), by Pietro Lombardo (1481). The simple, 


stately lines of its composition, the dignity of its broad 
arched and mullioned windows, separated by engaged col- 
umns the earliest example in Venice of this feature, and 
one of the earliest in Italy its well-proportioned basement 
and upper stories, crowned by an adequate but somewhat 
heavy entablature, make this one of the finest palaces in 


Italy (Fig. 165). It established a type of large-windowed, 
vigorously modelled facades which later architects devel- 
oped, but hardly surpassed. In the smaller contemporary, 
P. Dario, another type appears, better suited for small 
buildings, depending for effect mainly upon well-ordered 
openings and incrusted panelling of colored marble. 

ROME. Internal disorders and the long exile of the popes 
had by the end of the fourteenth century reduced Rome to 
utter insignificance. Not until the second half of the fif- 
teenth century did returning prosperity and wealth afford 


the Renaissance its opportunity in the Eternal City. Pope 
Nicholas V. had, indeed, begun the rebuilding of St. l'eter's 
from designs by B. Rossellini, in 1450, but the project lapsed 
shortly after with the death of the pope. The earliest Re- 
naissance building in Rome was the P. di Venezia, begun in 
1455, together with the adjoining porch of S. Marco. In 
this palace and the adjoining unfinished Palazzetto we find 
the influence of the old Roman monuments clearly mani- 
fested in the court arcades, built like those of the Colosseum, 
with superposed stages of massive piers and engaged col- 
umns carrying entablatures. The proportions are awk- 
ward, the details coarse ; but the spirit of Roman classic- 
ism is here seen in the germ. The exterior of this palace 
is, however, still Gothic in spirit. The architects are un- 
known ; Giuliano da Majano (1452-90), Giacomo di Pietra- 
santii, and Meo del Capri no (1430-1501) are known to have 
worked upon it, but it is not certain in what capacity. 

The new style, reaching, and in time overcoming, the con- 
st rvatism of the Church, overthrew the old basilican tradi- 
tions. In S. Agostino (1 479-83), by Putrasonta, and S. M. del 
Popolo, by Pintelli (?), piers with pilasters or half-columns 
and massive arches separate the aisles, and the crossing is 
crowned with a dome. To the same period belong the 
Sistine chapel and parts of the Vat ican palace, but the in- 
terest of these lies rather in their later decorations than in 
their somewhat scanty architectural merit. 

The architectural renewal of Rome, thus begun, reached 
its culmination in the following period. 

OTHER MONUMENTS. The complete enumeration of even 
the most important Karly Renaissance monuments of Italy 
is impossible within our limits. Two or three only can 
here be singled out as suggesting types. Among town 
halls of this period the first place belongs to the P. del Con- 

siglio at Verona, by /*'/./ Giocond* (1435-1515)- I" llHS 
beautiful edifice the facade consists of a light and graceful 


arcade supporting a wall pierced with four windows, and 
covered with elaborate frescoed arabesques (recently re- 
stored). Its unfortunate division by pilasters into four 
bays, with a pier in the centre, is a blemish avoided in the 
contemporary P. del Consiglio at Padua. The Ducal Palace 
at Urbino, by Luciano da Laurano (1468), is noteworthy for 
its fine arcaded court, and was highly famed in its day. At 
Brescia S. M. dei Miracoli is a remarkable example of a cru- 
ciform domical church dating from the close of this period, 
and is especially celebrated for the exuberant decoration of 
its porch and its elaborate detail. Few campaniles were 
built in this period ; the best of them are at Venice. Naples 
possesses several interesting Early Renaissance monuments, 
chief among which are the Porta Capuana (1484), by Giul. 
da Majano, the triumphal Arch of Alphonso of Arragon, by 
Pietro di Martino, and the P. Gravina, by Gab. d'Agnolo. 
Naples is also very rich in minor works of the early Re- 
naissance, in which it ranks with Florence, Venice, and 




Books Recommended : As before, Burckhardt, Cico- 
gnara, Fergusson, Palustre. Also, Gauthier, Les plus beaux 
edifices de Genes, (ieymiiller, Les projets primitifs pour la 
basilique de St. Pierre de Rome. Gurlitt, Geschichte des Ba- 
rockstiles in Italic n. Letarouilly, Edifices de Rome Mode me ; 
Le Vatican. Palladio, The Works of A. Palladio. 

itable that the study and imitation of Roman architecture 
should lead to an increasingly literal rendering of classic 
details and a closer copying of antique compositions. Tow- 
ard the close of the fifteenth century the symptoms began 
to multiply of the approaching reign of formal classicism. 
Correctness in the reproduction of old Roman forms came 
in time to be esteemed as one of the chief of architectural 
virtues, and in the following period the orders became the 
principal resource of the architect. During the so-called 
Cinquecento, that is, from the close of the fifteenth cen- 
tury to nearly or quite 1550, architecture still retained 
much of the freedom and refinement of the Quattrocento. 
There was meanwhile a notable advance in dignity and 
amplitude of design, especially in the internal distribution 
of buildings. Externally the orders were freely used as 
subordinate features in the decoration of doors and win* 
'lows, and in court arcades of the Roman type. The I 


tern-crowned dome upon a high chum was developed into 
one of the noblest of architectural forms. Great attention 
was bestowed upon all subordinate features ; doors and 
windows were treated with frames and pediments of ex- 
treme elegance and refinement ; all the cornices and 
mouldings were proportioned and profiled with the utmost 
care, and the balustrade was elaborated into a feature at 
once useful and highly ornate. Interior decoration was 
even more splendid than before, if somewhat less delicate 
and subtle ; relief enrichments in stucco were used with 
admirable effect, and the greatest artists exercised their 
talents in the painting of vaults and ceilings, as in P. del 
T6 at Mantua, by Giulio Romano (1492-1546), and the Sis- 
tine Chapel at Rome, by Michael Angelo. This period is 
distinguished by an exceptional number of great architects 
and buildings. It was ushered in by Bramante Lazzari, of 
Urbino (1444-1514), and closed during the career of Michael 
Angelo Buonarotti (1475-1564) ; two names worthy to rank 
with that of Brunelleschi. Inferior only to these in archi- 
tectural genius were Raphael (1483-15 20), Baldassare Pe- 
ruzzi (1481-1536), Antonio da San Gallo the Younger (1485- 
1546), and G. Barozzi da Vignola (1507-1572), in Rome ; 
Giacopo Tatti Sansovino (1479-15 70), in Venice, and others 
almost equally illustrious. This period witnessed the erec- 
tion of an extraordinary series of palaces, villas, and 
churches, the beginning and much of the construction of 
St. Peter's at Rome, and a complete transformation in the 
aspect of that city. 

BRAMANTE'S WORKS. While precise time limits cannot be 
set to architectural styles, it is not irrational to date this 
period from the maturing of Bramante's genius. While his 
earlier works in Milan belong to the Quattrocento (S. M. 
delle Grazie, the sacristy of San Satiro, the extension of the 
Great Hospital), his later designs show the classic tendency 
very clearly. .The charming Tempietto in the court of S. 
l 9 



Pietro in Montorio at Rome, a circular temple-like chapel 
(1502), is composed of purely classic elements. In the P. 
Giraud (Fig. 166) and the great Cancelleria Palace, pilas- 
ters appear in the external composition, and all the details 
of doors and windows betray the results of classic study, 
as well as the refined taste of their designer.* The beauti- 
ful courtyard of the Cancelleria combines the Florentine 
system of arches on columns with the Roman system of 

superposed arcades 
independent of the 
court wall. In 1506 
Bramante began the 
rebuilding of St. 
Peter's for Julius II. 
(see p. 294) and the 
construction of a 
new and imposing 
papal palace adjoin- 
ing it on the Vatican 
hill. Of this colos- 
sal group of edifices, 
commonly known as 
the Vatican, he ex- 


ecuted the greater 
Belvedere court (afterward divided in two by the Library 
and the Braccio Nuovo), the lesser octagonal court of tl 
Belvedere, and the court of San Damaso, with its arcade 
afterward frescoed by Raphael and his school. Reside 
these, the cloister of S. M. della Pace, and many otlu 
works in and out of Rome, reveal the impress of Rraniantt 
genius, alike in their admirable plans and in the harmoi 
and beauty of their details. 

FLORENTINE PALACES. The P. Riccardi long remauu 
the accepted type of palace in Florence. As we have set 
it was imitated in the Strozzi palace, as late as 1489, wit 

* Sec Appendix <". 


greater perfection of detail, but with no radical change of 
conception. In the P. Gondi, however, begun in the fol- 
lowing year by Giuliano da San Gallo (1445-1516), a more 
pronounced classic spirit appears, especially in the court 
and the interior design. Early in the 16th century classic 
columns and pediments began to be used as decora- 
tions for doors and windows ; the rustication was confined 
to basements and corner-quoins, and niches, loggias, and 
porches gave variety of light and shade to the facades 
(P. Bartolini, by Baccio d'Agnolo ; P. Larderel, 15 15, by Do- 
sio ; P. Guadagni, by Cronaca ; P. Pandolfini, 15 18, attri- 
buted to Raphael). In the P. Serristori, by Baccio d'Ag- 
nolo (15 10), pilasters were applied to the composition of the 
facade, but this example was not often followed in Flor- 

ROMAN PALACES. These followed a different type. They 
were usually of great size, and built around ample courts 
with arcades of classic model in two or three stories. The 
broad street facade in three stories with an attic or mezza- 
nine was crowned with a rich cornice. The orders were 
sparingly used externally, and effect was sought principally 
in the careful proportioning of the stories, in the form and 
distribution of the square-headed and arched openings, and 
in the design of mouldings, string-courses, cornices, and 
other details. The piano nobile, or first story above the 
basement, was given up to suites of sumptuous reception- 
rooms and halls, with magnificent ceilings and frescoes by 
the great painters of the day, while antique statues and re- 
liefs adorned the courts, vestibules, and niches of these 
princely dwellings. The Massimi palace, by Peruzzi, is an 
interesting example of this type. The Vatican, Cancelleria, 
and Giraud palaces have already been mentioned ; other not- 
able palaces are the Palma (1506) and Sacchetti (1540), by 
A. da San Gallo the Younger ; the Farnesina, by Peruzzi, 
with celebrated fresco decorations designed by Raphael ; 



and the Lante (1520) and A 1 temps (1530), by Pefuzzi. Hut 
the noblest creation of this period was the 

FABNESE PALACE, by many esteemed the finest in Italy. 
It was begun in 1530 for Alex. Farnese (Paul III.) by A. 
da San Gallo the Younger, with Vignola's collaboration. 
The simple but admirable plan is shown in Fig. 167, and 

the courtyard, the most impos- 
ing in Italy, in Fig. 168. The 
exterior is monotonous, but the 
noble cornice by Michael An- 
gelo measurably redeems this 
defect. The fine vaulted col- 
umnar entrance vestibule, the 
court and the salons, make up 
an ensemble worthy of the great 
architects who designed it. 
The loggia toward the rivet 
was added by G. delta Porta 
in 1580. 
VILLAS. The Italian villa of 
"^ this pleasure-loving period af- 
1 knui MI.MB. forded full scope for the most 
playful fancies of the architect, decorator, and landscape 
gardener. It comprised usually a dwelling, a casino or 
amusement-house, and many minor edifices, summer-houses 
arcades, etc., disposed in extensive grounds laid out wit 
terraces, cascades, and shaded alleys. The style was grace- 
ful, sometimes trivial, but almost always pleasing, makinj 
free use of stucco enrichments, both internally and e> 
ternally, with abundance of gilding and frescoing. The 
Villa Madama (15 16), by Raphael, with stucco-decorations 
by Giulio Romano, though incomplete and now dilapidated, 
is a noted example of the style. More complete, the Villa 
of Pope Julius, by Vignola (1550), belongs by its purity of 
style to this period ; its facade well exemplifies the simplicity, 



dignity, and fine proportions of this master's work. In ad- 
dition to these Roman villas may be mentioned the V. 
Medici (1540, by Annibale Lippi ; now the French Academy of 
Rome) ; the Casino del Papa in the Vatican Gardens, by Pino 
Ligorio (1560) ; the V. Lante, near Viterbo, and the V. d'Este, 
at Tivoli, as displaying among almost countless others the 
Italian skill in combining architecture and gardening. 

CHURCHES AND CHAPELS. This period witnessed the build- 
ing of a few churches of the first rank, but it was especially 
prolific in memorial, votive, and sepulchral chapels added 
to churches already existing, like the Chigi Chapel of S. M. 
del Popolo, by Raphael. The earlier churches of this 
period generally followed antecedent types, with the dome 
as the central feature domi- 
nating a cruciform plan, and 
simple, unostentatious and 
sometimes uninteresting ex- 
teriors. Among them may be 
mentioned : at Pistoia, S. M. 
del Letto and S. M. dell' 
Umilta, the latter a fine dom- 
ical rotunda by Ventura Vitoni 
(1509), with an imposing ves- 
tibule ; at Venice, S. Salva- 
tore, by Tullio Lombardo 
(1530), an admirable edifice 
with alternating domical and 
barrel-vaulted bays ; S. Geor- 
gio dei Grechi (1536), by 
Sansovino, and S. M. Formosa ; 
at Todi, the Madonna della Consolazione ( 1 5 1 o), by Cola da 
Caprarola, a charming design with a high dome and four 
apses ; at Montefiascone, the Madonna delle Grazie. by 
Sammichde (1523), besides several churches at Bologna, 
Ferrara, Prato, Sienna, and Rome of almost or quite equal 




interest. In these churches one may trace the development 
of the dome as an external feature, while in S. Biagio, at 
Montepulciano, the effort was made by Ant. da San Gallo 
the Elder to combine with it the contrasting lines of two 
campaniles, of which, however, but one was completed. 

ST. PETER'S. The culmination of Renaissance church ar- 
chitecture was reached in St. Peter's, at Rome. The orig- 
inal project of Nicholas V. having lapsed with his death, 
it was the intention of Julius II. to erect on the same 
site a stupendous mausoleum over the monument he had 
ordered of Michael Angelo. The design of Bramante, who 
began its erection in 1506, comprised a Greek cross with 
apsidal arms, the four angles occupied by domical chapels 
and loggias within a square outline (Fig. 169). The too 
hasty execution of this noble design led to the collapse of 
two of the arches under the dome, and to long delays after 
Bramante's death in 15 14. Raphael, Giuliano da San Gal- 
lo, Peruzzi, and A. da 
San Gallo the Younger 
successively supervised 

the works under the 
popes from Leo X. to 
Paul III., and devised a 
vast number of plans U >r 
its completion. Most 
of these involved fun- 
damental alterations of 
the original scheme, and 
were motived by the 
abandonment of the pro- 
posed monument of Ju- 
lius II. ; a church, and 

not a mausoleum, being in consequence required. In 1546 
Michael Angelo was assigned by Paul III. to the works, 
and gave final form to the general design in a simplified 

r lC,. 169. ORIf.lNM. PLAN Of ST. I'F.TKK' 1 ., BOMK. 



version of Bramante's plan with more massive supports, a 
square east front with a portico for the chief entrance, and 
the unrivalled Dome, which is its most striking feature. 
This dome, slightly altered 
and improved in curvature 
by della Porta after M. 
Angelo's death in 1564, 
was completed by D. Fon- 
tana in 1604. It is the most 
majestic creation of the 
Renaissance, and one of 
the greatest architectural 
conceptions of all history. 
It measures 140 feet in 
internal diameter, and with 
its two shells rises from a 
lofty drum, buttressed by 
coupled Corinthian col- 
umns, to a height of 405 
feet to the top of the lan- 
tern. The church, as left 
by Michael Angelo, was 
harmonious in its propor- 
tions, though the single 
order used internally and 
externally dwarfed by its 
colossal scale the vast dimensions of the edifice. Un- 
fortunately in 1606 C. Maderna was employed by Paul V. to 
lengthen the nave by two bays, destroying the proportions 
of the whole, and hiding the dome from view on a near ap- 
proach. The present tasteless facade was Maderna's 
work. The splendid atrium or portico added (1629-67), by 
Bernini, as an approach, mitigates but does not cure the 
Ugliness and pettiness of this front. 

St. Peter's as thus completed (Fig. 170) is the largest 


5 fc "&oft 


The portion below the line A, B, and the 
side chapels, C, D, were added by Maderna. 
The remainder represents Michael Angelo's 


church in existence, and in many respects is architecturally 

worthy of its pre-eminence. The central aisle, nearly 600 
feet long, with its stupendous panelled and gilded vault, 83 
feet in span, the vast central area and the majestic dome, 
belong to a conception unsurpassed in majestic simplicity 
and effectiveness. The construction is almost excessively 
massive, but admirably disposed. On the other hand the 
nave is tco long, and the details not only lack originality 
and interest, but are also too large and coarse in scale, 
dwarfing the whole edifice. The interior (Fig. 171) is want- 
ing in the sobriety of color that befits so stately a design : 
it suggests rather a pagan temple than a Christian basilica. 
These faults reveal the decline of taste which had already 
set in before Michael Angelo took charge of the work, and 
which appears even in the works of that master. 

the 16th century the classic orders began to dominate all 
architectural design. While Vignola, who wrote a tr< 
tise upon the orders, employed them with unfailing refine- 
ment and judgment, his contemporaries showed less dis- 
cernment and taste, making of them an end rather than a 
means. Too often mere classical correc tn ess was substi- 
tuted for the fundamental qualities of original invention 
and intrinsic beauty of composition. The innovation of 
colossal orders extending through several stories, while it 
gave to exterior designs a certain grandeur of scale, tended 
to coarseness and even vulgarity of detail. Sculpture and 
ornament began to lose their refinement ; and while Street- 
an hite< ture gained in monumental scale, and public squares 
received a more stately adornment than ever before, the 
facades individually were too often bare and unin- 
teresting in their correct formality. In the interiors of 
churches and large halls there appears a struggle between a 
(old and dignified simplicity and a growing tendency tow- 
ard pretentious sham, but these pernicious tendencies did 


not fully mature till the latter part of the century, and the 
half-century after 1540 or 1550 was prolific of notable works 
in both ecclesiastical and secular architecture. The names 
of Michael Angelo and Vignola, whose careers began in the 
preceding period ; of Palladio and della Porta (1541-1604) 
in Rome ; of Sammichele and Sansovino in Verona and 
Venice, and of Galeazzo Alessi in Genoa, stand high in the 
ranks of architectural merit. 

churches. The type established by St. Peter's was 
widely imitated throughout Italy. The churches in which 
a Greek or Latin cross is dominated by a high dome rising 
from a drum and terminating in a lantern, and is treated 
both internally and externally with Roman Corinthian pilas- 
ters and arches, are almost numberless. Among the best 
churches of this type is the Gesil at Rome, by Vignola 
(1568), with a highly ornate interior of excellent propor- 
tions and a less interesting exterior, the facade adorned 
with two stories of orders and great flanking volutes over 
the sides (see p. 277). Two churches at Venice, by Palladio 
S. Giorgio Maggiore (1560 ; facade by Scamozzi, 1575) and 
the Redentore offer a strong contrast to the Gesu, in their 
cold and almost bare but pure and correct design. An imi- 
tation of Bramante's plan for St. Peter's appears in S. M. di 
Carignano, at Genoa, by Galeazzo Alessi (1500-72), begun 
1552, a fine structure, though inferior in scale and detail to 
its original. Besides these and other important churches 
there were many large domical chapels of great splendor 
added to earlier churches ; of these the Chapel of Sixtus V. 
in S. M. Maggiore, at Rome, by D. Fontana (1543-1607), is 
an excellent example. 

PALACES: ROME. The palaces on the Capitoline Hill, built 
at different dates (1540-1644) from designs by Michael An- 
gelo, illustrate the palace architecture of this period, and 
the imposing effect of a single colossal order running 
through two stories. This treatment, though well adapted 


to produce monumental effects in large squares, was dan- 
gerous in its bareness and heaviness of scale, and was bet- 
ter suited for buildings of vast dimensions than for ordi- 
nary street-facades. In other Roman palaces of this time 
the traditions of the preceding period still prevailed, as in 
the Sapienza (University), by della Porta (1575), which has 
a dignified court and a facade of great refinement without 
columns or pilasters. The Papal palaces built by Domen- 
ico Fontana on the Lateran, Quirinal, and Vatican hills, 
between 1574 and 1590, externally copying the style of the 
Farnese, show a similar return to earlier models, but are 
less pure and refined in detail than the Sapienza. The 
great pentagonal Palace of Caprarola, near Rome, by Vig- 
nola, is perhaps the most successful and imposing produc- 
tion of the Roman classic school. 

VERONA. Outside of Rome, palace building took on vari- 
ous local and provincial phases of style, of which the most 
important were the closely related styles of Verona, Venice, 
and Vicenza. Michdc Sanimiihelr (14S4-1549), who built 
in Verona the Bevilacqua, Canossa, Pompei, and Verzi pal- 
aces and the four chief city gates, and in Venice the P. 
Grimani, his masterpiece (1550), was a designer of great 
originality and power. He introduced into his military 
architecture, as in the gates of Verona, the use of rusticated 
orders, which he treated with skill and taste. The idea 
was copied by later architects and applied, with doubtful 
propriety, to palace-facades; though Ammanati's garden- 
facade for the Pitti palace, in Florence (cir. 1560), is an im- 
HVe and successful design. 

VENICE. Into the development of the maturing class 
style Giacopo Tatti Sansovino (147 7-1 5 70) introduced in 
Venetian buildings new elements of splendor. Coupled 
columns between arches themselves supported on col- 
umns, and a profusion of figure sculpture, gave to his pal- 
hitherto unknown magnificence of effect, as 



in the Library of St. Mark (now the Royal Palace, Fig. 172), 
and the Cornaro palace (P. Corner de Ck Grande), both 
dating from about 1530-40. So strongly did he impress 
upon Venice these ornate and sumptuous variations on 
classic themes, that later 
architects adhered, in a 
very debased period, to 
the main features and 
spirit of his work. 

VICENZA. Of Palla- 
dia's churches in Venice 
we have already spoken ; 
his palaces are mainly 
to be found in his native 
city, Vicenza. In these 
structures he displayed 
great fertility of inven- 
tion and a profound fa- 
miliarity with the classic 
orders, but the degener- 
ate taste of the Baroque 
period already begins to 
show itself in his work. 
There is far less of archi- 
tectural propriety and 
grace in these preten- 
tious palaces, with their 
colossal orders and their 
affectation of grandeur, than in the designs of Vignola or 
Sammichele. Wood and plaster, used to mimic stone, in- 
dicate the approaching reign of sham in all design (P. Bar- 
barano, 1570 ; Chieregati, 1560 ; Tiene, Valmarano, 1556; 
Villa Capra). His masterpiece is the two-storied arcade 
about the mediaeval Basilica, in which the arches are sup- 
ported on a minor order between engaged columns serving 




as buttresses. This treatment has in consequence ever 
since been known as the Palladia* Motive. 

GENOA. During the second half of the sixteenth century 
a remarkable series of palaces was erected in Genoa, es- 
pecially notable for their great courts and imposing stair- 
cases. These last were given unusual prominence owing 
to differences of level in the courts, arising from the slope 
of their sites on the hillside. Many of these palaces were 
by (ialeazzo Alessi (1502-72) ; others by architects of lesser 
note ; but nearly all characterized by their effective plan- 
ning, fine stairs and 
loggias, and strong and 
dignified, if sometimes 
uninteresting, detail (P. 
Balbi. Brignole, Cambi 
asi, Doria-Tursi [or Mu- 
nicipio], Durazzo [or 
RealeJ, Pallavicini, and 

A reaction from the cold 
classic ismo of the late six- 
teenth century showed 
itself in the following 
period, in the lawless 
and vulgar extrava- 

es of the so-called 
Baroqmt style. The 
wealthy Jesuit order 
1 notorious contrib- 
utor to the debasement 
of architectural tas 
Moat of the Jesuit churches and many others not belong- 
ing to the order, but following its pernicous example, are 
monuments of bad taste and pretentious sham, broken 




and contorted pediments, huge scrolls, heavy mouldings, 
ill-applied sculpture in exaggerated attitudes, and a general 
disregard for architectural propriety characterized this 
period, especially in 
its church architect- 
ure, to whose style 
the name Jesuit is 
often applied. Sham 
marble and heavy 
and excessive gild- 
ing were universal 
(Fig. 173). C. Ma- 
derna (1556- 1629), 
Lorenzo Bernini 
( 1 589-1680), and F. 
Bo rromini (1599 
1667) were the worst 
offenders of the pe- 
riod, though Bernini 
was an artist of un- 
doubted ability, as 
proved by his colon- 
nades or atrium in 
front of St. Peter's. 
There were, howev- 
er, architects of purer taste whose works even in that de- 
based age were worthy of admiration. 

BAROQUE CHURCHES. The Baroque style prevailed in 
church architecture for almost two centuries. The major- 
ity of the churches present varieties of the cruciform plan 
crowned by a high dome which is usually the best part of 
the design. Everywhere else the vices of the period ap- 
pear in these churches, especially in their facades and in- 
ternal decoration. S. M. della Vittoria, by Maderna, and 
Sta. Agnese, by Borromini, both at Rome, are examples of the 



style. Naples is particularly full of Baroque chun Kes (li.u. 
173), a few of which, like the Gesii Nuovo (1584), are dignified 
and creditable designs. The domical church of S. M. della 
Salute, at Venice (1631), by Longhena, is also a majestic edi- 
fice in excellent style (Fig. 174), and here and there other 
churches offer exceptions to the prevalent basent 
architecture. Particularly objectionable was the wholesale 
disfigurement of existing monuments by ruthless remodel- 
ling, as in S. John Lateran, at Rome, the cathedrals of Fer- 
rara and Ravenna, and many others. 

PALACES. These were generally superior to the churches, 
and not infrequently impressive and dignified structures. 
The two best examples in Rome are the P. Borghese, by 
Martino Lunghi the Elder (1590), with a fine court arcade on 
coupled Doric and Ionic columns, and the P. Barberini, by 
Maderna and Borromini, with an elliptical staircase by 
Bernini, one of the few palaces in Italy with projecting 
lateral wings. In Venice, Longhena, in the Rezzonico and 
Pesaro palaces (1650-80), showed his freedom from the man- 
nerisms of the age by reproducing successfully the ornate 
but dignified style of Sansovino (see p. 301). At Naples I). 
Fontana, whose works overlap the Baroque period, produced 
in the Royal Palace (1600) and the Royal Museum (1586-16 15) 
designs of considerable dignity, in some respects superior to 
his papal residences in Rome. In suburban villas, like the 
Albani and Borghese villas near Rome, the ostentatious 
style of the Decline found free and congenial expression. 

LATER MONUMENTS. In the few eighteenth-century build- 
vhich are worthy of mention there is noticeable a reac- 
tion from the extravagances of the seventeenth century, 
shown in the dignified correctness of the exteriors and the 
somewhat frigid splendor of the interiors. The most q< 
ble work of this period is the Royal Palace at Caserta, 
Win Vitrlli (1752), an architect of considerable taste a 
inventiv< Dsidering his time. This great palace, 


feet square, encloses four fine courts, and is especially re- 
in, ukable for the simple if monotonous dignity of the well 
proportioned exterior and the effective planning of its three 
octagonal vestibules, its ornate chapel and noble staircase. 
Staircases, indeed, were among the most successful features 
of late Italian architecture, as in the Scala Regia of the 
Vatican, and in the Corsini, Braschi, and Barberini palaces 
at Rome, the Royal Palace at Naples, etc. 

In church architecture the east front of S. John Lateran 
in Rome, by Galilei (1734), and the whole exterior of S. M. 
Maggiore, by Ferd. Fuga (1743), are noteworthy designs: 
the former an especially powerful conception, combining a 
colossal order with two smaller orders in superposed loggie, 
but marred by the excessive scale of the statues which 
crown it. The Fountain of Trevi, conceived in much the 
same spirit (1735, by Niccola Salvi), is a striking piece of 
decorative architecture. The Sacristy of St. Peter's, by 
Marchionne (1775), also deserves mention as a monumental 
and not uninteresting work. In the early years of the 
present century the Braccio Nuovo of the Vatican, by Stem, 
the imposing church of S. Francesco di Paola at Naples, by 
Bianclii, designed in partial imitation of the Pantheon, and 
the great S. Carlo Theatre at Naples, show the same coldly 
classical spirit, not wholly without merit, but lacking in 
true originality and freedom of conception. 

campaniles. The campaniles of the Renaissance and 
Decline deserve at least passing reference, though they are 
neither numerous nor often of conspicuous interest. That 
of the Campidoglio (Capitol) at Rome, by Martino Lunghi, is 
a good example of the classical type. Venetia possesses a 
number of graceful and lofty bell-towers, generally of brick 
with marble bell-stages, of which the upper part of the 
Campanile of St. Mark and the tower of S. Giorgio Mag- 
giore are the finest examples. 

The Decline attained what the early Renaissance aimed 


at the revival of Roman forms. But it was no longer a 
Renaissance ; it was a decrepit and unimaginative art, held 
in the fetters of a servile imitation, copying the letter 
rather than the spirit of antique design. It was the mis- 
taken and abject worship of precedent which started archi- 
tecture upon its downward path and led to the atrocious 
products of the seventeenth century. 

MONUMENTS (mainly in addition to those mentioned in the text). 15TH 
CXNtl ky Florence: Foundling Hospital (Innocenti), 1421 ; Old Sac- 
risty and Cloister S. Lorenzo ; P. Quaratesi, 1440 ; cloisters at Sta. CfOOC 
and Certosa, all by Brunelleschi ; facade S. M. Novella, by Alberti, 1456 ; 
Badia at Fiesole, from designs of Brunelleschi, 1462 ; Court of P. Vecchio, 
by Michelozzi, 1464 (altered and enriched, 1565) ; P. Guadagni, by Cro- 
naca, 1490; Hall of 500 in P. Vecchio, by same, 1495. VBMK 
Zaccaria, by Martino Lombardo, 1457-15 15 ; S. Michele, by Moro 
bardo, 1466; S. If. del Orto, 1473; S. Giovanni Crisostomo, by Mor<> 
Lombardo, atrium of S. Giovanni Evangelista, Procurazie Vecchie, all 
1481 ; Scuola di S. Marco, by Martino Lombardo, 1490 ; I'. I >ario ; P. 
Corner-Spinelli. Ferrara : P. Schifanoja, 1469 ; P. Scrofa or Costabili, 
1485 ; S. If. in Vado, P. dei Diamanti, P. Bevilacqua, S. Franca 
Benedetto, S. Cristoforo, all 1490-1500. Milan: Ospedale Grande (or 
Ifaggjore), begun 1457 by Filarete, extended by Bramante, cir. 1480-90 
(great court by Richini, 17th century); S. M. delle Grazie, K. end, S.k - 
risty of S. Satiro, S. M. presso S. Celso, all by Bramante, 1477-1499. 
k<>MK: S. Pictro in Montorio, 1472; S. M. del Popolo, 1475?; Sistine 
Chapel of Vatican, 1475 ; S. Agostino, 1483. Siknna : Loggia dd Papa 
and P. Nerucci, 1460; P. del Governo, 1469-1500 ; P. Spannocchi, 1470 j 
.'. irina, I4'><), by <li iiastiano and Federighi, church later by Pcru/zi; 
library in cathedral by L. Marina, 1497 ; Oratory of S. Bernardino, by 
Turrapili, 1496. Piln/.\: Cathedral, Bishop's Palace (Vescovado), P. 
I'ubblico, all dr. 1460, by 1',. di I.orenzo (or Rosselini ? ). El BKWHRRK (in 
chronological order) : Arch of Alplx.iis.,. Naples, 1443, by P. di Martino : 
Oratory S. Bernardino, Pe r ugi a, by di Duccio, 1461 ; Church over 
Santa, I.oreto, 1465-1526; P. del Consiglio at Verona, by Fra Giocondo, 
1470; Capella Collconi, BergaiUO, 1476 ; S. If. in Orjjano. Verona, 1481 ; 
Porta Capuana, Naples, by Giul. da Majano, 14-4 ; Madonna della CfOOC, 
Crema, by I?. BattagH, L40O-1556; Madonna di (ampagna and S. SiMo. 
Piacenza, both 1492-1511; P. Uevilac qua. Pologna, by Nardi, 1402 (?) ; 
P. Gravina, Napi' 1, Bologna J P. I'retorio, Lucca ; S. M. Iti 

Miracoli, Brescia ; all at close of 15th century. 


161 11 CENTURY ROME : P. Sera, 1501 ; S. M. della Pace and cloister, 
1504, both by Bramante (facade of church by P. da Cortona, 17th cen- 
tury) ; S. M. di Loreto, 1507, by A. da San Gallo the Elder; P. Vidoni, 
by Raphael; P. Lante, 1520; Vigna Papa Giulio, 1534, by Peruzzi ; P. 
dei Conservatori, 1540, and P. del Senatore, 1563 (both on Capitol), by 
M. Angelo, Vignola, and della Porta ; Sistine Chapel in S. M. Maggiore, 
1590 ; S. Andrea della Valle, 1591, by Olivieri (facade, 1670, by Rainaldi). 
Florence : Medici Chapel of S. Lorenzo, new sacristry of same, and 
l.aurentian Library, all by M. Angelo, 1529-40; Mercato Nuovo, 1547, 
by B. Tasso ; P. degli Uffizi, 1560-70, by Vasari ; P. Giugni, 1560. 
Venice : P. Camerlinghi, 1525, by Bergamasco ; S. Francesco della Vigna, 
by Sansovino, 1539, facade by Palladio, 1568; Zecca or Mint, 1536, and 
Loggetta of Campanile, 1540, by Sansovino * ; Procurazie Nuove, 1584, by 
Scamozzi. Verona: Capella Pellegrini in S. Bernardino, 1514; City 
Gates, by Sammichele, 1530-40 (Porte Nuova, Stuppa, S. Zeno, S. 
Giorgio). Vicenza : P. Porto, 1552 ; Teatro Olimpico, 1580 ; both by 
Palladio. Genoa : P. Andrea Doria, by Montorsoli, 1529 ; P. Ducale, 
by Pennone, 1550; P. Lercari, P. Spinola, P. Sauli, P. Marcello Durazzo, 
all by Gal. Alessi, cir. 1550 ; Sta. Annunziata, 1587, by della Porta ; Log- 
gia dei Banchi, end of 16th century. Elsewhere (in chronological order): 
P. Roverella, Ferrara, 1508 ; P. del Magnifico, Sienna, 1508, by Cozza- 
relli ; P. Communale, Brescia, 1508, by Formentone ; P. Albergati, Bo- 
logna, 1510; P. Ducale, Mantua, 1520-40; P. Giustiniani, Padua, by 
Falconetto, 1524 ; Ospedale del Ceppo, Pistoia, 1525 ; Madonna delle 
Grazie, Pistoia, by Vitoni, 1535 ; P. Buoncampagni-Ludovisi, Bologna, 
1545 ; Cathedral, Padua, 1550, by Righetti and della Valle, after M. 
Angelo; P. Bernardini, 1560, and P. Ducale, 1578, at Lucca, both by 

17TH Century : Chapel of the Princes in S. Lorenzo, Florence, 1604, 
by Nigetti ; S. Pietro, Bologna, 1605 ; S. Andrea delle Fratte, Rome, 
1612 ; Villa Borghese, Rome, 1616, by Vasanzio ; P. Contarini delle Scrig- 
ni, Venice, by Scamozzi ; Badia at Florence, rebuilt 1625 by Segaloni ; 
S. Ignazio, Rome, 1626-85 ! Museum of the Capitol, Rome, 1644-50 ; 
Church of Gli Scalzi, Venice, 1649 ; P. Pesaro, Venice, by Longhena, 
1650; S. Moise, Venice, 1668 ; Brera Palace, Milan ; S. M. Zobenigo, 
Venice, 1680; Doganadi Mare, Venice, 1686, by Benone ; Santi Apostoli, 

i8th and early 19TH Century : Gesuati, at Venice, 1715-30 ; S. 
Geremia, Venice, 1753, by Corbellini ; P. Braschi, Rome, by Morelli, 
1790; Nuova Fabbrica, Venice, 1810. 

* See Appendix B. 



Books Recommended : As before, Fergusson, Muntz, 
Palustre. Also Berty, La Renaissance monumentale en France. 
Chateau, Histoire et caracteres tie l' architecture en France. 
Daly, Motifs historic ues d' architecture et de sculpture. Dc 
Laborde, La Renaissance des arts a la cour de France. I Hi 
Cerceau, Les plus excellents (>astinients dc France. Liibke, 
Geschichte der Renaissance in Frankreich. Mathews, The 
Renaissance under the Valois Kings. Palustre, La Renaissance 
en France. Pattison, 1 he Renaissance of the Fine Arts in 
France. Rouyer et Darcel, L'Art architectural en France. 
Sauvageot, Choix de palais, chdteaux, hotels, et maisons dc 

ORIGIN AND CHAEACTER. The vitality and richness of the 
Gothic style in France, even in its decline in the fifteenth 
century, long stood in the way of any general introduction 
of classic forms. When the Renaissance appeared, it came 
as a foreign importation, introduced from Italy by the king 
and the nobility. It underwent a protracted transitional 
phase, during which the national Gothic forms and tradi- 
tions were picturesquely mingled with those of the Renais- 
sance. The campaigns of Charles VIII. (1489), Louis XII. 
(1499), am ' Francis I. (1515), in vindication of thei r claims 
to the thrones of Naples and Milan, brought these mon- 
arch* and their nobles into contact with the splendid mate- 
rial and artistic civilization of Italy, then in the full tide of 
the maturing Renaissance. They returned to France, 
filled with the ambition to rival the splendid palaces an< 
gardens of Italy, taking with them Italian artists to teacl 
their arts to the French. But while these Italians success 


fully introduced many classic elements and details into 
French architecture, they wholly failed to dominate the 
French master-masons and tailleurs de pier re in matters of 
planning and general composition. The early Renaissance 
architecture of France is consequently wholly unlike the 
Italian, from which it derived only minor details and a 
certain largeness and breadth of spirit. 

PERIODS. The French Renaissance and its sequent de- 
velopments may be broadly divided into three periods, 
with subdivisions coinciding more or less closely with va- 
rious reigns, as follows : 

I. The Valois Period, or Renaissance proper, 1483- 
1589, subdivided into : 

a. The Transition, comprising the reigns of Charles 
VIII. and Louis XII. (1483-15 15), and the early years of 
that of Francis I. ; characterized by a picturesque mixture 
of classic details with Gothic conceptions. 

b. The Style of Francis I., or Early Renaissance, from 
about 1520 to that king's death in 1547 ; distinguished by a 
remarkable variety and grace of composition and beauty of 

c. The Advanced Renaissance, comprising the reigns 
of Henry II. (1547), Francis II. (1559), Charles IX. (1560), 
and Henry III. (1574-89) ; marked by the gradual adop- 
tion of the classic orders and a decline in the delicacy and 
richness of the ornament. 

II. The Bourbon or Classic Period (1589-1715) : 

a. Style of Henry IV., covering his reign and partly 
that of Louis XIII. (1610-45), employing the orders and 
other classic forms with a somewhat heavy, florid style of 

b. Style of Louis XIV., beginning in the preceding 
reign and extending through that of Louis XIV. (1645- 
1715) ; the great age of classic architecture in France, cor- 
responding to the Palladian in Italy. 


III. The Decline or Rococo Period, corresponding 
with the reign of Louis XV. (1715-74) ; marked by pom- 
pous extravagance and capriciousness. 

During this period a reaction set in toward a severer 
classicism, leading to the styles of Louis XVI. and of the 
Empire, to be treated of in a later chapter. 

THE transition. As early as 1475 the new style made 
its appearance in altars, tombs, and rood-screens wrought 
by French carvers with the collaboration of Italian arti- 
ficers. The tomb erected by Charles of Anjou to his fa- 
ther in Le Mans cathedral (1475, by Francesco Laurana), the 
chapel of St. Lazare in the cathedral of Marseilles (1483), 
and the tomb of the children of Charles VIII. in Tours ca- 
thedral (1506), by Michel Columbe, the greatest artist of his 
time in France, are examples. The schools of Rouen and 
Tours were especially prominent in works of this kind, 
marked by exuberant fancy and great delicacy of execu- 
tion. In church architecture Gothic traditions were long 
dominant, in spite of the great numbers of Italian prelates 
in France. It was in c/idtraux, palaces, and dwellings that 
the new style achieved its most notable triumphs. 

early CHATEAUX. The castle of Charles VIIL, at Am- 
boise on the Loire, shows little trace of Italian influence. 
It was under Louis XII. that the transformation of French 
architecture really began. The Chateau de Gaillon (of which 
unfortunately only fragments remain in the Ecole des 
Beaux-Arts at Paris), built for the Cardinal George of Am- 
boise, between 1497 and 1509, by Pierre Fain, was the 
masterwork of the Rouen school. It presented a curious 
mixture of styles, with its irregular plan, its moat, draw- 
bridge, and round corner-towers, its high roofs, turrets, 
and dormers, which gave it, in spite of many Renaissance 
details, a mediaeval picturesqueness. The Chateau de Blois 
(the east and south wings of the present group), begun for 
Louis XII. about 1500, was the first of a remarkable serie 


of royal palaces which are the glory of French architect- 
ure. It shows the new influences in its horizontal lines 
and flat, unbroken facades of brick and stone, rather than 
in its architectural de- 
tails (Fig. 175). The 
Ducal Palace at Nancy 
and the Hotel de Ville at 
Orleans, by Viart, show 
a similar commingling 
of the classic and medi- 
aeval styles. 

Early in the reign of 
this monarch, and part- 
ly under the lead of 
Italian artists, like il 
Rosso, Serlio, and Pri- 
maticcio, classic ele- 
ments began to domi- 
nate the general com- 
position and Gothic 
details rapidly disap- 
peared. A simple and 
effective system of ex- 
terior design was adopt- 
ed in the castles and 
palaces of this period. 
Finely moulded belt- 
courses at the sills and heads of the windows marked the 
different stories, and were crossed by a system of almost 
equally important vertical lines, formed by superposed 
pilasters flanking the windows continuously from basement 
to roof. The facade was crowned by a slight cornice 
and open balustrade, above which rose a steep and lofty 
roof, diversified by elaborate dormer windows which were 

FIG. 175. BLOIS 



adorned with gables and pinnacles (Fig. 178). Slender 
pilasters, treated like long panels ornamented with ara- 
besques of great beauty, or with a species of baluster shaft 
like a candelabrum, were preferred to columns, and were 
provided with graceful capitals of the Corinthianesque type. 
The mouldings were minute and richly carved ; pediments 
were replaced by steep gables, and mullioned windows 
with stone crossbars were used in preference to the simpler 
Italian openings. In the earlier monuments Gothic details 
were still used occasionally ; and round corner-towers, high 
dormers, and numerous turrets and pinnacles appear even 
in the chateaux of later date. 

CHURCHES. Ecclesiastical architecture received but scant 
attention under Francis I., and, so far as it was practised, 
still clung tenaciously to Gothic principles. Among the 
few important churches of this period may be mentioned 
St. Etienne du Mont, at Paris (1517-38), in which classic 
and Gothic features appear in nearly equal proportions ; 
the east end of St. Pierre, at Caen, with rich external carv- 
ing ; and the great parish church of St. Eustache, at Paris 
(1532, by Lemercier), in which the plan and construction are 
purely Gothic, while the details throughout belong to the 
new style, though with little appreciation of the spirit and 
proportions of classic art. New facades were also built 
for a number of already existing churches, among which 
St. Michel, at Dijon, is conspicuous, with its vast portal arch 
and imposing towers. The Gothic towers of Tours cathe- 
dral were completed with Renaissance lanterns or belfries, 
the northern in 1507, the southern in 1547. 

PALACES. To the palace at Blois begun by his prede- 
cessor, Francis I. added a northern and a western wing, 
completing the court. The north win}/ is one of the mas- 
terpieces of the style, presenting toward the court a simple 
and effective composition, with a rich but slightly proje< t- 
ing cornice anil a high roof with elaborate dormers. This 



facade is divided into two unequal sections by the open 
Staircase Tower (Fig. 176), a chef-d'oeuvre in boldness of 
construction as well as in delicacy and richness of carving. 
The outer facade of this wing is a less ornate but more 
vigorous design, crowned 
by a continuous open loggia 
under the roof. More ex- 
tensive than Blois was Fon- 
tainebleau, the favorite 
residence of the king and 
of many of his successors. 
Following in parts the ir- 
regular plan of the convent 
it replaced, its other por- 
tions were more symmetri- 
cally disposed, while the 
whole was treated external- 
ly in a somewhat severe, 
semi-classic style, singular- 
ly lacking in ornament. In- 
ternally, however, this pal- 
ace, begun in 1528 by Gilles 
Le Breton, was at that time 
the most splendid in France, 
the gallery of Francis I. be- 
ing especially noted. The 
Chateau of St. Germain, 
near Paris (1539, by Pierre 
C/nimbiges), is of a very dif- 
ferent character. Built largely of brick, with flatbalustraded 
roof and deep buttresses carrying three ranges of arches, it 
is neither Gothic nor classic, neither fortress nor palace in 
aspect, but a wholly unique conception. 

The rural chateaux and hunting-lodges erected by Fran- 
cis I. display the greatest diversity of plan and treatment. 




attesting the inventiveness of the French genius, express' 

ing itself in a new-found language, whose formal canons it 
disdained. Chief among them is the Chateau of Chambord 
(Figs. 177, 178) "a Fata Morgana in the midst of a wild, 

woody thicket," to use 
Liibke's language. This 
extraordinary edifice, 
resembling in plan a 
feudal castle with cur- 
tain-walls, bastions, 
moat, and donjon, is in 
its architectural treat- 
ment a palace with ar- 
cades, open-stair towers, 
a noble double spiral 
Staircase terminating in 
a graceful lantern, and a roof of the most bewildering com- 
plexity of towers, chimneys, and dormers (1526, by Purr* 
le Nepveii). The hunting-lodges of La Muette and Chalvau, 
and the so-called Chateau de Madrid all three demolished 
during or since the Revolution deserve mention, especially 


ill I 

no. 17.V \ n '.-. 



the last. This consisted of two rectangular pavilions, con- 
nected by a lofty banquet-hall, and adorned externally with 
arcades in Florentine style, and with medallions and reliefs 
of della Robbia ware (1527, by Gadyer). 

THE LOUVRE. By far the most important of all the ar- 
chitectural enterprises of this reign, in ultimate results, 
if not in original ex- 
tent, was the begin- 
ning of a new palace 
to replace the old 
Gothic fortified pal- 
ace of the Louvre. 
To this task Pierre 
Lescot was summoned 
in 1542, and the work 
of erection actually 
begun in 1546. The 
new palace, in a sump- 
tuous and remarkably 
dignified classic style, 
was to have covered 
precisely the area of 
the demolished fort- 
ress. Only the south- 
west half, comprising 
two sides of the court, 
was, however, under- 
taken at the outset (Fig. 179). It remained for later 
monarchs to amplify the original scheme, and ultimately to 
complete, late in the present century, the most extensive 
and beautiful of all the royal residences of Europe. (See 
Figs. 181, 208, 209.) 

Want of space forbids more than a passing reference to 
the rural castles of the nobility, rivalling those of the king. 
Among them Bury, La Rochefoucauld, Bournazel, and es- 

^^^ _ 



5 r 





pecially Azay-le-Rideau (1520) and Chenonceaux (1515-23), 
may be mentioned, all displaying that love of rural pleasure, 
that hatred of the city and its confinement, which so dis- 
tinguish the French from the Italian Renaissance. 

other buildings. The Hdtel - de - Ville (town hall), of 
Paris, begun during this reign, from plans by Dovienico di 
Cortona (?), and completed under Henry IV., was the most 
important edifice of a class which in later periods numbered 
many interesting structures. The town hall of Beaugency 
(1527) is one of the best of minor public buildings in France, 
and in its elegant treatment of a simple two-storied facade 
may be classed with the Maison Francois I., at Paris. This 
stood formerly at Moret, whence it was transported to Paris 
and re-erected about 1830 in somewhat modified form. The 
large city houses of this period are legion ; we can men- 
tion only the Hotel Carnavalet at Paris ; the Hotel Bourg- 
theroudeat Rouen ; the Hotel d'coville at Caen ; the arch- 
bishop's palace at Sens, and a number of houses in Orleans. 
The Tomb of Louis XII., at St. Denis, deserves especial 
mention for its fine proportions and beautiful arabesques. 

THE ADVANCED EENAI8SANCE. By the middle of the six- 
teenth century the new style had lost much of its earlier 
charm. The orders, used with increasing frequency, were 
more and more conformed to antique precedents. Facades 
were flatter and simpler, cornices more pronounced, arches 
more Roman in treatment, and a heavier style of carving 
took the place of the delicate arabesques of the preceding 
age. The reigns of Henry II. (1547-59) and Charles IX. 
(1560-74) were especially distinguished by the labors of 
three celebrated architects: Pierre Lescot (1515-78), who 
continued the work on the southwest angle of the Louvre ; 
Yeti/i Bullant (1515-78), to whom are due the right wing of 
Kronen and the porch of colossal Corinthian columns in the 
left wing of the same, built under Francis I. ; and, finally, 
PhiUberi de f Or me (1515-70). yean Goujon (1510-72) also 


executed during this period most of the remarkable archi- 
tectural sculptures which have made his name one of the 
most illustrious in the annals of French art. Chief among 
the works of -de l'Orme was the palace of the Tuileries, built 
under Charles IX. for Catherine de Me^licis, not far from 
the Louvre, with which it was ultimately connected by a long 
gallery. Of the vast plan conceived for this palace, and 
comprising a succession of courts and wings, only a part of 
one side was erected (1564-72). This consisted of a domical 
pavilion, flanked by low wings only a story and a half high, 
to which were added two stories under Henry IV., to the 
great advantage of the design. Another masterpiece was 
the Chateau d'Anet, built in 1552 by Henry II. for Diane 
de Poitiers, of which, unfortunately, only fragments sur- 
vive. This beautiful edifice, while retaining the semi- 
military moat and bastions of feudal tradition, was planned 
with classic symmetry, adorned with superposed orders, 
court arcades, and rectangular corner-pavilions, and pro- 
vided with a domical cruciform chapel, the earliest of its 
class in France. All the details were unusually pure and 
correct, with just enough of freedom and variety to lend a 
charm wanting in later works of the period. To the reign 
of Henry II. belong also the chateaux of Ancy-le-Franc, 
Verneuil, Chantilly (the " petit chateau," by Bullant), the 
banquet-hall over the bridge at Chenonceaux (1556), several 
notable residences at Toulouse, and the tomb of Francis I. at 
St. Denis. The chateaux of Pailly and Sully, distinguished 
by the sobriety and monumental quality of their composi- 
tion, in which the orders are important elements, belong to 
the reign of Charles IX., together with the Tuileries, al- 
ready mentioned. 

THE CLASSIC PERIOD : HENRY IV. Under this energetic but 
capricious monarch (1589-1610) and his Florentine queen, 
Marie de Medicis, architecture entered upon a new period 
of activity and a new stage of development. Without the 



charm of the early Renaissance or the stateliness of the 
age of Louis XIV., it has a touch of the Baroque, attribu- 
table partly to the influence of Marie <lc MeMicis and her 
Italian prelates, and partly to the Italian training of many 
of the French architects. The great work of this period 
was the extension of the Tuileries by jf. B. du Cerceau, and 
the completion, by Metezeau and others, of the long gallery 


next the Seine, begun under Henry II., with the view of 
connecting the Tuileries with the Louvre. In this pari of 
the work colossal orders were used with indifferent effect. 
Next in importance was the addition to Fontainebleau <>f a 
great COUIl to the eastward, whose relatively quiet and 

dignified style offeni less contrast than one might expect to 

the Other wings and courts dating from Francis I. More 
^fti! architecturally than either of the above was the 
Luxemburg palace, built for the queen by Salomon DeBrosst % 
in r6l6 (Fig. i.So). Its plan presents the favorite French 
arrangement of a main building separated from the street 


l)y a garden or court, the latter surrounded on three sides 
by low wings containing the dependencies. Externally, 
rusticated orders recall the garden front of the Pitti at 
Florence ; but the scale is smaller, and the projecting pa- 
vilions and high roofs give it a grace and picturesqueness 
wanting in the Florentine model. The Place Royale, at 
Paris, and the chateau of Beaumesnil, illustrate a type of 
brick-and-stone architecture much in vogue at this time, 
stone quoins decorating the windows and corners, and the 
orders being generally omitted. 

Under Louis XIII. the Tuileries were extended north- 
ward and the Louvre as built by Lescot was doubled in 
size by the architect Le7tiercier, the Pavilion de l'Horloge be- 
ing added to form the centre of the enlarged court facade. 

CHURCHES. To this reign belong also the most impor- 
tant churches of the period. The church of St. Paul-St. 
Louis, at Paris (1627, by Derrand), displays the worst faults 
of the time, in the overloaded and meaningless decoration 
of its uninteresting front. Its internal dome is the earliest 
in Paris. Far superior was the chapel of the Sorbonne, a 
well-designed domical church by Le?nercier, w ; ith a sober 
and appropriate exterior treated with superposed orders. 

PERIOD OF LOUIS XIV. This was an age of remarkable 
literary and artistic activity, pompous and pedantic in many 
of its manifestations', but distinguished also by productions 
of a very high order. Although contemporary with the 
Italian Baroque Bernini having been the guest of Louis 
XIV. the architecture of this period was free from the 
wild extravagances of that style. In its' often cold and cor- 
rect dignity it resembled rather that of Palladio, making 
large use of the orders in exterior design, and tending 
rather to monotony than to overloaded decoration. In in- 
terior design there was more of lightness and caprice. 
Papier-mache* and stucco were freely used in a fanciful style 
of relief ornamentation by scrolls, wreaths, shells, etc., and 


decorative panelling was much employed The whole was 
saved from triviality only by the controlling lines of the 
architecture Which framed it. Hut it was better suited to 
cabinet-work or to t lie prettinesses of the boudoir than 
to monumental interiors. The Galerie d'Apollon, built 
during this reign over the Petite Galerie in the Louvre, 
escapes this reproach, however, by the sumptuous dignity 
of its interior treatment. 

VERSAILLES. This immense edifice, built about an already 
existing villa of Louis XIII., was the work of l.rrati and 
J.H. Mansart (1647-1708). Its erection, with the laving 
out of its marvellous park, almost exhausted the resources 
of the realm, but with results quite incommensurate with 
the outlay. In spite of its vastness, its exterior is common- 
place ; the orders are used with singular monotony, which 
is not redeemed by the deep breaks and projections of the 
main front. There is no controlling or dominant feature : 
there is no adequate entrance or approach ; the grand 
staircases are badly placed and unworthily treated, and the 
different elements of the plan are combined with singular 
lack of the usual French sense Of monumental and rational 
arrangement. The chapel is by far the best single feature 
in the design. 

Far more successful was the completion of the Louvre, 
in 1688, from the designs of Clmude Perfattlt, the court phy- 
sician, whose plans were fortunately adopted in preference 
to those of Bernini. For the east front he designed a 
magnificent Corinthian colonnade nearly 600 feet long, with 
coupled columns upOn a plain high basement, and with a cen- 
tral pediment and terminal pavilions (Fig. 181). The whole 
forms one of the most imposing facades in existence; but 
it is a mere decoration, having no practical relation to Un- 
building behind it. Its height required the addition of 
third story to match it on the north and south sides of tht 
court, which as thus < ompleted quadrupled the original art 



proposed by Lescot. Fortunately the style of Lescot's work 
was retained throughout in the court facades, while exter- 
nally the colonnade was recalled on the south front by a 
colossal order of pilasters. The Louvre as completed by 
Louis XIV. was a stately and noble palace, as remarkable 
for the surpassing excellence of the sculptures of Jean 
Goujon as for the dignity and beauty of its architecture. 


Taken in connection with the Tuileries, it was unrivalled 
by any palace in Europe except the Vatican. 

OTHER BUILDINGS. To Louis XIV. is also due the vast 
but uninteresting Hdtel des Invalides or veteran's asylum, 
at Paris, by J. H. Mansart. To the chapel of this institu- 
tion was added, in 1680-1706, the celebrated Dome of the 
Invalides, a masterpiece by the same architect. In plan it 
somewhat resembles Bramante's scheme for St. Peter's a 
Greek cross with domical chapels in the four angles and 
a dome over the centre. The exterior (Fig. 182), with 
the lofty gilded dome on a high drum adorned with en- 
gaged columns, is somewhat high for its breadth, but is a 




harmonious and impressive design ; and the interior, if 
somewhat cold, is elegant and well proportioned. The 
chief innovation in the design was the wide separation of 

the interior stone dome from 
the lofty exterior decorative 
cupola and lantern of wood, 
this separation being de- 
signed to meet the conflict- 
ing demands of internal and 
external effect. To the same 
architect is due the formal 
monotony of the Place Ven- 
dome, all the houses sur- 
rounding it being treated 
with a uniform architecture 
of colossal pilasters, at once 
monumental and inappro- 
priate. One of the 
most pleasing designs 
of the time is the 
Chateau de Maisons 
(1658), by F. MaiiHirt, 
uncle of J. H. Mansai t. 
In this the proportions 
of the central and ter- 
minal pavilions, the 
mass and lines of the 
steep roof a la Ma/i- 
sarde, the simple and 
effective use of the orders, and the refinement of all the de- 
tails impart a grace of aspect rare in contemporary works. 
The same qualities appear also in the Val-de-Grace, by F. 
Mansart and Lemercier, a domical church of excellent 
proportions begun under Louis XIII. The want of space 
forbids mention of other buildings of this period. 



THE DECLINE. Under Louis XV. the pedantry of the 
classic period gave place to a protracted struggle between 
license and the severest classical correctness. The exte- 
rior designs of this time were often even more uninterest- 
ing and bare than under Louis XIV.; while, on the other 
hand, interior decoration tended to the extreme of extrava- 
gance and disregard of 
constructive propriety. 
Contorted lines and 
crowded scrolls, shells, 
and palm - leaves 
adorned the mantel- 
pieces, cornices, and 
ceilings, to the almost 
complete suppression 
of straight lines. 

While these tenden- 
cies prevailed in many 
directions, a counter- 
current of severe clas- 
sicism manifested it- 
self in the designs of 
a number of important 


public buildings, in 

which it was sought to copy the grandeur of the old Roman 
colonnades and arcades. The important church of St. Sulpice 
at Paris (Fig. 183) is an excellent example of this. Its inte- 
rior, dating from the preceding century, is well designed, but 
in no wise a remarkable composition, following Italian models. 
The facade, added in 1755 by Servandoni, is, on the other 
hand, one of the most striking architectural objects in the 
city. It is a correct and well proportioned classic composi- 
tion in two stories an Ionic arcade over a Doric colonnade, 
surmounted by two lateral turrets. Other monuments of 
this classic revival will be noticed in Chapter XXV. 


PUBLIC SQUARES. Much attention was given to the em- 
bellishment of open spaces in the cities, for which the clas- 
sic style was admirably suited. The most important work 
of this kind was that on the north side of the Place de la 
Concorde, Paris. This splendid square, perhaps, on the 
whole, the finest in Europe (though many of its best feat- 
ures belong to a later date), was at this time adorned with 
the two monumental colonnades by Gabriel. These colon- 
nades, which form the decorative fronts for blocks of 
houses, deserve praise for the beauty of their proportions, 
as well as for the excellent treatment of the arcade on which 
they rest, and of the pavilions at the ends. 

IN GENERAL. French Renaissance architecture is marked 
by good proportions and harmonious and appropriate de- 
tail. Its most interesting phase was unquestionably that 
of Francis I., so far, at least, as concerns exterior design. 
It steadily progressed, however, in its mastery of planning ; 
and in its use of projecting pavilions crowned by domi- 
nant masses of roof, it succeeded in preserving, even in se- 
verely classic designs, a picturesqueness and variety other- 
wise impossible. Roofs, dormers, chimneys, and staircases 
it treated with especial success; and in these matters, as well 
as in monumental dispositions of plan, the French have 
largely retained their pre-eminence to our own day. 

MONUMENTS. (Mainly supplementary to text. Ch. = chateau ; P. = 
palace ; C.=s cathedral ; Chu.= church ; H.= hotel ; T. H.= town hal 

Tran-iii"n: Plois, E. wing, 1499 ; Ch. Meillant ; Ch. Chaumont ; 
H. Amboise, 1502-05. 

FkANCH I. : Ch. Nantouillet, 1517-25 ; Ch. Plois, W. wing (after 
demolished) and N. wing, 1520-30; H. Lallemant, Bo uq j M , 1520; 
Villers-Cotterets, 1520-59; P, of Archbishop, Sens, 1521-35; P. 
tainebleau (Cour Ovale, Cour d'Adieux, Gallery Francis I., 1527-3 
Peristyle, Chapel St. Saturnin, 1540-47, by GilUs U Breton ; Cour 
Cheval Plane, 1527-31, by P. Chambiges) ; H. Pernuy, Toulouse, 1528-3 
P. Granvelle, Besancon, 1532-40; T. H. Nioit, T. H. Loches, 1532-4 
II. de Ligeris (Carna valet), Paris, 1544, by /'. I.escot ; churches of Gi 


nave and facade, 1530 ; La Dalbade, Toulouse, portal, 1530 ; St. Sympho- 
rien Tours, 1531 ; Chu. Tillieres, 1534-46. 

Advanced Renaissance : Fontaine des Innocents, Paris, 1547-50, by 
P. Lescot and J. Goujon ; tomb Francis I., at St. Denis, 1555, by Ph. 
de rOrme ; H. Catelan, Toulouse, 1555 ; tomb Henry II., at St. Denis, 
1560 ; portal S. Michel, Dijon, 1564 ; Ch. Sully, 1567 ; T. H. Arras, 
1573 ; P. Fontainebleau (Cour du Cheval Blanc remodelled, 1564-66, by 
P. Girard ; Gourde la Fontaine, same date) ; T. H. Besancon, 1582 ; Ch. 
Charleval, 1585, byy. B. du Cerceau. 

Style of Henry IV. : P. Fontainebleau (Galerie des Cerfs, Chapel of 
the Trinity, Baptistery, etc.) ; P. Tuileries (Pav. de Flore, by du Cerceau, 
1 590-1610 ; long gallery continued) ; Hotel Vogue, at Dijon, 1607 ; Place 
Dauphine, Paris, 1608 ; P. de Justice, Paris, Great Hall, by S. de Brosse, 
161 8 ; H. Sully, Paris. 1624-39 ; P. Royal, Paris, by J. Lemercier, for 
Cardinal Richelieu, 1627-39 > P Louvre doubled in size, by the same ; P. 
Tuileries (N. wing, and Pav. Marsan, long gallery completed) ; H. Lam- 
bert, Paris ; T. H. Reims, 1627 ; Ch. Blois, W. wing for Gaston d'Orleans, 
by F. Mansart, 1635 ; facade St. Etienne du Mont, Paris, 1610 ; of St. 
Gervais, Paris, 1616-21, by S. de Brosse. 

Style of Louis XIV. : T. H. Lyons, 1646 ; P. Louvre, E. colonnade 
and court completed, 1660-70 ; Tuileries altered by Le Vau, 1664 ; ob- 
servatory at Paris, 1667-72 ; arch of St. Denis, Paris, 1672, by Blondel ; 
Arch of St. Martin, 1674, by Bullet ; Banque de France, H. de Luyne, 
H. Soubise, all in Paris ; Ch. Chantilly ; Ch. de Tanlay ; P. St. Cloud ; 
Place des Victoires, 1685 ; Chu. St. Sulpice, Paris, by Le Vau (facade, 
1755) ; Chu. St. Roch, Paris, 1653, by Lemercier and de Cotte ; Notre 
Dame des Victoires, Paris, 1656, by Le Muet and Bruant. 

The Decline: P. Bourbon, 1722; T. H. Rouen; Halle aux Bles 
(recently demolished), 1748; Ecole Militaire, 1752-58, by Gabriel ; P. 
Louvre, court completed, 1754, by the same ; Madeleine begun, 1764 ; H. 
des Monnaies (Mint), by Antoine ; Erole de Medecine, 1774, by Gon- 
douin ; P. Royal, Great Court, 1784, by Louis ; Theatre Francais, 1784 
(all the above at Paris) ; Grand Theatre, Bordeaux, 1785-1800, by L.ouis ; 
Prefecture at Bordeaux, by the same ; Ch. de Compiegne, 1770, by 
Gabriel ; P. Versailles, theatre by the same ; H. Montmorency, Soubise, 
de Varennes, and the Petit Luxembourg, all at Paris, by de Cotte ; public 
squares at Nancy, Bordeaux, Valenciennes, Rennes, Reims. 



Books Recommended : As before, Fergusson, Palustre. 
Also, Belcher and Macartney, Later Renaissance Architecture 
in England. Billings, Baronial an</ Ecclesiastical Antiquities 

of Scotland. Blomfield, A Short History of Renaissance Arc/i- 
itecture in England. Britton, Architectural Antiquities ot 
Great Britain. Hwerbeck, Die Renaissance in Belgien und 
Holland. Galland, Geschichte der Hollandischen Baukunst ini 
Zeitalter der Renaissance, (iotch and Brown, Architecture f 
the Renaissance in England. Loftie, Inigo Jones and Wren. 
Nash, Mansions of England. Pap worth, Renaissance and 
Italian Styles of Architecture in Great Britain. Richardson, 
Architectural Remains of the Reigns of Elizabeth and James J. 
Schayes, Hisloire de I* architecture en Belgit/ue. 

THE TRANSITION. The architectural activity of the six- 
teenth century in England was chiefly devoted to the erec- 
tion of vast country mansions for the nobility and wealthy 
bourgeoisie. In these seignorial resiliences a degenerate form 
of the Gothic-, known as the Tudor style, was employed 
during the reigns of Henry VII, and Henry VIII., and they 
still retained much of the feudal aspect of the Middle 
Ages. This style, with its broad, square windows and am- 
ple halls, was well suited to domestic architecture, as w 11 
as to collegiate buildings, of which a considerable number 
were erected at this time. Among the more important pal- 
aces and manor-houses of this period are the earlier parts 
of Hampton Court, Haddon and Hengreave Hails, and the 
now ruined < asties of Raglan and Wolterton. 

ELIZABETHAN STYLE. I'nder Elizabeth (1558-1603) the 
progress of classic culture and the employment of Dutch 


and Italian artists led to a gradual introduction of Renais- 
sance forms, which, as in France, were at first mingled with 
others of Gothic origin. Among the foreign artists in Eng- 
land were the versatile Holbein, Trevigi and Torregiano 
from Italy, and Theodore Have, Bernard Jansen, and Ge- 
rard Chrlsmas from Holland. The pointed arch disappeared, 
and the orders began to be used as subordinate features in 


the decoration of doors, windows, chimneys, and mantels. 
Open-work balustrades replaced externally the heavy Tudor 
battlements, and a peculiar style of carving in flat relief- 
patterns, resembling applique designs cut out with the jig- 
saw and attached by nails or rivets, was applied with little 
judgment to all possible features. Ceilings were com- 
monly finished in plaster, with elaborate interlacing pat- 
terns in low relief ; and this, with the increasing use of in- 
terior woodwork, gave to the mansions of this time a more 
homelike but less monumental aspect internally. English 


architects, like Smithson and Thorpe, now began to win 
the patronage at first monopolized by foreigners. In 
Wollaton Hall (1580), by Smithson, the orders were used 
for the main composition with mullioned windows, much 
after the fashion of Longleat House, completed a year ear- 
lier by his master, John of Padua. During the following 
period, however (1590-1610), there was a reaction toward 
the Tudor practice, and the orders were again relegated to 
subordinate uses. Of their more monumental employment, 
the Gate of Honor of Caius College, Cambridge, is one of 
the earliest examples. Hardwicke and Charlton Halls, and 
Burghley, -Hatfield, and Holland Houses (Pig. 184), are 
noteworthy monuments of the style. 

JACOBEAN STYLE. During the reign of James I. (1603- 
25), details of classic origin came into more general use, 
but caricatured almost beyond recognition. The orders, 
though much employed, were treated without correctness 
or grace, and the ornament was unmeaning and heavy. It 
is not worth while to dwell further upon this style, which 
produced no important public buildings, and soon gave way 
to a more rigid classicism. 

CLASSIC PEEIOD. If the classic style was late in its ap- 
pearance in England, its final sway was complete and long- 
lasting. It was Imgo Jours (1572-1652) who first intro- 
duced the correct and monumental style of the Italian mas- 
ters of Classic design. For PalladlO, indeed, he seems to 
entertained a sort of veneration, and the villa which 
Signed at Chiswick was a reduced copy of Palladio's 
Villa Capra, near Vicenza. This and other works of his 
show a failure to appreciate the unsuitability of Italian con- 
ceptions to the climate and tastes of Great Britain ; his 
efforts to popularize I'alladian architecture, without the re- 
sources which Palladio controlled in the way of decorative 

sculpture and painting, were consequently not always 

happy in their results. His greatest work was the design 



for a new Palace at Whitehall, London. Of this colossal 
scheme, which, if completed, would have ranked as the 
grandest palace of the time, only the Banqueting Hall 
(now used as a museum) was ever built (Fig. 185). It is an 
effective composition in two stories, rusticated throughout 
and adorned with columns and pilasters, and contains a 
fine vaulted hall in three aisles. The plan of the palace, 
which was to have 
measured 1,152.x 720 
feet, was excellent, 
largely conceived and 
carefully studied in its 
details, but it was 
wholly beyond the re- 
sources of the king- 
dom. The garden- 
front of Somerset 
House (1632 ; demol- 
ished) had the same 
qualities of simplicity 
and dignity, recalling 
the works of Sammi- 
chele. Wilton House, 
Coleshill, the villa at 
C his wick, and St. 

Paul's, Covent Garden, are the best known of his works, 
showing him to have been a designer of ability, but hardly of 
the consummate genius which his admirers attribute to him. 
ST. PAUL'S CATHEDRAL. The greatest of Jones's succes- 
sors was Sir Christopher Wren (1632-1723), principally 
known as the architect of St. Paul's Cathedral, London, 
built to replace the earlier Gothic cathedral destroyed in 
the great fire of 1666. It was begun in 1675, and its de- 
signer had the rare good fortune to witness its completion 
in 1 7 10. The plan, as finally adopted, retained the general 




proportions of an English Gothic church, measuring 480 
feet in length, with transepts 250 feet long, and a grand 
rotunda 108 feet in diameter at the crossing (Fig. 186). 
The style was strictly Italian, treated with sobriety and 
dignity, if somewhat lacking in variety and inspiration. 
Externally two stories of the Corinthian order appear, the 
upper story being merely a screen to hide the clearstory 
and its buttresses. This is an archi- 
tectural deception, not atoned for 
by any special beauty of detail. The 
dominant feature of the design is the 
dome over the central area. It con- 
sists of ail inner shell, reaching a 
height of 216 feet, above which 
rises the exterior dome of wood, 
surmounted by a stone lantern, the 
summit of which is 360 feet from 
the pavement (Fig. 187). This ex- 
terior dome, springing from a high 
drum surrounded by a magnificent 
peristyle, gives to the Otherwise 
Commonplace exterior of the cathe- 
dral a signal majesty of effect. 
Next to the dome the most suc- 
cessful part of the design is the west front, with its two- 
storied porch and flanking bell -turrets. Internally the 
excessive relative length, especially that of the choil 
detracts from the effect of the dome, and the poverty 
detail gives the whole a somewhat bare aspect. It is in- 
tended to relieve this ultimately by a systematic use of mo- 
saic decoration, especially in the dome. The central area 
itself, in spite of the awkward treatment of the four smaller 
arches of the eight which support the dome, is a noble de- 
sign, occupying the whole width of the three aisles, like the 
Octagon at Ely, ami producing a striking effect of ampli- 

nc. 186. PLAN Off ST. W'L'\ 



tude and grandeur. The dome above it is constructively in- 
teresting from the employment of a cone of brick masonry 
to support the stone lantern which rises above the exterior 
wooden shell. The lower part of the cone forms the drum 
of the inner dome, its contraction upward being intended 
to produce a perspective illusion of increased height. 


St. Paul's ranks among the five of six greatest domical 
buildings of Europe, and is the most imposing modern edi- 
fice in England. 

WREN'S OTHER WORKS. Wren was conspicuously success- 
ful in the designing of parish churches in London. St. Ste- 
phen's, Walbrook, is the most admired of these, with a 
dome resting on eight columns. Wren may be called the 
inventor of the English Renaissance type of steeple, in 
which a conical or pyramidal spire is harmoniously added 


to a belfry on a square tower with classic details. The 
steeple of Bow Church, Cheapside, is the most successful 
example of the type. In secular architecture Wren's most 
important works were the plan for rebuilding London after 
the Great Fire ; the new courtyard of Hampton Court, a 
quiet and dignified composition in brick and stone ; the 
pavilions and colonnade of Greenwich Hospital; the Shel- 
donian Theatre at Oxford, and the Trinity College Library 
at Cambridge. Without profound originality, these works 
testify to the sound good taste and intelligence of their 

THE 18TE CENTURY. The Anglo-Italian style as used by 
Jones and Wren continued in use through the eighteenth 
century, during the first half of which a number of impor- 
tant country-seats and some churches were erected. Van 
BrttgA (1666-1726). Hawksmoor (1666-1736), and Hibbs 
(1683-175 1 ) were then the leading architects. Van Brugh 
was especially skilful in his dispositions of plan and mass, 
and produced in the designs of Blenheim and Castle How- 
ard effects of grandeur and variety of perspective hard- 
ly equalled by any of 
his contemporaries in 



palatial aspect, though 

the striving for pictU- 

resqueness is carried too 

far. Castle Howard is 

simpler, depending largely for effect on a somewhat inap- 
propriate dome. To Hawksmoor, his pupil, are due St. 

Mary's, Woolnoth (1715). at London, in which by a bold 
ition of the whole exterior and by windows set in 

iSK. It. IN "( IIKM1KIM. 



large recessed arches he was enabled to dispense wholly 
with the orders ; St. George's, Bloomsbury ; the new quad- 
rangle of All Souls at Oxford, and some minor works. 
The two most noted de- , 
signs of James Gibbs are 
St. Martin's-in-the-Fields, 
at London (1726), and the 
Radcliffe Library, at Ox- 
ford (1747). In the for- 
mer the use of a Corinth- 
ian portico a practically 
uncalled-for but decora- 
tive appendage and of a 
steeple mounted on the 
roof, with no visible lines 
of support from the 
ground, are open to criti- 
cism. But the excellence 
of the proportions, and 
the dignity and appropri- 
ateness of the composi- 
tion, both internally and 
externally, go far to re- 
deem these defects (Fig. 
189). The Radcliffe Li- 
brary is a circular domical hall surrounded by a lower circuit 
of alcoves and rooms, the whole treated with straightfor- 
ward simplicity and excellent proportions. Colin Camp- 
bell, Flitcroft, Kent and Wood, contemporaries of Gibbs, 
may be dismissed with passing mention. 

Sir William Chambers (1726-96) was the greatest of the 
later 18th-century architects. His fame rests chiefly on 
his Treatise on Civil Architecture, and the extension and re- 
modelling of Somerset House, in which he retained the gen- 
eral ordonnance of Inigo Jones's design, adapting it to a 



frontage of some 600 feet. Robert Adams, the designer of 
Keddlestone Hall, Robot Taylor (1714-88), the architect of 
the Hank of England, and George Dance, who designed the 
Mansion House and Newgate Prison, at London the latter 
a vigorous and appropriate composition without the orders 
close the list of noted architects of the eighteenth cen- 
tury. It was a period singularly wanting in artistic creative- 
ness and spontaneity ; its productions were nearly all dull 
and respectable, or at best dignified, but without charm. 

BELGIUM. As in all other countries where the late 
Gothic style had been highly developed, Belgium was slow 
to accept the principles of the Renaissance in art. Long 
after the dawn of the sixteenth century the Flemish archi- 
tects continued to employ their highly florid Gothic alike 
for churches and town-halls, with whjch they chiefly had to 
do. The earliest Renaissance buildings date from 1530-40, 
among them being the Hotel du Saumon, at Malines, at 
Bruges the Ancien Greffe, by yean ll'a/iot, and at I. 
the Archbishop's Palace, by Jiorset. The last named, in 
the singular and capricious form of the arches and balus- 
ter-like columns of its court, reveals the taste of the age 
for what was outre iuu\ odd ; a taste partly due, no doubt, 
to Spanish influences, as Belgium wa> in reality from 1506 
to 1712 a Spanish province, and there was more or less in- 
terchange of artists between the two countries. The Hotel 
de Ville, at Antwerp, by Cornelius it I'rienJt or Floris 
(1518-75). rrr< ted in 1565, is the most important monument 
of the Renaissance in Belgium. Its facade, 305 feet long 
and 102 feet high, in four stories, is an impressive creation 
in spite of its somewhat monotonous fenestration and the 
inartistic repetition in the third story of the composition 
and proportions of the second. The basement story forms 
an open arcade, and an open colonnade or loggia runs 
along under the roof, thus imparting to the composition a 
considerable play of light and shade, enhanced by the pict- 



uresque central pavilion which rises to a height of six 
stories in diminishing stages. The style is almost Palla- 
dian in its severity, but in general the Flemish architects 
disdained the restrictions of classic canons, preferring a 
more florid and fanciful effect than could be obtained by 
mere combinations of Roman columns, arches, and entabla- 
tures. De Vriendt's other works were mostly designs for 
altars, tabernacles and the like ; among them the rood 
screen in Tournay Cathe- 
dral. His influence may 
be traced in the Hotel de 
Ville at Flushing (1594). 

The ecclesiastical ar- 
chitecture of the Flemish 
Renaissance is almost as 
destitute of important 
monuments as is the sec- 
ular. Ste. Anne, at Bru- 
ges, fairly illustrates the 
type, which is character- 
ized in general by heavi- 
ness of detail and a cold 
and bare aspect internally. 
The Renaissance in Bel- 
gium is best exemplified, 
after all, by minor works 
and ordinary dwellings, many of which have considerable 
artistic grace, though they are quaint rather than monumen- 
tal (Fig. 190). Stepped gables, high dormers, and volutes 
flanking each diminishing stage of the design, give a cer- 
tain piquancy to the street architecture of the period. 

HOLLAND. Except in the domain of realistic painting, 
the Dutch have never manifested pre-eminent artistic en- 
dowments, and the Renaissance produced in Holland few 
monuments of consequence. It began there, as in many 



other places, with minor works in the churches, due largely 
to Flemish or Italian artists. About the middle of the 16th 
century two native architects, Sebastian van Noye and Will- 
iam van Noort, first popularized the use of carved pilasters 
and of gables or steep pediments adorned with carved scal- 
lop-shells, in remote imitation of the style of Francis 1. 
The principal monuments of the age were town-halls, and, 
after the war of independence in which the yoke of Spain 
was finally broken (1566-79), local administrative buildings 
mints, exchanges and the like. The Town Hall of The 
Hague (1565), with its stepped gable or great dormer, its 
consoles, statues, and octagonal turrets, may be said to have 
inaugurated the style generally followed after the war. 
Owing to the lack of stone, brick was almost universally 
employed, and stone imported by sea was only used in edi- 
fices of exceptional cost and importance. Of these the Town 
Hall at Amsterdam holds the first place. Its facade is of 
about the same dimensions as the one at Antwerp, but 
compares unfavorably with it in its monotony and want of 
interest. The Leyden Town Hall, by the Fleming, Limn 
de Key (1597), the Bourse or Exchange and the Hanse 
House at Amsterdam, by Hendrik de A'eyser, are also worthy 
of mention, though many lesser buildings, built of brick 
combined with enamelled terra -cotta and stone, possi 
quite as much artistic merit. 

DENMARK. In Denmark the monuments of the Renais- 
sance may almost be said to be confined to the reign of 
Christian IV. (1588-1648), and do not include a single 
church of any importance. The royal castles of the Rosen- 
borg at Copenhagen (1610) and the Fredericksborg (1580- 
1624), the latter by a Dutch architect, are interesting and 
picturesque in mass, with their fanciful gables, mullioned 
windows and numerous turrets, but can hardly lay claim to 
beauty of detail or purity of style. The Exchange at Co- 
penhagen, built of brick and stone in the same general 


style (1619-40), is still less interesting both in mass and 

The only other important Scandinavian monument de- 
serving of special mention in so brief a sketch as this is the 
Royal Palace at Stockholm, Sweden (1698-1753), due to a 
foreign architect, Nicodemus de Tessin. It is of imposing 
dimensions, and although simple in external treatment, it 
merits praise for the excellent disposition of its plan, its 
noble court, imposing entrances, and the general dignity 
and appropriateness of its architecture. 

MONUMENTS (in addition to those mentioned in text). England, 
Tudor Style : Several palaces by Henry VIII., no longer extant ; West- 
wood, later rebuilt ; Gosfield Hall ; Harlaxton. Elizabethan : Buck- 
hurst. 1565; Kirby House. 1570, both by Thorpe; Cains College, 1570- 
75, by Theodore Have; "The Schools," Oxford, by Thomas Holt, 1600; 
Beaupre Castle, 1600. Jacobean : Tombs of Mary of Scotland and of 
Elizabeth in Westminster Abbey; Audsley Inn; Bolsover Castle, 1613 ; 
Heriot's Hospital. Edinburgh, 1628. Classic or Anglo-Italian : St. 
John's College, Oxford ; Queen's House, Greenwich ; Coleshill ; all by 
Inigo Jones, 1620-51 ; Amesbury, by Webb ; Combe Abbey ; Bucking- 
ham and Montague Houses ; The Monument, London, 1670, by Wren ; 
Temple Bar, by the same ; Winchester Palace, 1683 ; Chelsea College ; 
Towers of Westminster Abbey, 1696 ; St. Clement Dane's ; St. James's, 
Westminster ; St. Peter's, Cornhill, and many others, all by Wren. 18TH 
Century : Seaton Delaval and Grimsthorpe, by Van Brugh ; Wanstead 
House, by Colin Campbell ; Treasury Buildings, by Kent. 

The most important Renaissance buildings of Belgium and Holland 
have been mentioned in the text. 



Books RECOMMENDED : As before, Fergusson, Palustre. 
Also, von Bezold, Die Baukunst der Renaissance in Deutsch- 
land, Holland, Belgien und Ddnchirk (in Udbuch. d.Arch.). 
Caveda (tr. Kugler), Get chic lite do Baukunst in Spanien. 
Fritsch, Denkmaler der deutschen Renaissance (plates). Jung- 
handel, Die Baukunst Spaniens. I^ambert und Stahl, Motive 
der deutschen Architektur. Fiibke, Geschichte der Renaissance 
in Deutschland. Prentice, Renaissance Architecture and Orna- 
ment in Spain. I'hde, Baudenkmaler in Spauien. Verdier et 
Cattois, Architecture civiletet domestii/ue. Villa Amil, Hispania 
Ariistica y Monumental. 

AUSTRIA; BOHEMIA- The earliest appearance of the Re 
naissance in the architecture of the German states was in the 
eastern provinces. Before the close of the fifteenth < en- 
tury Florentine and Milanese architects were employed in 
Austria, Bohemia, and the Tyrol, where there are a number 
of palaces and chapels in an unmixed Italian style. The 
portal of the castle of Mahriseh-Triibau dates from 1492 ; 
while to the early years of the 16th century belong a cruci- 
form chapel at Gran, the remodelling of the castle at Cra- 
- ow, and the chapel of the Jagellons in the same city the 
earliest domical structure of the German Renaissance, 
though of Italian design. The* Schloss Porzia (1510), at 
Spital in Carinthia, is a fine quadrangular palace, surround- 
ing a court with arcades on three sides, in which the open 
stairs form a picturesque interruption with their rampant 
arches. But for the massiveness of the details it might 
be a Florentine palace. In addition to this, the famous Ar- 
senal at Wieuer-Neustadt (1524), the portal of the Impe 


rial Palace (1552), and the Castle Schalaburg on the Dan- 
ube (1530-1601), are attributed to Italian architects, to 
whom must also be ascribed a number of important works 
at Prague. Chief among these the Belvedere (1536, by 
Paolo della Stella), a rectangular building surrounded by a 
graceful open arcade, above which it rises with a second 
story crowned by a curved roof; the Waldstein Palace 
(1621-29), by Giov. Marini, with its imposing loggia; 
Schloss Stern, built on the plan of a six-pointed star (1459- 
1565) and embellished by Italian artists with stucco orna- 
ments and frescoes ; and parts of the palace on the Hrad- 
schin, by Scamozzi, attest the supremacy of Italian art in 
Bohemia. The same is true of Styria, Carinthia, and the 
Tyrol ; e. g, Schloss Ambras at Innsbruck (1570). 

GERMANY: PERIODS. The earliest manifestation of the 
Renaissance in what is now the German Empire, appeared 
in the works of painters like Diirer and Burkmair, and in 
occasional buildings previous to 1525. The real transfor- 
mation of German architecture, however, hardly began un- 
til after the Peace of Augsburg, in 1555. From that time 
on its progress was rapid, its achievements being almost 
wholly in the domain of secular architecture princely and 
ducal castles, town halls or Rathhauser, and houses of 
wealthy burghers or corporations. It is somewhat singular 
that the German emperors should not have undertaken the 
construction of a new imperial residence on a worthy scale, 
the palaces of Munich and Berlin being aggregations of 
buildings of various dates about a nucleus of mediaeval ori- 
gin, and with no single portion to compare with the stately 
chateaux of the French kings. Church architecture was 
neglected, owing to the Reformation, which turned to its 
own uses the existing churches, while the Roman Catholics * 
were too impoverished to replace the edifices they had 

The periods of the German Renaissance are less well 


in. irked than those of the French ; hut its successive devel- 
opments follow the same general progression, divided into 
three stages : 

I. The Early Renaissance, 1525-1600, in which the 
orders were infrequently used, mainly for porches and for 
gable decoration. The conceptions and spirit of most 
monuments were still strongly tinged with Gothic feeling. 

II. The Late Renaissance, 1600-1675, characterized 
by a dry, heavy treatment, in which too often neither the 
fanciful gayety of the previous period nor the simple and 
monumental dignity of classic design appears. Broken 
curves, large scrolls, obelisks, and a style of flat relief carv- 
ing resembling the Elizabethan are common. Occasional 
monuments exhibit a more correct and classic treatment 
after Italian models. 

III. The DECLINE or Baroque Period, 1675-1800, em- 
ploying the orders in a style of composition oscillating be- 
tween the extremes of bareness and of Rococo over-deco- 
ration. The ornament partakes of the character of the 
Louis XV. and Italian Jesuit styles, being most successful 
in interior decoration, but externally running to the ex- 
treme of unrestrained fancy. 

CHARACTERISTICS. In none of these periods do we meet 
with the sober, monumental treatment of the Florentine or 
Roman schools. A love of picturesque variety in ma- 
and sky-lines, inherited from mediaeval times, appears in 
the high roots, stepped gables and lofty dormers which are 
universal. The roofs often comprise several stories, and 
are lighted by lofty gables at either end, and by dormers 
carried up from the side walls through two or three stories. 
Gables and dormers alike are built in diminishing sta. 

1 step adorned with a console or scroll, and the whole 
treated with pilasters or colonnettes and entablatures break- 
ing over each support (Fig. 191). These roofs, dormers, and 
gables contribute the most noticeable element to the gen- 



eral effect of most German Renaissance buildings, and are 
commonly the best-designed features in them. The orders 
are scantily used and usually treated with utter disregard 
of classic canons, being generally far too massive and over- 
loaded with ornament. 
Oriels, bay-windows, 
and turrets, starting 
from corbels or col- 
onnettes, or rarely 
from the ground, di- 
versify the facade, and 
spires of curious bul- 
bous patterns give 
added piquancy to the 
picturesque sky-line. 
The plans seldom had 
the monumental sym- 
metry and largeness 
of Italian and French 
models ; courtyards 
were often irregular 
in shape and diversi- 
fied with balconies 
and spiral staircase- 
turrets. The nation- 
al leaning was always 
toward the quaint and 
fantastic, as well in 
the decoration as in fig- 191. schloss hamelschenburg. 

the composition. Gro- 
tesques, caryatids, galnes (half-figures terminating below in 
sheath-like supports), fanciful rustication, and many other 
details give a touch of the Baroque even to works of early 
date. The same principles were applied with better suCt 
cess to interior decoration, especially in the large halls of 


the castles and town-halls, and many of their ceilings were 
sumptuous and well-considered designs, deeply panelled, 
painted and gilded in wood or plaster. 

CASTLES- The Schloss or Burg of the German prince or 
duke retained throughout the Renaissance many mediaeval 
characteristics in plan and aspect. A large proportion of 
these noble residences were built upon foundations of de- 
molished feudal castles, reproducing in a new dress the 
ancient round towers and vaulted guard-rooms and halls, 
as in the Hartenfels at Torgau, the Heldburg (both in 
Saxony), and the castle of Trausnitz, in Bavaria, among 
many others. The Castle at Torgau (1540) is one of the 
most imposing of its class, with massive round and square 
towers showing externally, and court facades full of pict- 
uresque irregularities. In the great Castle at Dresden the 
plan is more symmetrical, and the Renaissance appears more 
distinctly in the details of the Georgenfliigel (1530-50), 
though at that early date the classic orders were almost 
ignored. The portal of the Heldburg, however, built in 
1562, is a composition quite in the contemporary French 
vein, with superposed orders and a crowning pediment over 
a massive basement. 

Another important series of castles or palaces are of more 
regular design, in which the feudal traditions tend to disap- 
pear. The majority belong to the end of the 16th and be- 
ginning of the 17th centuries. They are built around large 
rectangular courts with arcades in two or three stories on 
one or more sides, but rarely surrounding it entirely. In 
these the segmental arch is more common than the semi- 
circular, and springs usually from short and stumpy Ionic 
or Corinthian columns. The rooms and halls are arranged 
en suite, without corridors, and a large and lofty banquet 
hall forms the dominant feature of the series. The earliest 
of these regularly planned palaces are of Italian design. 
Chief among them is the Eesidenz at Landshut (1536-43), 


with a thoroughly Roman plan, by pupils of Giulio Roma- 
no, and exterior and court facades of great dignity treated 
with the orders. More German in its details, but equally 
interesting, is the Furstenhof at Wismar, in brick and terra- 
cotta, by Valentino di Lira and Van Aken (1553) ; while in 
the Piastenschloss at Brieg (1547-72), by Italian architects, 
the treatment in parts suggests the richest works of the 
style of Francis I. In other castles the segmental arch and 
stumpy columns or piers show the German taste, as in the 
Plassenburg, by Kaspar Vischer (1554-64), the castle at 
Plagnitz, and the Old Castle at Stuttgart, all dating from 
about 1550-55. Heidelberg Castle, in spite of its mediaeval 
aspect from the river "and its irregular plan, ranks as the 
highest achievement of the German Renaissance in palace 
design. The most interesting parts among its various 
wings built at different dates the earlier portions still 
Gothic in design are the Otto Heinrichsbau (1554) and 
the Friedrichsbau (1601). The first of these appears some- 
what simpler in its lines than the second, by reason of having 
lost its original dormer-gables. The orders, freely treated, 
are superposed fn three stories, and twin windows, niches, 
statues, gaines, medallions and profuse carving produce 
an effect of great gayety and richness. The Friedrichs- 
bau (Fig. 192), less quiet in its lines, and with high scroll- 
gabled and stepped dormers, is on the other hand more 
soberly decorated and more characteristically German. The 
Schloss Hamelschenburg (Fig. 191) is designed in some- 
what the same spirit, but with even greater simplicity of 

TOWN HALLS. These constitute the most interesting class 
of Renaissance buildings in Germany, presenting a consid- 
erable variety of types, but nearly all built in solid blocks 
without courts, and adorned with towers or spires. A high 
roof crowns the building, broken by one or more high ga- 
bles or many-storied dormers. The majority of these town 



halls present facades much diversified by projecting wings, 
as at Lemgo and Paderborn, or by oriels and turrets, as at 
Altenburg (1562-64); and the towers which dominate the 
whole terminate usually in bell-shaped cupolas, or in more 

capricious forms with 
successive swellings 
and contractions, as at 
Dan tzic (1587). A few, 
however, are designed 
with monumental sim- 
plicity of mass ; of these 
that at Bremen (161 2) 
is perhaps the finest, 
with iN beautiful ex- 
terior arcade on strong 
Doric columns. The 
town hall of Nuremberg 
is one of the few with 
a court, and presents a 
facade of almost Roman 
simplicity (1613- 19) ; 
that at Augsburg (1615) 
is equally classic and 
more pleasing; while 
at Schweinfurt, Rothen- 

bnrg(i57a), Mulhausen, 

etc., are others worthy 
of mention. 

chael's, at Munich, is 
almost the only important church of the first period in 
Germany (1582), but it is worthy to rank with many of 
the most notable contemporary Italian churches. A wide 
nave covered by a majestic barrel vault, is flanked by side 
chapels, separated from each other by massive piers and 




forming a series of gallery bays above. There are short 
transepts and a choir, all in excellent proportion and treat- 
ed with details which, if somewhat heavy, are appropriate 
and reasonably correct. The Marienkirche at Wolfenbiit- 
tel (1608) is a fair sample of the parish churches of the sec- 
ond period. In the exte- 
rior of this church point- 
ed arches and semi-Gothic 
tracery are curiously asso- 
ciated with heavy rococo 
carving. The simple rect- 
angular mass, square tow- 
er, and portal with mas- 
sive orders and carving 
are characteristic features. 
Many of the church-tow- 
ers are well proportioned 
and graceful structures in 
spite of the fantastic out- 
lines of their spires. One 
of the best and purest in 
style is that of the Uni- 
versity Church at Wiirz- 
burg (1587-1600). 

HOUSES. Many of the 
German houses of the six- 
teenth and seventeenth 
centuries would merit ex- 
tended notice in a larger 

work, as among the most interesting lesser monuments 
of the Renaissance. Nuremberg and Hildesheim are par- 
ticularly rich in such houses, built either for private citi- 
zens or for guilds and corporations. Not a few of the half- 
timbered houses of the time are genuine works of art, 
though interest chiefly centres in the more monumental 




dwellings of stone. In this domestic architecture the pict- 
uresque quality of German design appears to better advan- 
tage than in more monumental edifices, and their broadly 
stepped gables, corbelled oriels, florid portals and want of 

formal symmetry im- 
parting a peculiar and 
undeniable charm. The 
Kaiserhaus and Wjede- 
kindsches Haus at 1 1 i 1- 
desheim ; Fiirstenhaus 
at Leipzig; Peller, 
Hirschvogel, and Funk 
houses at Nuremberg ; 
the Salt House at Frank- 
furt, and Ritter House 
at Heidelberg, are a few 
of the most noted among 
these examples of do- 
mestic architecture. 

The Zwinger Palace at 
Dresden (Fig. 193), is 
the most elaborate and 
wayward example of the 
German palace archi- 
tecture of the third pe- 
riod. Its details are of 
the most exaggerated 
rococo type, like co 
fectioner's work done in stone ; and yet the building h 
an air of princely splendor which partly atones for its d 
tails. Besides this palace, Dresden possesses in the domical 
Harienkirche (Fig. 194) a very meritorious example of 
late design. The proportions are good, and the detail, if 
not interesting, is at least inoffensive, while the whole is 

:hi-rch or st. mary (marienkirche), 





a dignified and rational piece of work. At Vienna are a 
number of palaces of the third period, more interesting for 
their beautiful grounds and parks than for intrinsic archi- 
tectural merit. As in Italy, this was the period of stucco, 
and although in Vienna this cheap and perishable material 
was cleverly handled, and the ornament produced was often 
quaint and effective, the results lack the permanence and 
dignity of true building in stone or brick, and may be dis- 
missed without further mention. 

In minor works the Germans were far less prolific than 
the Italians or Spaniards. Few of their tombs were of the 
first importance, though one, the Sebald Shrine, in Nurem- 
berg, by Peter Vischer (1506-19), is a splendid work in 
bronze, in the transitional style ; a richly decorated canopy 
on slender metal colonnettes covering and enclosing the 
sarcophagus of the saint. There are a large number of 
fountains in the squares of German and Swiss cities which 
display a high order of design, and are among the most 
characteristic minor products of German art. 

SPAIN. The flamboyant Gothic style sufficed for a while 
to meet the requirements of the arrogant and luxurious 
period which in Spain followed the overthrow of the Moors 
and the discovery of America. But it was inevitable that 
the Renaissance should in time make its influence felt in 
the arts of the Iberian peninsula, largely through the em- 
ployment of Flemish artists. In jewelry and silverwork, 
arts which received a great impulse from the importation 
of the precious metals from the New World, the forms of 
the Renaissance found special acceptance, so that the new 
style received the name of the Plateresque (from platero, 
silversmith). This was a not inept name for the minutely 
detailed and sumptuous decoration of the early Renais- 
sance, which lasted from 1500 to the accession of Philip II. 
in 1556. It was characterized by surface-decoration spread- 
ing over broad areas, especially around doors and windows, 


florid escutcheons and Gothic details mingling with dell 
cately chiselled arabesques. Decorative pilasters with 
broken entablatures and carved baluster-shafts were em- 
ployed with little reference to constructive lines, but with 
great refinement of detail, in spite of the exuberant profu- 
sion of the ornament. 

To this style, after the artistic inaction of Philip II.'s 
reign, succeeded the coldly classic style practised by Ben u- 
guete and Herrera, and called the Griego-Romano. In spite of 
the attempt to produce works of classical purity, the build- 
ings of this period are for the most part singularly devoid of 
originality and interest. This style lasted until the middle 
of the seventeenth century, and in the case of certain works 
and artists, until its close. It was followed, at least in eeele- 
siastieal architecture, by the so-called Churrigueresque^ a 
name derived from an otherwise insignificant architect, Chtn- 
rigtiera, who like Maderna and Horromini in Italy, discarded 
all the proprieties of architecture, and rejoiced in the wildest 
extravagances <>f an untrained fancy and debased taste. 

EARLY MONUMENTS. The earliest ecclesiastical works of 
the Renaissance period, like the cathedrals of Salamanca, 
Toledo, and Segovia, were almost purely Gothic in style. 
Not until 1525 did tin- new forms begin to dominate in 
cathedral design. The cathedral at Jaen, by Valdehira 
(1525), an imposing structure with three aisles and side 
chapels, was treated internally with the Corinthian order 
throughout. The Cathedral <>i Granada (1529, by Diego de 
Si/oc) is especially interesting for its great domical sanctu- 
ary 70 feet in diameter, and for the largeness and dignity 
of its conception and details. The cathedral of Malaga, 
the church of San Domingo at Salamanca, and the monas- 
tery of San Girolamo in the same city are either wholly or 
in part Plateresque, and provided with portals of especial 
richness of decoration. Indeed, the portal of S. Domingo 
practically forms the whole facade. 



In secular architecture the Hospital of Santa Cruz at 
Toledo, by Enrique de Egos (1504 16), is one of the earliest 
examples of the style, line, as also in the University at 
Salamanca (Kig. 195), the portal is the most notable feat- 
ure, suggesting both 
Italian and French 
models in its details. 
The great College at 
Alcala de Henares is 
another important 
early monument of 
the Renaissance 
(1500-17, by Pedro 
Gumiel). In most de- 
signs the preference 
was for long facades 
of moderate height, 
with a basement 
showing few open- 
ings, and a bel etage 
lighted by large win- 
dows widely spaced. 
Ornament was chief- 
ly concentrated about 
the doors and win- 
dows, except for the 
root balustrades, fig. 195. door of the university, salamancai 
which were often ex- 
ceedingly elaborate. Occasionally a decorative motive is 
spread over the whole facade, as in the Casa de las Conchas 
at Salamanca, adorned with cockle-shells carved at inter- 
vals all over the front a bold and effective device ; or the 
Infantada palace with its spangling of carved diamonds. 
The courtyard or patio was an indispensable feature of 
these buildings, as in all hot countries, and was sur- 



rounded by arcades frequently of the most fanciful design 
overloaded with minute ornament, as in the Iniantado at 
Guadalajara, the Casa de Zaporta, formerly at Saragossa 

| now removed to Paris ; 
Fig. 196), and the Lu- 
piana monastery. The 
patios in the Arch- 
bishop's Palace at Al- 
calade Heflaresand the 
Collegio de los Irlande- 
ses at Salamanca are of 
simpler design ; that of 
the Casa de Pilatos at 
Seville is almost pure- 
ly Moorish. Salamanca 
abounds in buildings of 
this period. 

The more classic treat- 
ment of architectural 
designs by the use of 
the orders was intro- 
duced by Alonzo BerrU' 
g ttete (1480- 1 5 60 ?), who 
studied in Italy after 
1503. The Archbish- 
op's Palace and the 
Doric Gate of San Mar- 

n.. 196. CAM i/F. /aiokia: (oikivaki). tinO. both at Toledo. 

were his work, as well 

as the first palace at Madrid. The Palladio of Spain was, 

However, by Juan de Hnrera (died 1597), the architect or 

Valladolid Cathedral, built under Philip V. This vast edi- 

ilows the general lines of the earlier cathedrals of Jaen 

and Granada, but in a style of classical correctness almost 



severe in aspect, but well suited to the grand scale of the 
church. The masterpiece of this period was the monastery 
of the Escurial, begun by Juan Battista of Toledo, in 1563, 
but not completed until nearly one hundred and fifty years 
later. Its final architectural aspect was largely due to 
Herrera. It is a vast rectangle of 740 X 580 feet, compris- 
ing a complex of courts, halls, and cells, dominated by the 
huge mass of the 
chapel. This last is 
an imposing domical 
church covering 70,- 
000 square feet, treat- 
ed throughout with 
the Doric order, and 
showing externally a 
lofty dome and cam- 
paniles with domical 
lanterns, which serve 
to diversify the oth- 
erwise monotonous 
mass of the monas- 
tery. What the Es- 
curial lacks in grace 
or splendor is at least 
in a measure re- 
deemed by its maj- 
estic scale and varied sky-lines. The Palace of Charles V. 
(Fig. 197), adjoining the Alhambra at Granada, though 
begun as early as 1527 by Machuca, was mainly due to 
Berruguete, and is an excellent example of the Spanish 
Palladian style. With its circular court, admirable propor- 
tions and well-studied details, this often maligned edifice 
deserves to be ranked among the most successful examples 
of the style. During this period the cathedral of Seville 
received many alterations, and the upper part of the adjoin- 



in^ Moorish tower of the Giralda, burned in 1395, was re- 
built by Fernando Ruiz in the prevalent style, and with con- 
siderable elegante and appropriateness of design. 

Of the Palace at Madrid, rebuilt by Philip V. after the 
burning of the earlier palace in 1734, and mainly the work 
of an Italian, /vara ; the Aranjuez palace (1739, by Fran* 
cisco I/crrcra), and the Palace at San Ildefonso, it need only 
be said that their chief merit lies in their size and the ab- 
sence of those glaring violations of good taste which gen- 
erally characterized the successors of Churriguera. In 
ecclesiastical design these violations of taste were particu- 
larly abundant and excessive, especially in the facades and 
in the sanctuary huge aggregations of misplaced and 
vulgar detail, with hardly an unbroken pediment, column, 
or arch in the whole. Some extreme examples of this 
abominable style are to be found in the Spanish-American 
churches of the 17th and 18th centuries, as at Chihuahua 
(Mexico), Tucson (Arizona), and other places. The least 
offensive features of the churches of this period were the 
towers, usually in pairs at the west end, some of them 
showing excellent proportions and good composition in 
spite of their execrable details. 

Minor architectural works, such as the rood screens! in 
the churches of Astorga and Medina de Rio Seco, and 
many tombs at Granada, Avila, Alcala, etc., give evidence 
of superior skill in decorative design, where constructive 
considerations did not limit the exercise of the imagination. 

Portugal. The Renaissance appears to have produced 
few notable works in Portugal. Among the chief of these 
are the Tower, the church, and the Cloister, at Belem. These 
display a riotous profusion of minute carved ornament, with 
a free commingling of late Gothic details, wearisome in the 
end in spite of the beauty of its execution (1500-40?). 
The church of Santa Cruz at Coimbra, and that of Luz, 
near Lisbon, an- among tli<- most noted of the religious 


monuments of the Renaissance, while in secular architecture 
the royal palace at Mafra is worthy of mention. 

MONUMENTS. (Mainly supplementary to preceding text) Austria, 
BOOTHIA, etc. : At Prague, Schloss Stern, 1459-1565 ; Schwarzenburg 
Palace, 1544 ; Waldstein Palace, 1629; Salvator Chapel, Vienna, 1515 ; 
Schloss Schalaburg, near Molk, 1530-1601 ; Standehaus, Gratz, 1625. 
At Vienna : Imperial palace, various dates ; Schwarzenburg and Lichten- 
stein palaces, 18th century. 

Germany, First Period : Schloss Baden, 1510-29 and part 1569-82; 
Schloss Merseburg, 15 14, with late 16th-century portals ; Fuggerhaus at 
Augsburg, 1516 ; castles of Neuenstein, 1530-64 ; Celle, 1532-46 (and 
enlarged, 1665-70) ; Dessau, 1533 ; Leignitz, portal, 1533 ; Plagnitz, 
1550; Schloss Gottesau, 1553-88; castle of Gtistrow, 1555-65; of Oels, 
1 559-1616 ; of Bernburg, 1565 ; of Heiligenburg, >56g-87 ; Miinzhof at 
Munich, 1575 ; Lusthaus (demolished) at Stuttgart, 1575 ; Wilhelmsburg 
Castle at Schmalkald, 1584-90; castle of Hamelschenburg, 1588-1612. 
SfccOND Period: Zunfthaus at Basle, 1578, in advanced style; so also 
Juleum at Helmstadt, 1593-1612 ; gymnasium at Brunswick, 1592-1613 ; 
Spiesshof at Basle, 1600; castle at Berlin, 1600-1616, demolished in great 
part ; castle Bevern, 1603 ; Dantzic, Zeughaus, 1605 ; Wallfahrtskirche at 
Dettelbach, 1613 ; castle Aschaffenburg, 1605-13 ; Schloss Weikersheim, 
1600-83. Third Period : Zeughaus at Berlin, 1695 ; palace at Berlin 
by Schluter, 1699-1706 ; Catholic church, Dresden. (For Classic Revival, 
see next chapter.) Town Halls : At Heilbronn, 1535 ; Gorlitz, 1537 ; 
Posen, 1550; Mulhausen, 1552; Cologne, porch with Corinthian columns 
and Gothic arches, 1569; Ltibeck (Rathhaushalle), 1570; Schweinfurt, 
1570; Gotha, 1574; Emden, 1574-76; Lemgo, 1589; Neisse, 1604; 
Nordhausen, 1610 ; Paderborn, 1612-16 ; Gernsbach, 1617. 

Spain, i6th Century : Monastery San Marcos at Leon ; palace of 
the Infanta, Saragossa ; Carcel del Corte at Baez ; Cath. of Malaga, 
W. front, 1538, by de Siloe ; Tavera Hospital, Toledo, 1541, by de Busta- 
mente ; Alcazar at Toledo, 1548 ; Lonja (Town Hall) at Saragossa, 1551 ; 
Casa de la Sal, Casa Monterey, and Collegio de los Irlandeses, all at 
Salamanca ; Town Hall, Casa de los Taveras and upper part of Giralda, 
all at Seville. 17TH Century : Cathedral del Pilar, Saragossa, 1677 ; 
Tower del Seo, 1685. i8th Century : palace at Madrid, 1735 ; at Aran- 
juez, 1739 ; cathedral of Santiago, 1738 ; Lonja at Barcelona, 1772. 



Books Recommended: As before, Fergusson. Also Cha- 
teau, Histoire et caracteres de V architecture en France ; and 
LUbke, Geschichte der Architektur. (For the most part, how- 
ever, recourse must be had to the general histories of 
architecture, and to monographs on special cities or build- 

THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. By the end of the seventeenth 
century the Renaissance, properly speaking, had run its 
course in Europe. The increasing servility of its imitation 
of antique models had exhausted its elasticity and originality. 
Taste rapidly declined before the growth of the industrial 
and commercial spirit in the eighteenth century. The fer- 
ment of democracy and the disquiet of far-reaching political 
changes had begun to preoccupy the minds of men to the 
detriment of the arts. By the middle of the eighteenth cen- 
tury, however, the extravagances of the Rococo, Jesuit, and 
Louis XV. styles had begun to pall upon the popular taste, 
The creative spirit was dead, and nothing seemed more 
promising as a corrective for these extravagances than a 
return to classic models. Hut the demand was for a literal 
copying of the arcades and porticos of Rome, to serve as 
frontispieces for buildings in which modern requirements 
should be accommodated to these antique exteriors, instead 
of controlling the design. The result was a manifest gain 
in the splendor of the streets and squares adorned by these 
highly decorative frontispieces, but at the expense of con- 


venience and propriety in the buildings themselves. While 
this academic spirit too often sacrificed logic and original- 
ity to an arbitrary symmetry and to the supposed canons 
of Roman design, it also, on the other hand, led to a stateli- 
ness and dignity in the planning, especially in the design- 
ing of vestibules, stairs, and halls, which render many of the 
public buildings it produced well worthy of study. The 
architecture of the Roman Revival was pompous and artifi- 
cial, but seldom trivial, and its somewhat affected grandeur 
was a welcome relief from the dull extravagance of the 
styles it replaced. 

THE GREEK REVIVAL. The Roman revival was, however, 
displaced in England and Germany by the Greek Revival, 
which set in near the close of the eighteenth century. This 
was the result of a newly awakened interest in the long- 
neglected monuments of Attic art which the discoveries of 
Stuart and Revett sent out in 1732 by the London Society 
of Dilettanti had once more made known to the world. 
It led to a veritable furore in England for Greek Doric 
and Ionic columns, which were applied indiscriminately to 
every class of buildings, with utter disregard of propriety. 
The British taste was at this time at its lowest ebb, 
and failed to perceive the poverty of Greek architecture 
when deprived of its proper adornments of carving and 
sculpture, which were singularly lacking in the British ex- 
amples. Nevertheless the Greek style in England had a 
long run of popular favor, yielding only during the reign of 
the present sovereign to the so-called Victorian Gothic, a 
revival of mediaeval forms. In Germany the Greek Revival 
was characterized by a more cultivated taste and a more 
rational application of its forms, which were often freely 
modified to suit modern needs. In France, where the Ro- 
man Revival under Louis XV. had produced fairly satisfac- 
tory results, and where the influence of the Royal School of 
Fine Arts {JZcole des Beaux-Arts) tended to perpetuate the 


principles of Roman design, the Greek Revival found no 
footing. The Greek forms were seen to be too severe and 
intractable for present requirements. About 1830, how- 
ever, a modified style of design, known since as the JV/o- 
Grec y was introduced by the exertions of a small coterie of 
talented architects ; and though its own life was short, it 
profoundly influenced French art in the direction of free- 
dom and refinement for a long time afterward. In Italy 
there was hardly anything in the nature of a true revival 
of either Roman or Greek forms. The few important works 
of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries were 
conceived in the spirit of the late Renaissance, and took 
from the prevalent revival of classicism elsewhere merely 
a greater correctness of detail, not any radical change of 
form or spirit. 

ENGLAND. There was, strictly speaking, no Roman re- 
vival in Great Britain. The modified l'alladian style of 
Wren and Gibbs and their successors continued until super- 
seded by the Greek revival. The first fruit of the new 
movement seems to have been the Bank of England at 
London, by Sir John Soane (1788). In this edifice the 
Greco-Roman order of the round temple at Tivoli was 
closely copied, and applied to a long facade, too low for its 
length and with no sufficient stylobate, but fairly effective 
with its recessed colonnade and unpierced walls. The Brit- 
ish Museum, by Robert Smirke (Fig. 198), was a more am- 
bitious essay in a more purely Greek style. Its colossal 
Ionic colonnade was, however, a mere frontispiece, applied 
to a badly planned and commonplace building, from which 
it cut off needed light. The more modest but appropriate 
columnar facade to the Fitzwilliam Museum at Cambridge, 
by Bassevi, was a more successful attempt in the same direc- 
tion, better proportioned and avoiding the incongruity of 
modern windows in several stories. These have always 
been the stumbling-block of the revived Greek style. The 


difficulties they raise are avoided, however, in buildings 
presenting but two stories, the order being applied to the 
upper story, upon a high stylobate serving as a basement. 
The High School and the Royal Institution at Edinburgh, 
and the University at London, by Wilkins, are for this rea- 
son, if for no other, superior to the British Museum and 
other many-storied Anglo-Greek edifices. In spite of all 


difficulties, however, the English extended the applications of 
the style with doubtful success not only to all manner of pub- 
lic buildings, but also to country residences. Carlton House, 
Bowden Park, and Grange House are instances of this 
misapplication of Greek forms. Neither did it prove more 
tractable for ecclesiastical purposes. St. Pancras's Church 
at London, and several churches by Thomson (1817-75), m 
Glasgow, though interesting as experiments in such adapta- 
tion, are not to be commended for imitation. The most 
successful of all British Greek designs is perhaps St. George's 



Hall at Liverpool (Fig. 199), whose imposing peristyle ami 
porches are sufficiently Greek in spirit and detail to elass 
it among the works of the Greek Revival. But its great 
hall and its interior composition are really Roman and not 


Greek, emphasizing the teaching of experience that Greek 
architecture does not lend itself to the exigencies of mod- 
ern civilization to nearly the same extent as the Roman. 

GERMANY. During the eighteenth century the classic revi- 
val in Germany, which at first followed Roman precedents 
(as in the columns carved with spirally ascending reliefs in 
front of the church of St. Charles Borromeo, at Vienna), was 
directed into the channel of Greek imitation by the literary 
works of Winckelmann, I.essing, Goethe, and others, as well 
ai by the interest aroused by the discoveries of Stuart and 
Kcvctt. The Brandenburg Gate at Berlin (1784), was the 
earliest realization in architecture of this revived Hellen- 
ism, and one of its most successful applications to civic 
purposes. Without precisely cop f Grei structure, 

it was evidently inspired from the Athenian a, and 

nothing in its purpose is foreign to the style employed. 
The greatest activity in the style came I iter, however, and 
irafl greatly stimulated by the achievements of Fr. Schinkel 
(1771-1S41). one of the greatest of modern Gem 



tects. While in the domical church of St. Nicholas at 
Potsdam, he employed Roman forms in a modernized Ro- 
man conception, and followed in one or two other buildings 
the principles of the Renaissance, his predilections were 
for Greek architecture. His masterpiece was the Museum 
at Berlin, with an imposing portico of 18 Ionic columns 
(Fig. 200). This building with its fine rotunda was excel- 
lently planned, and forms, in conjunction with t.he New 
Museum by Stiihler (1843-55), a n bl e palace of art, to whose 
monumental requirements and artistic purpose the Greek 
colonnades and pediments were not inappropriate. Schink- 
el's greatest successor was Leo von Klenze (1 784-1864), 
whose more textual reproductions of Greek models won 
him great favor and wide employment. The Walhalla 
near Ratisbon is a modernized Parthenon, internally vaulted 
with glass ; elegant externally, but too obvious a plagiarism 
to be greatly admired. The Ruhmeshalle at Munich, a 
double L partly enclosing a colossal statue of Bavaria, and 
devoted to the commemoration of Bavaria's great men, is 


copied from no Greek building, though purely Greek in 
design and correct to the smallest detail. In the Glypto- 
thek (Sculpture Gallery), in the same city, the one distinc- 



tivuly (ireek feature introduced by Klenze, an Ionic portico, 
is also the one inappropriate note in the design. The 
Propylaea at Munich, by the same (Fig. 201), and the Court 
Theatre at Berlin, by Schinkel,are other important examples 
of the style. The latter is externally one of the most 
beautiful theatres in Europe, though less ornate than many. 
Schinkel's genius was here remarkably successful in adapt- 
ing Greejc details to the exigent difficulties of theatre de- 



sign, and there is no suggestion of copying any known 
Greek building. 

In Vienna the one notable monument of the Classic Re- 
vival is the Reichsrathsgebaude or Parliament House, by 
Th. Hansen (1^4.?), an imposing two-storied composition 
with a lofty central colonnade and lower side-wings, har- 
monious in general proportions and pleasingly varied in 
outline and m 

In general, the Greek Revival in Germany presents the 

aspect of a sincere striving after beauty, on the part of a 
limited number ^\ artist-, ot great talent, misled by the idea 



that the forms of a dead civilization could be galvanized 
into new life in the service of modern needs. The result 
was disappointing, in spite of the excellent planning, ad- 
mirable construction and carefully studied detail of these 
buildings, and the movement here as elsewhere was fore- 
doomed to failure. 

FRANCE. In France the Classic Revival, as we have seen, 
had made its appearance during the reign of Louis XV. in 
a number of important monuments which expressed the 
protest of their authors against 
the caprice of the Rococo style 
then in vogue. The colonnades 
of the Garde - Meuble, the facade 
of St. Sulpice, and the coldly 
beautiful Pantheon (Figs. 202, 203) 
testified to the conviction in the 
most cultured minds of the time 
that Roman grandeur was to be 
attained only by copying the forms 
of Roman architecture with the 
closest possible approach to cor- 
rectness. In the Pantheon, the 
greatest ecclesiastical monument 
of its time in France (otherwise 
known as the church of Ste. Gene- 
vieve), the spirit of correct classicism dominates the inte- 
rior as well as the exterior. It is a Greek cross, measur- 
ing 362 x 267 feet, with a dome 265 feet high, and in- 
ternally 69 feet in diameter. The four arms have domical 
vaulting and narrow aisles separated by Corinthian col- 
umns. The whole interior is a cold but extremely elegant 
composition. The most notable features of the exterior 
are its imposing portico of colossal Corinthian columns 
and the fine peristyle which surrounds the drum of the 
dome, giving it great dignity and richness of effect. 




The dome, which is of stone throughout, has three shells, 
the intermediate shell serving to support the heavy stone 
lantern. The architect was Soufflot (1713-81). The Grand 
Theatre, at Bordeaux (1773, by Victor Louis), one of the 
largest and finest theatres in Europe, was another prod- 
uct of this movement, its stately colonnade forming one 

of the chief ornaments 
of the city. Under 
Louis XVI. there was 
a temporary reaction 
from this somewhat 
pompous affectation 

of antique grandeur ; 
but there were few 
important buildings 

erected during that 
unhappy reign, and 
the reaction showed 
itself mainly in a more 

delicate and graceful 

style of interior dec- 
oration. It wras re- 
served for the Empire 
to set tin- seal of of- 
ficial approval on the 
Roman Revival. The 
An li of Triumph of 
the Carrousel, behind the Tuileries, by PercUr ond Fontaine, 
the magnificent Arcde l'Ktoile, at the summit of the Avenue 
of the Champs Kl\>ees, by CkaigrtH ; the wing begun by 

Napoleon to connect the Tuileries with the Louvre on the 

land side, and the church of the Madeleine, by I'/'x'/on, 

erected as a temple to the heroes of the Grande Arm< 

were all designed, in lance with the expressed will 

of the Emperor himself, in a style as Roman as the require* 




ments of each case would permit. All these monuments, 
begun between 1806 and 1809, were completed after the 
Restoration. The Arch of the Carrousel is a close copy 
of Roman models; 
that of the toile 
(Fig. 204) was a 
much more original 
design, of colossal 
dimensions. Its 
admirable propor- 
tions, simple com- 
position and strik- 
ing sculptures give 
it a place among the 
noblest creations 
of its class. The 
Madeleine (Fig. 
205), externally a 
Roman Corinthian 
temple of the larg- 
est size, presents 
internally an al- 
most Byzantine conception with the three pendentive domes 
that vault its vast nave, but all the details are Roman. 
However suitable for a pantheon or mausoleum, it seems 
strangely inappropriate as a design for a Christian church. 
To these monuments should be added the Bourse or Ex- 
change, by Brongniart, heavy in spite of its Corinthian peri- 
style, and the river front of the Corps Legislatif or Palais 
Bourbon, by Poyet, the only extant example of a dodecastyle 
portico with a pediment. All of these designs are character- 
ized by great elegance of detail and excellence of execution, 
and however inappropriate in style to modern uses, they add 
immensely to the splendor of the French capital. Unques- 
tionably no feature can take the place of a Greek or Roman 




colonnade as an embellishment for broad avenues and open 
squares, or as the termination of an architectural vista. 

The Greek revival took little hold of the Parisian imag- 
ination. Its forms were too cold, too precise and fixed, too 
intractable to modern requirements to appeal to the French 
taste. It counts but one notable monument, the church of 
St. Vincent de Paul, by Hittorff, who sought to apply to this 


design the principles of Greek external polychromy ; but 
the frescoes and ornaments failed to withstand the Parisian 
climate, and were finally erased. The Neo-Grec movement 
already referred to, initiated by DttC, Duban.and Labrouste 
about 1830, aimed only to introduce into modern design the 
spirit and refinement, the purity and delicacy of Greek art, 
not its forms (Fig. 206). Its chief monuments were the re- 
modelling, by />//,; of the Palais de Justice, of which the new 
le is the most striking single feature; the beau 
tiful Library of the Ecole des Beaux-Arts, by Duban j the 



Library of Ste. Genevieve, by Labrouste, in which a long fa- 
cade is treated without a pilaster or column, simple arches 
over a massive basement forming the dominant motive, 
while in the interi- 
or a system of iron 
construction with 
glazed domes controls 
the design ; and the 
commemorative Co- 
lonne Juillet, by Due, 
the most elegant and 
appropriate of all 
modern memorial col- 
umns. All these build- 
ings, begun between 
1830 and 1850 and 
completed at various 
dates, are distin- 
guished by a remark- 
able purity and free- 
dom of conception 
and detail, quite un- 
fettered by the arti- 
ficial trammels of the 
official academic style 

th#n nrpvalpnt fig. 206. doorway, ecole des beaix-arts, paris. 

of Europe have little to show in the way of imitations of 
classic monuments or reproductions of Roman colonnades. 
In Italy the church of S. Francesco di Faola, at Naples, in 
quasi-imitation of the Pantheon at Rome, with wing-col- 
onnades, and the Super ga, at Turin (1706, by /vara) ; the 
facade of the San Carlo Theatre, at Naples, and the Braccio 
Nuovo of the Vatican (181 7, by Stern) are the monuments 
which come the nearest to the spirit and style of the Roman 

3 66 


Revival. Yet in each of these there is a large element of 
originality and freedom of treatment which renders doubt- 
ful their classification as examples of that movement. 

A reflection of the Munich school is seen in the modern 
public buildings of Athens, designed in some cases by Ger- 
man architects, and in others by native Greeks. The Uni- 
versity, the Museum buildings, the Academy of Art and 

Science, and other edifices 
exemplify fairly successful 
efforts to adapt the severe 
details of classic Greek 
art to modern windowed 
structures. They suffer 
somewhat from the too 
liberal^ use of stucco in 
place of marble, and from 
the conscious affectation 
of an extinct style. But 
they are for the most part 
pleasing and monumental 
designs, adding greatly to 
the beauty of the modern 

In Russia, during and 
after the reign of Peter the Great (i 689-1 725), there ap- 
peared a curious mixture of styles. A style analogous to the 
Jesuit in Italy and the ( hurrigueresque in Spain was gen- 
erally prevalent, but it was in many cases modified by 
Muscovite traditions into nondescript forms like thoi 
the Kremlin, at Moscow, or the less extravagant Citadel 
Church and Smolnoy Monastery at St. Petersburg. Along 
with this heavy and barbarous style, which prevails gener- 
ally in the numerous palaces of the capital, finished in stucco 

with atrocious details, a more severe and classical spirit is; 

met with. The church of the Greek Rite at St. Peters* 



burg combines a Roman domical interior with an exterior 
of the Greek Doric order. The Church of Our Lady of 
Kazan has a semicircular colonnade projecting from its 
transept, copying as nearly as may be the colonnades in 
front of St. Peter's. But the greatest classic monument in 
Russia is the Cathedral of St. Isaac (Fig. 207), at St. Peters- 
burg, a vast rectangular edifice with four Roman Corinthian 
pedimental colonnades projecting from its faces, and a 
dome with a peristyle crowning the whole. Despite many 
defects of detail, and the use of cast iron for the dome, 
which pretends to be of marble, this is one of the most im- 
pressive churches of its size in Europe. Internally it dis- 
plays the costliest materials in extraordinary profusion, while 
externally its noble colonnades go far to redeem its bare, 
attic and the material of its dome. The Palace of the 
Grand Duke Michael, which reproduces, with improvements, 
Gabriel's colonnades of the Garde Meuble at Paris on its 
garden front, is a nobly planned and commendable design, 
agreeably contrasting with the debased architecture of 
many of the public buildings of the city. The Admiralty 
with its Doric pilasters, and the New Museum, by von Klenze 
of Munich, in a skilfully modified Greek style, with effective 
loggias, are the only other monuments of the classic revival 
in Russia which can find mention in a brief sketch like this. 
Both are notable and in many respects admirable buildings, 
in part redeeming the vulgarity which is unfortunately so 
prevalent in the architecture of St. Petersburg. 

The MONUMENTS of the Classic Revival have been referred 
to in the foregoing text at sufficient length to preclude the 
necessity of further enumeration here. 



Books Recommended : As before, Chateau, Fergusson. 
Also Barqui, L 1 Architecture moderne en France. Berlin und 
seine Bauten (and a series of similar works on the modern 
buildings of other German cities). Daly, Architecture prive'e 
du X/Xe siecle. Gamier, Le nouvel Opera. Gourlier, Choix 
cTtdifices publics. Licht, Architektur Deutschlands. Lubke, 
Den kindle r der Kunst. Liitzow und Tischler, Wiener Neu- 
ha it ten. Narjoux, Monuments elevespar la ville de Paris, 1850- 
>88o. R i'uk ward t, Facaden und Details inodernei Bauten. 
Saminel mappe liervorragenden Coiicurrenz-Bntn'urfeii. Sedille, 
V Architecture modernc. Self ridge, Modern French Archi- 
tecture. Statham, Modern Architecture. Villars, England, 
Scotland, and Belaud (tr. Henry Frith). Consult also Trans* 
actions of the Royal Institute of British Architects, and the 
leading architectural journals of recent years. 

modern conditions. The nineteenth century has been 
pre-eminently an age of industrial progress. Its most strik- 
ing advances have been along mechanical, scientific, and 
commercial lines. As a result of this material progress t he 
general conditions of mankind in civilized countries have 
undoubtedly been greatly bettered. Popular education 
and the printing-press have also raised the intellectual level 
iety, making learning the privilege of even the poorest. 
Intellectual, scientific, and commercial pursuits have thus 
largely absorbed those energies which in other ages found 
exercise in the creation of artistic forms and objects. The 
critical and sceptical spirit, the spirit of utilitarianism and 
realism, has checked the free and general development of 
the creative imagination, at least in the plastic arts. While 


in poetry and music there have been great and noble 
achievements, the plastic arts, including architecture, have 
only of late years attained a position at all worthy of the 
intellectual advancement of the times. 

Nevertheless the artistic spirit has never been wholly 
crushed out by the untoward pressure of realism and com- 
mercialism. Unfortunately it has repeatedly been directed 
in wrong channels. Modern archaeology and the publica- 
tion of the forms of historic art by books and photographs 
have too exclusively fastened attention upon the details of 
extinct styles as a source of inspiration in design. The 
whole range of historic art is brought within our survey, 
and while this has on the one hand tended toward the con- 
fusion and multiplication of styles in modern work, it h^ 
on the other led to a slavish adherence to historic preced- 
ent or a literal copying of historic forms. Modern archi- 
tecture has thus oscillated between the extremes of archaeo- 
logical servitude and of an unreasoning eclecticism. In the 
hands of men of inferior training the results have been de- 
plorable travesties of all styles, or meaningless aggrega- 
tions of ill-assorted forms. 

An important factor in this demoralization of architect- 
ural design has been the development of new constructive 
methods, especially in the use of iron and steel. It has 
been impossible for modern designers, in their treatment 
of style, to keep pace with the rapid changes in the struct- 
ural use of metal in architecture. The roofs of vast span, 
largely composed of glass, which modern methods of truss- 
ing have made possible for railway stations, armories, and 
exhibition buildings ; the immense unencumbered spaces 
which may be covered by them ; the introduction and 
development, especially in the United States, of the post- 
and-girder system of construction for high buildings, in 
which the external walls are a mere screen or filling-in ; 
these have revolutionized architecture so rapidly and com- 


pletely that architects are still struggling and groping to 
find the solution of many of the problems of style, scale* 
and composition which they have brought forward. 

Within the last thirty years, however, architecture has, 
despite these new conditions, made notable advances. The 
artistic emulation of repeated international exhibitions, the 
multiplication of museums and schools of art, the general 
advance in intelligence and enlightenment, have all con- 
tributed to this artistic progress. There appears tc be 
more of the artistic and intellectual quality in the average 
architecture of the present time, on both sides of the Atlan- 
tic, than at any previous period in this century. The fu- 
tility of the archaeological revival of extinct styles is gen- 
erally recognized. New conditions are gradually procuring 
the solution of the very problems they raise. Historic pre- 
cedent sits more lightly on the architect than formerly, and 
the essential unity of principle underlying all good design 
is coming to be better understood.* 

FRANCE. It is in France, Germany (including Austria). 
and England that the architectural progress of this period 
In Europe has been most marked. We have already no- 
ticed the results of the classic revivals in these three coun- 
. Speaking broadly, it may be said that in France the 
influence of the cole des Beaux-Arts, while it has tended to 
give greater unity and consistency to the national architect! 
ure, and has exerted a powerful influence in behalf of re- 
finement of taste and correctness of style, has also stood in 
the way of a free development of new ideas. Fren< h archi- 
tectore has throughout adhered to the principles of the 
Renaissance, though the style has during this century been 
modified by various influences. The first of these was the 
Neo-Grec movement, alluded to in the last chapter, which 
broke the grip of Roman tradition in matters of detail and 
gave greater elasticity to the national style. Next should 
be mentioned the Gothic movement represented by Violleti 
* See Appendix I). 



le-Duc, I.assus, Ballu, and their followers. Beginning about 
1845, it produced comparatively few notable buildings, but 
gave a great impulse to the study of mediaeval archaeology 
and the restoration of mediaeval monuments. The churches 
of Ste. Clothilde and of St. Jean de Belleville, at Paris, and 
the reconstruction of the Chateau de Pierrefonds, were 
among its direct results. Indirectly it led to a freer and 
more rational treatment of constructive forms and mate- 
rials than had prevailed with the academic designers. The 
church of St. Augustin, by Baltard, at Paris, illustrates this 
in its use of iron and brick for the dome and vaulting, and 


A, A, the Old Louvre, so called ; B, B, the New Louvre. 

the College Chaptal, by E. Train, in its decorative treat- 
ment of brick and tile externally. The general adoption 
of iron for roof-trusses and for the construction of markets 
and similar buildings tended further in the same direction, 
the Halles Centrales at Paris, by Baltard, being a notable 

THE SECOND EMPIRE. The reign of Napoleon III. 
(1852-70) was a period of exceptional activity, especially in 
Paris. The greatest monument of his reign was the com- 
pletion of the Louvre and Tuileries, under Visconti and 



Lcfucl, including the remodelling of the pavilions de Flore 
and de Marsan. The new portions constitute the most not- 
able example of modern French architecture, and the man- 
ner in which the two pal- 
aces were united deserves 
high praise. In spite of cer- 
tain defects, this work is 
marked by a combination of 
dignity, richness, and refine- 
ment, such as are rarely 
found in palace architect- 
ure (Figs. 208, 209). The 
New Opera 1S63-75 , by 
Gamier d. 1 898 ,'tandsnexl 
to the Louvre in importance 
as a national monument. 
It is by far the most sump- 
tuous building for amust 
nient in existence, but 
purity of detail and in tl 
balance and restraint of it 
n it is inferior to tl 
work of VifiCOnti and I-efut 
(Fig. 210). To this reij 
belong the Palais de I'll 
dustrie, by Vitl, built f< 
the exhibition of 1855, and several great railway statioi 
((laic dii Nord, by Hitorff, dare de l'Fst. dare d'Orleans, 

etc.), in which the modern French version of the Renais- 
sance was applied with considerable skill to buildings largely 
Constructed of iron and glass. I Own halls ami theatres 
were erected in great numbers, and in decorative work* 
like fountains and monuments the French were particular! 
successful. The fountains of St. Michel, duvier, and M< 
liere, at Paris, and of Longchamps, at Marseilles (Fig. 211J 




illustrate the fertility of resource and elegance of detailed 
treatment of the French in this department. Mention should 
also here be made of the extensive enterprises carried out 
by Napoleon III., in rectifying and embellishing the street- 
plan of Paris by new avenues and squares on a vast scale, 
adding greatly to the monumental splendor of the city. 

THE republic. Since the disasters of 1870 a number of 
important structures 
have been erected, 
and French architect- 
ure has shown a re- 
markable vitality and 
flexibility under new 
conditions. Its pro- 
ductions have in gen- 
eral been marked by 
a refined taste and a 
conspicuous absence 
of eccentricity and ex- 
cess ; but it has for 
the most part trodden 
in well - worn paths. 
The most notable re- 
cent monuments are, 
in church architect- 
ure, the Sacr6-Coeur, 
at Montmartre, by 
Abadie, a votive 
church inspired from 
the Franco-Byzantine 
style of Aquitania * in F,G - 2i - grand staircase ok the opera, i-aris. 
civil architecture the 

new Hotel de Ville, at Paris, by Ballu and DSpert/ies, recall- 
ing the original structure destroyed by the Commune, but 
in reality an original creation of great merit ; in scholastic 



architecture the new Ecole de Medecine, and the new Sor- 
bonne, by Ntnot, and in other branches of the art the metal- 
and-glass exhibition buildings of 1878, 1889, and 1900. 
In the last of these the striving for originality and the 
effort to discard traditional forms reached the extreme, 
although accompanied by much very clever detail and a 

Fir;. 211. POUNl 


masterly use of color-decoration. To these should be added 
many noteworthy theatres, town-halls, court-houses, and 
pr/fectures in provincial cities, and commemorative col- 
umns and monuments almost without number. In street 
architecture there is now much more variety and orig- 
inality than formerly, especially in private houses, and 
the reaction against the orders and against traditional 
methods of design has of late been growing stronger. 



The chief excellence of modern French architecture lies 
in its rational planning, monumental spirit, and refinement 
of detail (Fig. 212). 

Germany AND AUSTRIA. German architecture has been 
more affected during the past fifty years by the archaeolog- 
ical spirit than has the French. A pronounced mediaeval 
revival partly accompanied, partly followed the Greek re- 
vival in Germany, and produced a number of churches and 
a few secular buildings in the basilican, Romanesque, and 
Gothic styles. These are less interesting than those in the 
Greek style, because 
mediaeval forms are 
even more foreign to 
modern needs than 
the classic, being 
compatible only with 
systems of design and 
construction which 
are no longer prac- 
ticable. At Munich 
the Auekirche, by 
O/i/mi/l/er, in an atten- 
uated Gothic style ; 

the Byzantine Ludwigskirche, and Ziebland's Basilica follow- 
ing Early Christian models ; the Basilica by Hubsch, at 
Bulach, and the Votive Church at Vienna (1856) by H. 
Von Ferstel (1828-1883) are notable neo-mediaeval monu- 
ments. The last-named church may be classed with Ste. 
Clothilde at Paris (see p. 371), and St. Patrick's Cathedral 
at New York, all three being of approximately the same size 
and general style, recalling St. Ouen at Rouen. They are 
correct and elaborate, but more or less cold and artificial. 

More successful are many of the German theatres and 
concert halls, in which Renaissance and classic forms have 
been freely used. In several of these the attempt has been 




made to express by the external form the curvilinear plan of 
the auditorium, as in the Dresden Theatre, by Semper (1841 ; 
F 'g- 213), the theatre at Carlsruhe, by Hiibsch, and the 
double winter-summer Victoria Theatre, at Berlin, by Titz. 
But the practical and aesthetic difficulties involved in this 

f I JSTLB rMpBifi 


treatment have caused its general abandonment. Tl 
Opera House at Vienna, by Siccardsburg and Van der Nit 
(1S61-69), is rectangular in its masses, and but for a certain 
triviality of detail would rank among the most su< < 
buildings of its kind. The new Burgtheater in the s.uiic 
city is a more elaborately ornate structure in Renaissance! 
style, somewhat florid and overdone. 

Modern German architecture is at its best in acadet 
and residential buildings. The Bauschiile. at Berlin, 1>\ 
Schinkel, in which brick is used in a rational and dignified 
1 without the orders : the Polytechnic School, at Z(i- 
ri< h, by Semper ; university buildings, and especially build- 
tor technical instruction, at Carlsruhe, Stuttgart, 
Strasburg, Vienna, and other cities, show a monumental 



treatment of the exterior and of the general distribution, 
combined with a careful study of practical requirements. 
In administrative buildings the Germans have hardly been 
as successful ; and the new Parliament House, at Berlin, by 
Wallot, in spite of its splendor and costliness, is heavy and 
unsatisfactory in detail. The larger cities, especially Ber- 
lin, contain many excellent examples of house architecture, 
mostly in the Renaissance style, sufficiently monumental in 
design, though usually, like most German work, inclined to 
heaviness of detail. The too free use of stucco in imita- 
tion of stone is also open to criticism. 


VIENNA. During the last thirty years Vienna has under- 
gone a transformation which has made it the rival of Paris 
as a stately capital. The remodelling of the central portion, 
the creation of a series of magnificent boulevards and 


squares, and the grouping of the chief state and municipal 
buildings about these upon a monumental scheme of ar- 
rangement, have given the city an unusual aspect of splen- 
dor. Among the most important monuments in this group 
are the Parliament House, by Hansen (see p. 360), and the 
Town Hall, by Schmidt. This latter is a Neo-Gothic edifice 
of great size and pretentiousness, but strangely thin and 
meagre in detail, and quite out of harmony with its sur- 
roundings. The university and museums are massive piles 
in Renaissance style; and it is the Renaissance rather than 
the classic or Gothic revival which prevails throughout the 
new city. The great blocks of residences and apartments 
(Fig. 214) which line its- streets are highly ornate in their 
architecture, but for the most part done in stucco, which 
fails after all to give the aspect of solidity and durability 
which it seeks to counterfeit. 

The city of Buda-Pesth. has also in recent years undergone 
a phenomenal transformation of a similar nature to that 
effected in Vienna, but it possesses fewer monuments of con- 
spicuous architectural interest. The Synagogue i> the most 
noted of these, a rich and pleasing edifice of brick in a 
modified Hispano-Moresque style. 

GREAT BRITAIN. During the closing years of the Angl 
Greek style a coterie of enthusiastic students of l!riti>h 
mediaeval monuments archaeologists rather than architect! 
initiated a movement for the revival of the national 
Gothic architecture. The first fruits of this movement, led 
by Pugin, Brandon, Hickman, and others (about 1830-40), 
were seen in countless pseudo-Gothic structures in which 
the pointed arches, buttresses, and clustered shafts of med- 
iaeval architecture were imitated or parodied according to 
the designer's ability, with frequent misapprehension of their 
proper use or significance. This unintelligent misapplica- 
tion of Gothic forms was, however, confined to the earlier 
stages of the movement. With increasing light and <\pe- 



rience came a more correct and consistent use of the med- 
iaeval styles, dominated by the same spirit of archaeological 
correctness which had produced the classicismo of the Late 
Renaissance in Italy. This spirit, stimulated by extensive 
enterprises in the restoration of the great mediaeval monu- 


ments of the United Kingdom, was fatal to any free and 
original development of the style along new lines. But it 
rescued church architecture from the utter meanness and 
debasement into which it had fallen, and established a 
standard of taste which reacted on all other branches of 

THE VICTORIAN GOTHIC. Between 1850 and 1870 the striv- 
ing after archaeological correctness gave place to the more 
rational effort to adapt Gothic principles to modern re- 



quirements, instead of merely copying extinct styles. This 
effort, prosecuted by a number of architects of great intelli- 
gence, culture, and earnestness (Sir Gilbert Scott, George 
Edmund Street, William Burges, and others), resulted in a 
number of extremely interesting buildings. Chief among 

these in size and cost stand 
the Parliament Houses at 
Westminster, by Sir 
Charles Barry (begun 
1839), in the Perpendicu- 
lar style. This immense 
structure (tig. 215), im- 
posing in its simple ma 
and refined in its carefully 
studied detail, is the most 

t _JM*jSyWl| successful monument of 

ffffff^^Sf^X tne Victorian Gothic style. 

It suffers, however, from 
the want of proper rela- 
tion of scale between its 
decorative elements and 
the vast proportions of 
the edifice, which belittle 
its component elements. 
It cannot, on the whole, 
be claimed as a successful 
vindication of the claims of 
the promoters of the style 

as to the adaptability of 

Gothic forms to structures 
planned and built after 
the modern fashion. The 
Assize Courts at Mam luster (Fig. 216), the New Museum 
at Oxford, the gorgeous Albert Memorial at London, by 
Scott, and the New Law Courts at London, by Street, are 




all conspicuous illustrations of the same truth. They are 
conscientious, carefully studied designs in good taste, and 
yet wholly unsuited in style to their purpose. They are 
like labored and schol- 
arly verse in a foreign 
tongue, correct in 
form and language, 
but lacking the nat- 
uralness and charm of 
true and unfettered 
inspiration. A later 
essay of the same sort 
in a slightly different 
field is the Natural 
History Museum at 
South Kensington, by 
Waterhouse (1879), an 
imposing building in 
a modified Roman- 
esque style (Fig. 217). 
Victorian Gothic style 
responded to no deep 
and general movement 
of the popular taste, 
and, like the Anglo- 
Greek style, was 
doomed to failure from 
the inherent incon- 
gruity between modern needs and mediaeval forms. Within 
the last twenty years there has been a quite general return 
to Renaissance principles, and the result is seen in a large 
number of town-halls, exchanges, museums, and colleges, 
in which Renaissance forms, with and without the orders, 
have been treated with increasing freedom and skilful 



adaptation to the materials and special requirements of each 
case. The Albert Memorial Hal! (1S63, by General Scott) 
may be taken as an early instance of this movement, and the 
Imperial Institute (Colonial offices), by Collcutt, and Oxford 
Town Hall, by Aston Webb, as among its latest manifesta- 
tions. In domestic architecture the so-called Queen Anne 
style has been much in vogue, as practised by Norman Shaw, 
Krnest George, and others. It is really a modern style, origi- 
nating in the imitation of the modified Palladian style as used 
in the brick architecture of Queen Anne's time, but freely and 
often artistically altered to meet modern tastes and needs. 

In its emancipation from the mistaken principles of ar- 
chaeological revivals, and in its evidences of improved taste 
and awakened originality, contemporary British architect- 
ure shows promise of good things to come. It is still in- 
ferior to the French in the monumental quality, in techni- 
cal resource and refinement of decorative detail. 

ELSEWHERE IN EUROPE. In other European countries 
recent architecture shows in general increasing freedom 
and improved good taste, but both its opportunities and its 
performance have been nowhere else as conspicuous as in 
France, Germany, and England. The costly Bourse and the 
vast but overloaded Palais de Justice at Brussels, by I\>- 
/<////, are neither of them conspicuous for refined and cul- 
tivated taste. A few buildings of note in Switzerland, 
Russia, and Greece might find mention in a more extended 
review of architecture, but cannot here even be enumer- 
ated. In Italy, especially at Rome, Milan, Naples, and 
Turin, there has been a great activity in building since 
1870, but with the exception of the Monument to Victor 
Emmanuel and the National Museum at Rome, monumen- 
tal arcades and passages at Milan and Naples, and Campi 
Sand or monumental cemeteries at Bologna, Genoa, and 
one or two other places, there has been almost nothing of 
real importance built in Italy of late years. 



Books Recommended : As before, Fergusson, Statham. 
Also, Chandler, The Colonial Architecture of Maryland, Penn- 
sylvania, and Virginia. Cleaveland and Campbell, American 
Landmarks. Corner and Soderholz, Colonial Architecture in 
New England. Crane and Soderholz, Examples of Colonial 
Architecture in Charleston and Savannah. Drake, Historic 
Eields and Mansions of Middlesex. Everett, Historic Churches 
of America. King, Handbook of Boston; Handbook of New 
York. Little, Early New England Interiors. Schuyler, 
American Architecture. Van Rensselaer, H H Richardson 
and His Works. Wallis, Old Colonial Architecture and Furni- 

GENERAL REMARKS. The colonial architecture of modern 
times presents a peculiar phenomenon. The colonizing 
nation, carrying into its new habitat the tastes and practices 
of a long-established civilization, modifies these only with 
the utmost reluctance, under the absolute compulsion of 
new conditions. When the new home is virgin soil, desti- 
tute of cultivation, government, or civilized inhabitants, 
the accompaniments and activities of civilization intro- 
duced by the colonists manifest themselves at first in curi- 
ous contrast to the primitive surroundings. The struggle 
between organized life and chaos, the laborious subjugation 
of nature to the requirements of our complex modern life, 
for a considerable period absorb the energies of the colo- 
nists. The amenities of culture, the higher intellectual life, 
the refinements of art can, during this period, receive little 


attention. Meanwhile a new national character is being 
formed ; the people are undergoing the moral training upon 
which their subsequent achievements must depend. With 
the conquest of brute nature, however, and the gradual 
emergence of a more cultivated class, with the growth of 
commerce and wealth and the consequent increase of leis- 
ure, the humanities find more place in the colonial life. 
The fine arts appear in scattered centres determined by 
peculiarly favorable conditions. For a long time they re- 
tain the impress, and seek to reproduce the forms, of the 
art of the mother country. But new conditions impose 
a new development. Maturing commerce with other lands 
brings in foreign influences, to which the still unformed co- 
lonial art is peculiarly susceptible. Only with political and 
commercial independence, fully developed internal re- 
sources, and a high national culture do the arts finally 
attain, as it were, their majority, and enter upon a truly 
national growth. 

These facts are abundantly illustrated by the architect- 
ural history of the United States. The only one among 
the British colonies to attain political independence, it is 
the only one among them whose architecture has as yet en- 
tered upon an independent course of development, and this 
only within the last twenty-five or thirty years. Nor has 
even this development produced as yet a distinctive local 
style. It has, however, originated new constructive meth- 
ods, new types of buildings, and a distinctively American 
treatment of the composition and the masses ; the decora- 
tive details being still, for the most part, derived from his- 
toric precedents. The architecture of the other British 
colonies has retained its provincial character, though pro- 
ducing from time to time individual works of merit. In 
South America and Mexico the only buildings of itnpor- 
.ire Spanish, French, or German in style, according to 
the nationality of the architects employed. The following 


sketch of American architecture refers, therefore, exclu- 
sively to its development in the United States. 

FORMATIVE PERIOD. Buildings in stone were not under- 
taken by the early English colonists. The more important 
structures in the Southern and Dutch colonies were of brick 
imported from Europe. Wood was, however, the material 
most commonly employed, especially in New England, and 
its use determined in large measure the form and style of 
the colonial architecture. There was little or no striving 
for architectural elegance until well into the eighteenth cen- 
tury, when Wren's influence asserted itself in a modest way 
in the Middle and Southern colonies. The very simple 
and unpretentious town-hall at Williamsburg, Va., and St. 
Michael's, Charleston, are attributed to him ; but the most 
that can be said for these, as for the brick churches and 
manors of Virginia previous to 1725, is that they are sim- 
ple in design and pleasing in proportion, without special 
architectural elegance. The same is true of the wooden 
houses and churches of New England of the period, except 
that they are even simpler in design. 

From 1725 to 1775 increased population and wealth along 
the coast brought about a great advance in architecture, es- 
pecially in churches and in the dwellings of the wealthy. 
During this period was developed the Coloiiial style, based on 
that of the reigns of Anne and the first two Georges in Eng- 
land, and in church architecture on the models set by Wren 
and Gibbs. All the details were, however, freely modified 
by the general employment of wood. The scarcity of archi- 
tects trained in Old World traditions contributed to this 
departure from classic precision of form. The style, es- 
pecially in interior design, reflected the cultured taste of the 
colonial aristocracy in its refined treatment of the wood- 
work. But there was little or no architecture of a truly 
monumental character. Edifices of stone were singularly 
few, and administrative buildings were small and modest, 



owing to insufficient grants from the Crown, as well as Co 
the poverty of the colon its. 

The churches of this period include a number of interest- 
ing designs, especially pleasing in the forms of their steeples. 
The " Old South " at Boston (now a museum), Trinity at 
Newport, and St. Paul's at New York one of the few built 

of stone (1764) are 
I. good examples of the 

*S style. Christ Church at 

Philadelphia (1727-35, 
by 1 hr. Kearsley) is an- 
other example, histori- 
cally as well as archi- 
tecturally interesting 
(Fig. 218) ; and there are 
scores Of other churches 
almost equally note- 
worthy, scattered 
through New England, 
Maryland. Virginia, anil 

Middle States. 
dwellings. These 
reflect better than the 
churches the varying 
tastes of the different 
colonies Maryland and Virginia abound in fine brick 
manor-houses, set amid extensive grounds walled in and 
entered through iron gates of artistic design. The interior 
finish of these houses was often elaborate in conception 
and admirably executed. Westover (1737), Carter's Grove 
(1737) in Virginia, and the Harwood and Hammond Houses 
at Annapolis, Md. (1770), are examples. The majority 
of the New England houses were of wood, more compact 
in plan, more varied and picturesque in design than those; 
of the South, but wanting somewhat of their stateliness. 




The interior finish of wainscot, cornices, stairs, and mantel- 
pieces shows, however, the same general style, in a skilful 
and artistic adaptation of classic forms to the slender pro- 
portions of wood construction. Externally the orders 
appear in porches and in colossal pilasters, with well 
designed entablatures, and windows of Italian model. The 



influence of the Adams and Sheraton furniture is doubt- 
less to be seen in these quaint and often charming ver- 
sions of classic motives. The Hancock House, Boston 
(of stone, demolished) ; the Sherburne House, Portsmouth 
(1730) ; Craigie House, Cambridge (1757, Fig. 219) ; and 
Rumford House, North Woburn (Mass.), are typical ex- 

In the Middle States architectural activity was chiefly 
centred in Philadelphia and New York, and one or two 
other towns, where a number of manor-houses, still ex- 


tant, attest the wealth and taste of the time. It is notice- 
able that the veranda or piazza was confined to the South- 
ern States, but that the climate seems to have had little 
influence on the forms of roofs. These were gambrelled, 
hipped, gabled, or flat, alike in the North and South, accord- 
ing to individual taste. 

PUBLIC BUILDINGS- Of public and monumental archi- 
tecture this period has little to show. Large cities did not 
exist ; New York, Boston, and Philadelphia were hardly 
more than overgrown villages. The public buildings 
court-houses and town-halls were modest and inexpensive 
structures. The Old State House and Faneuil Hall at 
Boston, the Town Hall at Newport (R. I.), and Indepen- 
dence Hall at Philadelphia, the best known of those now 
extant, are not striking architecturally. Monumental design 
was beyond the opportunities and means of the colonies. 
It was in their churches, all of moderate size, and in their 
dwellings that the colonial builders achieved their greatest 
successes ; and these works are quaint, charming, and re- 
fined, rather than impressive or imposing. 

To the latter part of the colonial period belong a number 
of interesting buildings which remain as monuments of 
Spanish rule in California, Florida, and the Southwest. The 
old Port S. Marco, now Fort Marion (1656-1756), and the 
Catholic cathedral (1793; after the fire of 1887 rebuilt in 
its original form with the original facade uninjured), both 
Augustine, Fla. ; the picturesque buildings of the 
California missions (mainly 1 769-1 800), the majority of 
them now in ruins ; scattered Spanish churches in Cali- 
fornia, Arizona, and New Mexico, and a few unimportant 
secular buildings, display among their modern and Ameri- 
ttings a picturesque and interesting Spanish aspect 
and character, though from the point of view of architect- 
ural detail they represent merely a crude phase of the Chur- 
rigueresque style. 


early REPUBLICAN PERIOD. Between the Revolution and 
the War of 1812, under the new conditions of independence 
and self-government, architecture took on a more monu- 
mental character. Buildings for the State and National ad- 
ministrations were erected with the rapidly increasing re- 
sources of the country. Stone was more generally used ; 
colonnades, domes, and cupolas or bell-towers, were adopted 


as indispensable features of civic architecture. In church- 
building the Wren-Gibbs type continued to prevail, but with 
greater correctness of classic forms. The gambrel roof 
tended to disappear from the houses of this period, and 
there was some decline in the refinement and delicacy of 
the details of architecture. The influence of the Louis XVI. 
style is traceable in many cases, as in the New York City 
Hall (1803-12, by McComb and Mangin), one of the very 
best designs of the time, and in the delicate stucco-work 
and interior finish of many houses. The original Capitol 
at Washington the central portion of the present edifice 
by Thornton, Hallet, and B, If. Latrobe (1 793-1830 ; Fig. 220), 



the State House at Boston (1795, by BulfiitcK), and the Uni- 
versity of Virginia, at Charlotteville, by Thomas Jefferson 
( 1 8 1 7 ; recently destroyed in part by fire), are the most in- 
teresting examples of the classic tendencies of this period. 
Their freedom from the rococo vulgarities generally prev- 
alent at the time in Europe is noticeable. 

THE CLASSIC KEVIVAL. The influence of the classic re- 
vivals of Europe began to appear before the close of this 

period, and reached 
its culmination about 
1830-40. It left its 
impress most strong- 
ly on our Federal 
architecture, al- 
though it invaded 
domestic archite< t- 
ure, producing count- 
less imitations, in 
brick and wooden 

houses, of Grecian 

colonnades and por- 
ticos. One of its 
first-fruits was the 

White House, or Ex- 
ecutive Mansion, at 
Washington, by Mo- 
han (1792), recalling 
the large English country houses of the time. The Treasury 
and Patent Office buildings at Washington, the Philadelphia 
Mint, the Sub-treasury and Custom House at New York 
(the latter erected originally for a bank ; Fig. 221), and the 
Boston Custom House are among the important Federal 
buildings of this period. Several State capitols were also 
d under the same influence ; and the Marine Exchange 
and Girard College at Philadelphia should also be men- 

Ht.. Ml.- CUSTOM Hoi sh, m:w yokk. 


tioned as conspicuous examples of the pseudo-Greek style. 
The last-named building is a Corinthian dormitory, its tiers__ 
of small windows contrasting strangely with its white marble 
columns. These classic buildings were solidly and carefully 
constructed, but lacked the grace, cheerfulness, and appro- 
priateness of earlier buildings. The Capitol at Washington 
was during this period greatly enlarged by terminal wings 
with fine Corinthian porticos, of Roman rather than Greelf 
design. The Dome, by Walters, was not added until 1858- 
73 ; it is a successful and harmonious composition, nobly 
completing the building. Unfortunately, it is an after- 
thought, built of iron painted to simulate marble, the sub- 
structure being inadequate to support a dome of masonry. 
The Italian or Roman style which it exemplified, in time 
superseded the less tractable Greek style. 

THE WAR PERIOD. The period from 1850 to 1876 was 
one of intense political activity and rapid industrial prog- 
ress. The former culminated in the terrible upheaval of 
the civil war ; the latter in the completion of the Pacific 
Railroad (1869) and a remarkable development of the min- 
ing resources and manufactures of the country. It was a 
period of feverish commercial activity, but of artistic stag- 
nation, and witnessed the erection of but few buildings of 
architectural importance. A number of State capitols, city 
halls and churches, of considerable size and cost but of in- 
ferior design, attest the decline of public taste and archi- 
tectural skill during these years. The huge Municipal 
Building at Philadelphia and the still unfinished Capitol at 
Albany are full of errors of planning and detail which 
twenty-five years of elaboration have failed to correct. 
Next to the dome of the Capitol at Washington, completed 
during this period, of which it is the most signal architect- 
ural achievement, its most notable monument was the 
St. Patrick's Cathedral at New York, by Renwick ; a Gothic 
church which, if somewhat cold and mechanical in detail, is 


a stately and well-considered design. Its west front and 
spires (completed 1886) are particularly successful. Trinity 
Church (1843, by Upjohn) and Grace Church (1840, by Ren- 
wick), though of earlier date, should be classed with this 
cathedral as worthy examples of modern Gothic design. 
Indeed, the churches designed in this style by a few thor- 
oughly trained architects during this period are the most 
creditable and worthy among its lesser productions. In 
general an undiscriminating eclecticism of style prevailed, 
unregulated by sober taste or technical training. The Fed- 
eral buildings by Mullett were monuments of perverted de- 
sign in a heavy and inartistic rendering of French Renais- 
sance motives. The New York Post Office and the State, 
Army and Navy Department building at Washington are 
examples of this style. 

THE ARTISTIC AWAKENING. Between 1870 and 1880 a 
remarkable series of events exercised a powerful influence 
on the artistic life of the United States. Two terrible con- 
flagrations in Chicago (187 1) and Boston (1872) gave unex- 
ampled opportunities for architectural improvement and 
greatly stimulated the public interest in the art. The fev- 
erish and abnormal industrial activity which followed the 
war and the rapid growth of the parvenu spirit were 
checked by the disastrous " panic " of 1873. With the com- 
pletion of the Pacific railways and the settlement of new 
communities in the West, industrial prosperity, when it re- 
turned, was established on a firmer basis. An extraordinary 
expansion of travel to Europe began to disseminate the seeds 
of artistic culture throughout the country. The suc< < 
establishment of schools of architecture in Boston (1866) and 
other cities, and the opening or enlargement of art museums 
in New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Detroit, Mil- 
waukee, and elsewhere, stimulated the artistic awakening 
which now manifested itself. In architecture the personal 
influence of two men, trained in the Paris Ecole des Bcau> 


Arts, was especially felt of R. M. Hunt (1827-95) through 
his words and deeds quite as much as through his works ; 
and of H H Richardson (1828-86) predominantly through 
his works. These two men, with others of less fame but of 
high ideals and thorough culture, did much to elevate archi- 
tecture as an art in the public esteem. To all these influ- 
ences new force was added by the Centennial Exhibition at 
Philadelphia (1876). Here for the first time the American 
people were brought into contact, in their own land, with 
the products of European and Oriental art. It was to them 
an artistic revelation, whose results were prompt and far- 
reaching. Beginning first in the domain of industrial and 
decorative art, its stimulating influence rapidly extended 
to painting and architecture, and with permanent conse- 
quences. American students began to throng the centres 
of Old World art, while the setting of higher standards of 
artistic excellence at home, and the development of impor- 
tant art-industries, were other fruits of this artistic awaken- 
ing. The recent Columbian Exhibition at Chicago (1893), 
its latest and most important manifestation, has added a 
new impulse to the movement, especially in architecture. 

STYLE IN RECENT ARCHITECTURE. The rapid increase in 
the number of American architects trained in Paris or 
under the indirect influence of the Ecole des Beaux-Arts 
has been an important factor in recent architectural prog- 
ress. Yet it has by no means imposed the French academic 
formulae upon American architecture. The conditions, ma- 
terials, and constructive processes here prevailing, and 
above all the eclecticism of the public taste, have prevented 
this. The French influence is perceived rather in a grow- 
ing appreciation of monumental design in the planning, 
composition, and setting of buildings, than in any direct 
imitation of French models. The Gothic revival which pre- 
vailed more or less widely from 1840 to 1875, as already 
noticed, and of which the State Capitol at Hartford 



(Conn.; 1S75-78), ami the Fine Arts Museum .it Boston, 
were among the last important products, was generally con- 
fined to church architecture, for which Gothic forms are 
still largely em- 
ployed, as in the 
Protestant Ca- 
thedral of All 
Saints now build- 
ing at Albany 
(V Y.), by an 
English archi- 


For the most part the works of the last twenty years 
show a more or less judicious eclecticism, the choi 

style being determined partly by the person and training 
of the designer, partly by the nature of the building. The 
powerfully conceived works of Richardson, in a free version 

of the French Romanesque, for a time exen ised a wide in- 
fluence, especially among the younger architects. Trinity 

Church, l!ost<<n (Fig. ^-'-'J, his earliest important work; 
many public libraries and business buildings, and finally 

the impressive County Buildings at Pittsburgh (l'a.), all 



treated in this style, are admirable rather for the strong in- 
dividuality of their designer, displayed in their vigorous 
composition, than on account of the historic style he em- 
ployed (Fig. 223). Yet it appeared in his hands so flexible 
and effective that it was widely imitated. But if easy to 
use, it is most difficult to use well ; its forms are too mas- 
sive for ordinary purposes, and in the hands of inferior de- 
signers it was so often travestied that it has now lost its 
wide popularity. While a number of able architects have 
continued to use it effectively in ecclesiastical, civic, and 
even commercial architecture, it is being generally super- 
seded by various forms of the Renaissance. Here also a 
wide eclecticism prevails, the works of the same architect 

often varying from the 
gayest Francis I. designs 
in domestic architecture, 
free adaptations of 


Quattrocento details for theatres and street architecture, 
to the most formal classicism in colossal exhibition-build- 
ings, museums, libraries, and the like. Meanwhile there are 
many more or less successful ventures in other historic 



styles applied to public and private edifices. Underlying 
this apparent confusion, almost anarchy in the use of his- 
toric styles, the careful observer may detect certain tenden- 
cies crystallizing into definite form. New materials and 
methods of construction, increased attention to detail, a 
growing sense of monumental requirements, even the de- 
velopment of the elevator as a substitute for the grand 
staircase, are leaving their mark on the planning, the pro- 
portions, and the artistic composition of American build* 
ings, irrespective of the styles used. The art is with us in 
a state of transition, and open to criticism in many respects ; 
but it appears to be full of life and promise for the future. 

COMMEECIAL BUILDINGS. This class of edifices has in our 
great cities developed wholly new types, which have taken 
shape under four imperative influ- 
ences. These are the demand for 
fire-proof construction, the demand 
for well-lighted offices, the introduc- 
tion of elevators, and the concen- 
tration of business into limited areas, 
within which land has become inor- 
dinately costly. These causeshave 
led to the erection of buildings of 
Bsive height (Fig. 224) ; the 
more recent among them construct- 
ed with a framework of iron CM" Steel 
columns and beams, the visible walls 
being a mere filling-in. To render 
a building of twenty stories attrac- 
tive to the eye, especially when built 
on an irregular site, is a difficult 
problem, of which a wholly satisfactory solution has yet to 
be found. There have been, however, some notable achieve- 
ments in this line, in most of which the principle has been 
clearly recognized that a lofty building should have a well- 


ric. 224. 


marked basement or pedestal and a somewhat ornate crown- 
ing portion or capital, the intervening stories serving as a 
die or shaft and being treated with comparative simplicity. 
The difficulties of scale and of handling one hundred and 
fifty to three hundred windows of uniform style have been 
surmounted with conspicuous skill (American Surety Build- 
ing and Broadway Chambers, New York ; Ames Building, 
Boston ; Carnegie Building, Pittsburgh ; Union Trust, St. 
Louis). In some cases, especially in Chicago and the Middle 
West, the metallic framework is suggested by slender piers 
between the windows, rising uninterrupted from the base- 
ment to the top story. In others, especially in New York 
and the East, the walls are treated as in ordinary masonry 
buildings. The Chicago school is marked by a more utili- 
tarian and unconventional treatment, with results which are 
often extremely bold and effective, but rarely as pleasing to 
the eye as those attained by the more conservative Eastern 
school. In the details of American office-buildings every 
variety of style is to be met with ; but the Romanesque and 
the Renaissance, freely modified, predominate. The ten- 
dency towards two or three well-marked types in the external 
composition of these buildings, as above suggested, promises, 
however, the evolution of a style in which the historic origin 
of the details will be a secondary matter. Certain Chicago 
architects have developed an original treatment of archi- 
tectural forms by exaggerating some of the structural lines, 
by suppressing the mouldings and more familiar historic forms, 
and by the free use of flat surface ornamenc. The Schiller, 
Auditorium, and Fisher Buildings, all at Chicago, Guaranty 
Building, Buffalo, and Majestic Building, Detroit, are ex- 
amples of this personal style, which illustrates the untram- 
melled freedom of the art in a land without traditions.* 

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE. It is in this field that the most 
characteristic and original phases of American architecture 
* See Appendix, D and E. 



are to be met with, particularly in rural and suburban resi- 
dences. In these the peculiar requirements of our varying 
climates and of American domestic life have been studied 
and in large measure met with great frankness and artistic 
appreciation. The broad staircase-hall, serving often as a 
sort of family sitting-room, the piazza, and a picturesque 

ru:. 225. COfNTRV llnfsp, MASSACHfSF.TTS. 

massing of steep roofs, have been the controlling factors in 
the evolution of two or three general types which appear 
in infinite variations. The material most used is wood, but 
this has had less influence in the determination of form 
than might have been expected. The artlessness of the 
planning, which is arranged to afford the maximum of con- 
venience rather than to conform to any traditional type, 
b i- been the element of greatest artistic success. It has 
resulted in exteriors which are the natural outgrowth of 


the interior arrangements, frankly expressed, without affec- 
tation of style (Fig. 225). The resulting picturesqueness 
has, however, in many cases been treated as an end instead 
of an incidental result, and the affectation of picturesque- 
ness has in such designs become as detrimental as any 
affectation of style. In the internal treatment of American 
houses there has also been a notable artistic advance, har- 
mony of color and domestic comfort and luxury being 
sought after rather than monumental effects. A number of 
large city and country houses designed on a palatial scale 
have, however, given opportunity for a more elaborate 
architecture ; notably the Vanderbilt, Villard, and Hunting- 
ton residences at New York, the great country-seat of 
Biltmore, near Asheville (N. C), in the Francis I. style (by 
R. M. Hunt), and many others. 

OTHER BUILDINGS. American architects have generally 
been less successful in public, administrative, and ecclesias- 
tical architecture than in commercial and domestic work. 
The preference for small parish churches, treated as audi- 
ence-rooms rather than as places of worship, has interfered 
with the development of noble types of church-buildings. 
Yet there are signs of improvement ; and the new Cathe- 
dral of St. John the Divine at New York, In a modified 
Romanesque style, promises to be a worthy and monu- 
mental building. In semi - public architecture, such as 
hotels, theatres, clubs, and libraries, there are many notable 
examples of successful design. The Ponce de Leon Hotel 
at St. Augustine, a sumptuous and imposing pile in a free 
version of the Spanish Plateresco ; the Auditorium Theatre 
at Chicago, the Madison Square Garden and the Casino at 
New York, may be cited as excellent in general conception 
and well carried out in detail, externally and internally. 
The Century and Metropolitan Clubs at New York, the 
Boston Public Library, the Carnegie Library at Pittsburgh, 
the Congressional Library at Washington, and the recently 


completed Minnesota State Capitol at Minneapolis, exem- 
plify in varying degrees of excellence the increasing ca- 
pacity of American architects for monumental design. This 
was further shown in the buildings of the Columbian Exposi- 
tion at Chicago in 1893. These, in spite of many faults of de- 
tail, constituted an aggregate of architectural splendor such 
as had never before been seen or been possible on this side 
the Atlantic. They further brought architecture into closer 
union with the allied arts and formed an object lesson in 
the value of appropriate landscape gardening as a setting to 
monumental structures. 

It should be said, in conclusion, that with the advances 
of recent years in artistic design in the United States there 
has been at least as great improvement in scientific con- 
struction. The sham and flimsiness of the Civil War period 
are passing away, and solid and durable building is becom- 
ing more general throughout the country, but especially in 
the Northeast and in some of the great Western cities, not- 
ably in Chicago. In this onward movement the Federal 
buildings post-offices, custom-houses, and other govern- 
mental edifices have not, till lately, taken high rank. Al- 
though solidly and carefully constructed, those built during 
the period 1 875-1 895 were generally inferior to the best 
work produced by private enterprise, or by State and 
municipal governments. This was in large part due to 
enactments devolving upon the supervising architect at 
Washington the planning of all Federal buildings, as well as 
a burden of supervisory and clerical duties incompatible 
with the h.ghest artistic results. Since 1898, however, a 
more enlightened policy has prevailed, and a number of 
notable designs for Federal buildings have been secured by 
carefully -conducted competitions. 




Books Recommended : Cole, Monographs of Ancient 
Monuments of India. Conder, Notes on Japanese Architecture 
(in Transactions of R. I. B. A., for 1886). Cunningham, 
Archceological Survey of India. Fergusson, Indian and East- 
ern Architecture ; Picturesque Illustrations of Indian Archi- 
tecture. Le Bon, les Monuments de Vlnde. Morse, Japanese 
Houses. Stirling, Asiatic Researches. Consult also the "Jour- 
nal and the Transactions of the Royal Asiatic Society. 

INTRODUCTORY NOTE. The architecture of the non-Mos- 
lem countries and races of Asia has been reserved for this 
closing chapter, in order not to interrupt the continuity of 
the history of European styles, with which it has no affinity 
and scarcely even a point of contact. Among them all, India 
alone has produced monuments of great architectural im- 
portance. The buildings of China and Japan, although in- 
teresting for their style, methods, and detail, and so de- 
serving at least of brief mention, are for the most part of 
moderate size and of perishable materials. Outside of 
these three countries there is little to interest the general 
student of architecture. 

INDIA : PERIODS. It is difficult to classify the non-Mo- 
hammedan styles of India, owing to their frequently over- 
lapping, both geographically and artistically ; while the lack 
of precise dates in Indian literature makes the chronology 
of many of the monuments more or less doubtful. The 


divisions given below are a modification of those first 
established by Fergusson, and are primarily based on the 
three great religions, with geographical subdivisions, as 
follows : 

iii! BUDDHIST style, from the reign of Asoka, cir. 250 
B.C., to the 7th century A.u. Its monuments occupy 
mainly a broad band running northeast and southwest, be- 
tween the Indian Desert and the Dekkan. Offshoots of the 
style are found as far north as Gandhara, and as far south 
as Ceylon. 

the jaina style, akin to the preceding if not derived 
from it, covering the same territory as well as southern 
India ; from 1000 a. p. to the present time. 

the brahman or hindu styles, extending over the whole 
peninsula. They are sub-divided geographically into the 
northern BRAiiMw, the chalukyan in the Dekkan, and 
the dravidian in the south ; this last style being cotermi- 
nous with the populations speaking the Tamil and cognat^ 
languages. The monuments of these styles are mainly sub- 
sequent to the 10th century, though a few date as far back 
as the 7th. 

The great majority of Indian monuments are religious 
temples, shrines, and monasteries. Secular buildings do not 
appear until after the Moslem conquests, and most of them 
arc quite modern. 

general character. All these styles possess certain 
traits in common. While stone and brick are both used, 
sandstone predominating, the details are in large measure 
derived from wooden prototypes. Structural lines are not 
followed in the exterior treatment, purely decorative con- 
siderations prevailing. Ornament is equally lavished on all 
parts of the building, and is bewildering in its amount and 
complexity. Realistic and grotesque sculpture is freely 
forming multiplied horizontal bands of extraordinary 
richness and minuteness of execution. Spacious and lofty 


interiors are rarely attempted, but wonderful effects are pro- 
duced by seemingly endless repetition of columns in halls 
ami corridors, and by external emphasis of important parts 
of the plan by lofty tower-like piles of masonry. 

The source of the various Indian styles, the origin of the 
forms used, the history of their development, are all wrapped 
in obscurity. All the monuments show a fully developed 
style and great command of technical resources from the 
outset. When, where, and how these were attained is as 
yet an unsolved mystery. In all its phases previous to the 
Moslem conquest Indian architecture appears like an in- 
digenous art, borrowing little from foreign styles, and hav- 
ing no affinities with the arts of Occidental nations. 

BUDDHIST STYLE. Although Buddhism originated in the 
sixth century b.c, the earliest architectural remains of the 
style date from its wide promulgation in India under Asoka 
(272-236 b.c). Buddhist monuments comprise three chief 
classes of structures : the sti/f>as or topes, which are mounds 
more or less domical in shape, enclosing relic-shrines of 
Buddha, or built to mark some sacred spot ; chaityas, or 
temple halls, cut in the rock ; and viharas, or monaster- 
ies. The style of the detail varies considerably in these 
three classes, but is in general simpler and more massive 
than in the other styles of India. 

TOPES. These are found in groups, of which the most 
important are at or near Bhilsa in central India, at Manik- 
yala in the northwest, at Amravati in the south, and in 
Ceylon at Ruanwalli and Tuparamaya. The best known 
among them is the Sanchi Tope, near Bhilsa, 120 feet in 
diameter and 56 feet high. It is surrounded by a richly 
carved stone rail or fence, with gateways of elaborate 
workmanship, having three sculptured lintels crossing the 
carved uprights. The tope at Manikyala is larger, and 
dates from the 7th century. It is exceeded in size by many 
in Ceylon, that at Abayagiri measuring 360 feet in 


diameter. Few of the topes retain the ice, or model of a 
shrine, which, like a lantern, once crowned each of them. 

Besides the topes there are a few stupas of tower-like 
form, square in plan, of which the most famous is that at 
Buddh Gaya, near the sacred Bodhi tree, where Buddha at- 
tained divine light in 588 B.C. 

CHAITYA HALLS. The Buddhist speos-temples so far as 
known the only extant halls of worship of that religion, ex- 
cept one at Sanchi are mostly in the Bombay Presidency, 
at Ellora, Karli, Ajunta, Nassick, and Bhaja. The earliest, 
that at Karli, dates from 78 b.c, the latest (at Ellora), dr. 
600 a.d. They consist uniformly of a broad nave ending 
in an apse, and covered by a roof like a barrel vault, and 
two narrow side aisles. In the apse is the dagoba or relic- 
shrine, shaped like a miniature tope. The front of the cave 
MM originally adorned with an open-work screen or frame 
of wood, while the face of the rock about the opening was 
carved into the semblance of a sumptuous structural facade. 
Among the finest of these caverns is that at Karli, whose 
live columns and impressive scale recall Egyptian mod- 
els, though the resemblance is superficial and has no historic 
significance. More suggestive is the affinity of many of the 
columns which stand before these caves to Persian proto- 
types (see Fig. 21). It is not improbable that both Persian 
and classic forms were introduced into India through the 
Bactrian kingdom 250 years B.C. Otherwise we must seek 
for the origin of nearly all Buddhist forms in a pre-existing 
wooden architecture, now wholly perished, though its tradi- 
tions may survive in the wooden screens in. the fronts of 
the caves. While some of these caverns are extremely 
simple, as at Bhaja, others, especially at Nassick and 
Ajunta, are of great splendor and complexity. 

VIHARAS. Kxcept at (iandhara in the Punjab, the 
structural monasteries of t^e Buddhists were probably all 
of wood and have long ago perished. The (iandhara mon- 


asteries of Jamalgiri and Takht-i-Bahi present in plan three 
or four courts surrounded by cells. The centre of one court 
is in both cases occupied by a platform for an altar or shrine. 
Among the ruins there have been found a number of capi- 
tals whose strong resemblance to the Corinthian type is 
now generally attributed to Byzantine rather than Bactrian 
influences. These viharas may therefore be assigned to the 
6th or 7th century a.d. 

The rock-cut viharas are found in the neighborhood of 
the chaityas already described. Architecturally, they are 
far more elaborate than the chaityas. Those at Salsette, 
Ajunta, and Bagh are particularly interesting, with pillared 
halls or courts, cells, corridors, and shrines. The hall of the 
Great Vihara at Bagh is 96 feet square, with 36 columns. 
Adjoining it is the school-room, and the whole is fronted 
by a sumptuous rock-cut colonnade 200 feet long. These 
caves were mostly hewn between the 5th and 7th centuries, 
at which time sculpture was more prevalent in Buddhist 
works than previously, and some of them are richly adorned 
with figures. 

JAINA STYLE. The religion and the architecture of the 
Jainas so closely resemble those of the Buddhists, that re- 
cent authorities are disposed to treat the Jaina style as a 
mere variation or continuation of the Buddhist. Chrono- 
logically they are separated by an interval of some three 
centuries, dr. 650-950 a.d., which have left us almost no 
monuments of either style. The Jaina is moreover easily 
distinguished from the Buddhist architecture by the great 
number and elaborateness of its structural monuments. 
The multiplication of statues of Tirthankhar in the cells 
about the temple courts, the exuberance of sculpture, the 
use of domes built in horizontal courses, and the imitation 
in stone of wooden braces or struts are among its distin- 
guishing features. \ 

jaina temples. The earliest examples are on Mount Abu 



in the Indian Desert. Built by Vimalafa Sah in 1032, the 
chief of these consists of a court measuring 140x90 feet, 
surrounded by cells and a double colonnade. In the centre 
rises the shrine of the god, containing his statue, and ter- 
minating in a lofty tower or sikhra. An imposing columnar 
porch, cruciform in plan, precedes this cell (Fig. 226). The 


intersection of the arms is covered by a dome supported OH 

eight columns with stone brackets or struts. The dome 
and columns are covered with profuse carving and sculpt- 
ured figures, and the total effect is one of remarkable 
dignity and splendor. The temple of Sadri is much more 
extensive, twenty minor domes and one of larger size form- 
ing cruciform port lies on all four sides of the central sikhra. 
The cells about the court are each covered by a small sikhra, 
and these, with the twenty-one domes (four of which are 



built in three stories), all grouped about the central tower 
and adorned with an astonishing variety of detail, consti- 
tute a monument of the first importance. It was built 
by Khumbo Rana, about 1450. At 
Girnar are several 12th-century 
temples with enclosed instead of 
open vestibules. One of these, that 
of Neminatha, retains intact its 
court enclosure and cells, which in 
most other cases have perished. The 
temple at Somnath resembles it, but 
is larger ; the dome of its porch, 33 
feet in diameter, is the largest Jaina 
dome in India. Other notable tem- 
ples are at Gwalior, Khajuraho, and 

In all the Jaina temples the salient 
feature is the sikhra or vimana. This 
is a tower of approximately square 
plan, tapering by a graceful curve 
toward a peculiar terminal ornament 
shaped like a flattened melon. Its 
whole surface is variegated by hori- 
zontal bands and vertical breaks, 
covered with sculpture and carving. 
Next in importance are the domes, 
built wholly in horizontal courses 
and resting on stone lintels carried 
by bracketed columns. These same 
traits appear in relatively modern 
examples, as at Delhi. 

TOWERS. A similar predilection for minutely broken sur- 
faces marks the towers which sometimes adjoin the temples, 
as at Chittore (tower of Sri Allat, 13th century), or were 
erected as trophies of victory, like that of Khumbo Rana in 



the same town (Fig. 227). The combination of horizontal 
and vertical lines, the distribution of the openings, and the 
rich ornamentation of these towers are very interesting, 
though lacking somewhat in structural propriety of design. 

style is as yet an unsolved problem. Its monuments were 
mainly built between 600 and 1200 a.d., the oldest being 
in Orissa, at Bhuwanesevar, Kanaruk, and Puri. In north- 
ern India the temples are about equally divided between the 
two forms of Brahmanism the worship of Vishnu or Vaish- 
riavism, and that of Siva or Shaivism and do not differ 
materially in style. As in the Jaina style, the vimana is 
their most striking feature, and this is in most cases adorned 
with numerous reduced copies of its own form grouped in 
successive stages against its sides and angles. This curious 
system of design appears in nearly all the great temples, 
both of Vishnu and Siva. The Jaina melon ornament is 
universal, surmounted generally by an urn-shaped finial. 

In plan the vimana shrine is preceded by two or three 
chambers, square or polygonal, some with and some with- 
out columns. The foremost of these is covered by a roof 
formed like a stepped pyramid set cornerwise. The fine 
porch of the ruined temple at Bindrabun is cruciform in 
plan and forms the chief part of the building, the shrine at 
the further end being relatively small and its tower un- 
finished or ruined. In some modern examples the ante- 
chamber is replaced by an open porch with a Saracenic 
dome, a- at P.enares ; in others the old type is completely 
abandoned, as in the temple at Kantonnuggur (1704-22). 
This is a square hall built of terra-cotta, with four three- 
arched porches and nine towers, more Saracenic than IWali- 
man in general aspect. 

The Kandarya Mahadeo, at Khajuraho. is the most noted 
example of the northern Brahman style, and one of the 
most splendid structures extant. A strong and lofty base- 


ment supports an extraordinary mass of roofs, covering the 
six open porches and the antechamber and hypostyle hall, 
which precede the shrine, and rising in successive pyramidal 
masses until the vimana is reached which covers the shrine. 
This is 116 feet high, but seems much loftier, by reason of 
the small scale of its constituent parts and the marvellously 
minute decoration which covers the whole structure. The 
vigor of its masses and the grand stairways which lead up 
to it give it a dignity unusual for its size, 60 x 109 feet in 
plan {fir. 1000 a.d.). 

At Puri, in Orissa, the Temple of Jugganat, with its double 
enclosure and numerous subordinate shrines, the Teli-ka- 
Mandir at Gwalior, and temples at TJdaipur near Bhilsa, at 
Mukteswara in Orissa, at Chittore, Benares, and Barolli, are 
important examples. The few tombs erected subsequent 
to the Moslem conquest, combining Jaina bracket columns 
with Saracenic domes, and picturesquely situated palaces 
at Chittore (1450), Oudeypore (1580), and Gwalior, should 
also be mentioned. 

CHALUKYAN STYLE. Throughout a central zone crossing 
the peninsula from sea to sea about the Dekkan,and extend- 
ing south to Mysore on the west, the Brahmans developed a 
distinct style during the later centuries of the Chalukyan 
dynasty. Its monuments are mainly comprised between 1050 
and the Mohammedan conquest in 1310. The most nota- 
ble examples of the style are found along the southwest 
coast, at Hullabid, Baillur, and Somnathpur. 

TEMPLES. Chalukyan architecture is exclusively relig- 
ious and its temples are easily recognized. The plans com- 
prise the same elements as those of the Jainas, but the 
Chalukyan shrine is always star-shaped externally in plan, 
and the vimana takes the form of a stepped pyramid instead 
of a curved outline. The Jaina dome is, moreover, wholly 
wanting. All the details are of extraordinary richness and 
beauty, and the breaking up of the surfaces by rectangular 



projections is skilfully managed so as to produce an effect 
of great apparent size with very moderate dimensions. AM 
the known examples stand on raised platforms, adding ma- 
terially to their dignity. Some are double temples, as at 
Hullabid (Fig. 228); others are triple in plan. A notice- 
____^__^ able feature of the 

style is the deeply cut 
stratification of the 
lower part of the tem- 
ples, each band or stra- 
tum bearing a distinct 
frieze of animals, fig- 
ures or ornament, 
carved with masterly 
skill. Pierced stone 
slabs filling the win- 
dow openings arc also 

not uncommon. 

The richest exem- 
plars of the style are 
the temples at Baillur 
and Somnathpur, and 
at Hullabid the Kait 
Iswara and the incom- 
plete Double Temple. 

The Kurti Stainbha, Of 
gate at Worangul, and 

the Great Temple at 

Hamoncondah should also be mentioned. 

DRAVIDIAN STYLE. The Brahman monuments of south- 
ern India exhibit a style almost as strongly marked as the 
Chalukyan. This appears less in their details than in their 
general plan and conception. The Dravidian temples are 
not single structures, but aggregations of buildings of varied 
size and form, covering extensive areas enclosed by walls 



and entered through gates made imposing by lofty pylons 
called gopuras. As if to emphasize these superficial resem- 
blances to Egyptian models, the sanctuary is often low and 
insignificant. It is preceded by much more imposing 
porches {mantapas) and hypostyle halls or choultries, the 
latter being sometimes of extraordinary extent, though sel- 
dom lofty. The choultrie, sometimes called the Hall of 
1,000 Columns, is in some cases replaced by pillared corri- 
dors of great length and splendor, as at Ramisseram and 
Madura. The plans are in most cases wholly irregular, and 
the architecture, so far from resembling the Egyptian in its 
scale and massiveness, is marked by the utmost minuteness 
of ornament and tenuity of detail, suggesting wood and stuc- 
co rather than stone. The Great Hall at Chillambaram is 
but 10 to 12 feet high, and the corridors at Ramisseram, 700 
feet long, are but 30 feet high. The effect of ensemble of the 
Dravidian temples is disappointing. They lack the empha- 
sis of dominant masses and the dignity of symmetrical and 
logical arrangement. The very loftiness of the gopuras 
makes the buildings of the group within seem low by con- 
trast. In nearly every temple, however, some one feature 
attracts merited admiration by its splendor, extent, or 
beauty. Such are the Choultrie, built by Tirumalla Nayak 
at Madura (1623-45), measuring t,ZZ x io 5 f eet 5 the corridors 
already mentioned at Ramisseram and in the Great Temple 
at Madura ; the gopuras at Tarputry and Vellore, and the 
Mantapa of Parvati at Chillambaram (1595-1685). Very 
noticeable are the compound columns of this style^onsist- 
ing of square piers with slender shafts coupled tothem and 
supporting brackets, as at Chillambaram, Peroor, and Vel- 
lore; the richly banded square piers, the grotesques of ram- 
pant horses and monsters, and the endless labor bestowed 
upon minute carving and ornament in superposed bands. 

OTHER MONUMENTS. Other important temples are at 
Tiruvalur, Seringham, Tinevelly, and Conjeveram, all alike 



in general scheme of design, with enclosures varying from 
300 to 1,000 feet in length and width. At Tanjore is a mag- 
nificent temple with two courts, in the larger of which 
stands a pagoda or shrine with a pyramidal vimana, unusual 
M -^ ,.. m Dravidian tem- 

^^ ^ pies, and beside it 

the smaller Shrine 
of Soubramanya 
(Fig. 229), a structure 
of unusual beauty of 
detail. In both, the 
vertical lower story 
with its pilasters and 


windows is curiously suggestive of Renaissance design. 
The pagoda dates from the 14th, the smaller temple from 
the 15th century. 

BOCK-CUT RATHS All the above temples were built sub- 
sequently to the 12th century. The rock-cut shrines date 
in some cases as far ba< It as the 7th century ; they are 
called kylas and roths, and are not caves, but isolated edi- 


fices, imitating structural designs, but hewn bodily from 
the rock. Those at Mahavellipore are of diminutive size ; 
but at Purudkul there is an extensive temple with shrine, 
choultrie, and gopura surrounded by a court enclosure 
measuring 250 x 150 feet (9th century). More famous still 
is the elaborate Kylas at Ellora, of about the same size as 
the above, but more complex and complete in its details. 

PALACES. At Madura, Tanjore, and Vijayanagar are 
Dravidian palaces, built after the Mohammedan conquest 
and in a mixed style. The domical octagonal throne-room 
and the Great Hall at Madura (17th century), the most fa- 
mous edifices of the kind, were evidently inspired from 
Gothic models, but how this came about is not known. 
The Great Hall with its pointed arched barrel vault of 67 
feet span, its cusped arches, round piers, vaulting shafts, 
and triforium, appears strangely foreign to its surroundings. 

CAMBODIA. The subject of Indian architecture cannot 
be dismissed without at least brief mention of the immense 
temple of Nakhon Wat in Cambodia. This stupendous cre- 
ation covers an area of a full square mile, with its concen- 
tric courts, its encircling moat or lake, its causeways, 
porches, and shrines, dominated by a central structure 200 
feet square with nine pagoda-like towers. The corridors 
around the inner court have square piers of almost classic 
Roman type. The rich carving, the perfect masonry, and 
the admirable composition of the whole leading up to the 
central mass, indicate architectural ability of a high order. 

CHINESE ARCHITECTURE. No purely Mongolian nation 
appears ever to have erected buildings of first-rate impor- 
tance. It cannot be denied, however, that the Chinese are 
possessed of considerable decorative skill and mechanical 
ingenuity ; and these qualities are the most prominent ele- 
ments in their buildings. Great size and splendor, massive- 
ness and originality of construction, they do not possess. 
Built in large measure of wood, cleverly framed and deco- 


rated with a certain richness of color and ornament, with a 
large element of the grotesque in the decoration, the Chi- 
nese temples, pagodas, and palaces are interesting rather 
than impressive. There is not a single architectural monu- 
ment of imposing size or of great antiquity, so far as we 
know. The celebrated Porcelain Tower of Nankin is no 
longer extant, having been destroyed in the Tapping rebel- 
lion in 1850. It was a nine-storied polygonal pagoda 236 
feet high, revetted with porcelain tiles, and was built in 141 2. 
The largest of Chinese temples, that of the Great Dragon 
at Pekin, is a circular structure of moderate size, though its 
enclosure is nearly a mile square. Pagodas with diminish- 
ing stories, elaborately carved entrance gates and succes- 
sive terraces are mainly relied upon for effect. They show 
little structural art, but much clever ornament. Like the 
monasteries and the vast lamaseries of Thibet, they belong 
to the Buddhist religion. 

Aside from the ingenious framing and bracketing of the 
Carpentry, the most striking peculiarity of Chinese build- 
ings is their broad-spreading tiled roofs. These invariably 
slope downward in a curve, and the tiling, with its hip- 
ridges, crestings, and finials in terra-cotta or metal, adds 
materially to the picturesqueness of the general effect. 
Color and gilding are freely used, and in some cases as in 
a summer pavilion at Pekin porcelain tiling covers the 
walls, with brilliant effect. The chief wonder is that this 

iurce of the architectural decorator has no! been further 

developed in China, where porcelain and earthenware are 
otherwise treated with such remarkable skill. 

JAPANESE ARCHITECTURE. Apparently associated in race 
with the Chinese and Koreans, the Japanese are far more 

artistic in temperament than either of their neighbors. The 

refinement and originality of their decorative art have 
given it a wide reputation. Unfortunately the prevalence 

of earthquakes has combined with the influence of the tra- 


ditional habits of the people to prevent the maturing of a 
truly monumental architecture. Except for the terraces, 
gates, and enclosures of their palaces and temples, wood is 
the predominant building material. It is used substantially 
as in China, the framing, dovetailing, bracketing, broad 
eaves and tiled roofs of Japan closely resembling those of 
China. The chief difference is in the greater refinement 
and delicacy of the Japanese details and the more monu- 
mental disposition of the temple terraces, the beauty of 
which is greatly enhanced by skilful landscape gardening. 
The gateways recall somewhat those of the Sanchi Tope 
in India (p. 403), but are commonly of wood. Owing to 
the danger from earthquakes, lofty towers and pagodas are 
rarely seen. 

The domestic architecture of Japan, though interesting 
for its arrangements, and for its sensible and artistic use of 
the most flimsy materials, is too trivial in scale, detail, and 
construction to receive more than passing reference. Even 
the great palace at Tokio,* covering an immense area, is 
almost entirely composed of one-storied buildings of wood, 
with little of splendor or architectural dignity. 

MONUMENTS (additional to those in text), buddhist : Topes at 
Sanchi, Sonari, Satdara, Andher, in Central India ; at Sarnath, near Be- 
nares ; at Jelalabad and Salsette ; in Ceylon at Anuradhapura, Tupara- 
maya, Lankaramaya. Grotto temples (chaityas), mainly in Bombay and 
Bengal Presidencies ; at Behar, especially the Lomash Rishi, and Cuttack ; 
at Bhaja, Bedsa, Ajunta, and Ellora (Wiswakarma Cave) ; in Salsette, the 
Kenheri Cave. Viharas : Structural at Nalanda and Sarnath, demolished ; 
rock-cut in Bengal, at Cuttack, Udayagiri (the Ganesa) ; in the west, 
many at Ajunta, also at Bagh, Bedsa, Bhaja, Nassick (the Nahapana, 
Yadnya Sri, etc.), Salsette, Ellora (the Dekrivaria, etc.). In Nepal, stupas 
of Swayanbunath and Bouddhama. 

jaina : Temples at Aiwulli, Kanaruc (Black Pagoda), and Purudkul ; 

* See Transactions R. I. B. A., 52d year, 1886, article by R. J. Conder, 
pp. 185-214. 


groups of temples at Palitana, (lirnar. Mount Abu. Somnath, Parisn.uli . 
Balm at Gwalior, 1093 ; Parswanatha and Ganthai (650) at Klia- 
juraho ; temple at (iyrasporc, 7th cent u ry ; modern temples at Ahmeda- 
bad(Ilutiising), Delhi, and Sonagfaor ; in the south at Moodbidri, Sravana 
Belgula ; towers at Chittore. 

nokthkrn BRAHMAN: Temples, Parasumareswara (500 A.D. ), Muktes- 
wara. and C.reat Temple (600-650), all at Bhuwaneswar, among many 
others ; of I'apanatha at Purudkul ; grotto temples at Dhumnar, Ellora, 
and I'oonah ; temples at Chandravati, Udaipur, and Amritsur (the last 
modern) ; tombs of Singram Sing and others at Oudeypore ; of Rajah 
Baktawar at Ulwar, and others at Goverdhun ; ghats or landings at Benares 
and elsewhere. 

oiaiikyan: Temples at Buchropully and Hamoncondah, 1163 ; ruins 
at Kalvani ; grottoes of Hazar Khutri. 

dkaviihan: Rock-cut temples (raths) at Mahavellipore ; Tiger Cave 
at Saluvan Kuppan ; temples at l'ittadkul (Purudkul), Tiruvalur. Com- 
baconum, Vellore, Peroor, V'ijayanagar ; pavilions at Tanjore and \ija- 

There are also many temples in the Kashmir Valley difficult of asrign- 
ment to any of the above styles and religions. 


Schliemann commented by Schuchardt, of Dorpfeld, Sta- 
makis, Tsoundas, Perrot, and others, in Troy, Mycenae, and 
Tiryns, and the more recent discoveries of Evans at 
Gnossus, in Crete, have greatly extended our knowledge of 
the prehistoric art of Greece and the Mediterranean basin, 
and established many points of contact on the one hand 
with ancient Egyptian and Phoenician art, and on the other, 
with the art of historic Greece. They have proved the 
existence of an active and flourishing commerce between 
Egypt and the Mediterranean shores and Aegean islands 
more than 2000 B.C., and of a flourishing material civiliza- 
tion in those islands and on the mainland of Greece, 
borrowing much, but not everything, from Egypt. While the 
origin of the Doric order in the structural methods of the 
pre-Homeric architecture of Tiryns and Mycenae, as set 
forth by Dorpfeld and by Perrot and Chipiez, can hardly be 
regarded as proved in all details, since much of the argument 
advanced for this derivation rests on more or less conjec- 
tural restorations of the existing remains, it seems to be 
fairly well established that the Doric order, and historic 
Greek architecture in general, trace their genesis in large 
measure back in direct line to this prehistoric art. The 
remarkable feature of this early architecture is the apparently 
complete absence of temples. Fortifications, houses, palaces, 
and tombs make up the ruins thus far discovered, and seem 
to indicate clearly the derivation of the temple-type of later 
Greek art from the primitive house, consisting of a hall o~ 
megaron with four columns about the central hearth (whence 
2 7 


no doubt, the atrium and peristyle of Roman houses, through 
their Greek intermediary prototypes) and a porch or aithousa, 
with or without columns in anlis, opening directly into the 
megaron, or indirectly through an ante-room called the 
prodomos. Here we have the prototypes of the Greek 
temple in an/is, with its naos having interior columns, 
whether roofed over or hypaethral (see pp. 54, 55). It is 
probable also that the evidently liberal use of timber for 
many of the structural details led in time to many of the 
forms later developed in stone in the entablature of the 
Doric order. But it is hard to discover, as Dorpfeld would 
have it, in the slender Mycenaean columns with their in- 
verted taper, the prototype of the massive Doric column 
with its upward taper. The Mycenaean column was evi- 
dently derived from wooden models ; the sturdy Doric 
column the earliest being the most massive seems plainly 
derived from stone or rubble piers (see p. 50), and thus to 
have come from a different source from the Mycenaean 

The gynecaum, or women's apartments, the men's apart- 
ments, and the bath were in these ancient palaces grouped 
in varying relations about the megaton : their plan, purpose, 
and arrangement are clearly revealed in the ruins of T\ryns, 
where they are more complete and perfect than either at 
Troy or Mycenae. 

B. campaniles IK ITALY. Reference is made on page 
264 to the towers or campaniles of the Italian Gothic style 
and period, and six of these are specifically mentioned ; 
and on page 305 mention is also made of those of the Re- 
naissance in Italy. The number and importance of the 
Italian campaniles and the interest attaching to their origin 
and design, warrant a more extended notice than has been 
assigned them in the pages cited. 

The oldest of these bell-towers appear to be those adjoin- 



ing the two churches of San Apollinare in and near Ravenna 
(see p. 114), and date presumably from the sixth century. 
They are plain circular towers with few and small openings, 
except in the uppermost story, where larger arched open- 
ings permit the issue of the sound of the bells. This type 
which might have been developed into a very interesting 
form of tower, does not seem to have been imitated. It 
was at Rome, and not till the ninth or tenth century, that 
the campanile became a recognized feature of church archi- 
tecture. It was invariably treated as a structure distinct 
from the church, and was built of brick upon a square plan, 
rising with little or no architectural adornment to a height 
usually of a hundred feet or more, and furnished with but 
a few small openings below the belfry stage, where a pair 
of coupled arched windows separated by a simple column 
opened from each face of the tower. Above these windows 
a pyramidal roof of low pitch terminated the tower. In 
spite of their simplicity of design these Roman bell- towers 
often possess a noticeable grace of proportions, and furnish 
the prototype of many of the more elaborate campaniles 
erected during the Middle Ages in other central and north 
Italian cities. The towers of Sta. Maria in Cosmedin, Sta. 
Maria in Trastevere, and S. Giorgio in Velabro are examples 
of this type. Most of the Roman examples date from the 
eleventh and twelfth centuries. 

In other cities, the campanile was treated with some 
variety of form and decoration, as well as of material. In 
Lombardy and Venetia the square red-brick shaft of the 
tower is often adorned with long, narrow pilaster strips, 
as at Piacenza (p. 158, Fig. 91) and Venice, and an arcaded 
cornice not infrequently crowns the structure. The open- 
ings at the top may be three or four in number on each 
face, and even the plan is sometimes octagonal or circular. 
The brick octagonal campanile of S. Gottardo at Milan is 
one of the finest Lombard church towers. At Verona the 


brick tower on the Piazza dell 'Erbe and that of S. Zeno are 
conspicuous ; but every important town of northern Italy 
possesses one or more examples of these structures dating 
from the eleventh, twelfth, or thirteenth century. 

Undoubtedly the three most noted bell-towers in Italy 
are those of Venice, Pisa, and Florence. The great Cam- 
panile of St. Mark at Venice, first begun in 874, carried 
higher in the twelfth and fourteenth centuries, and finally 
completed in the sixteenth century with the marble bel- 
vedere and wooden spire so familiar in pictures of Venice, 
was formerly the highest of all church campaniles in Italy, 
measuring approximately 325 feet to the summit. But this 
superb historic monument, weakened by causes not yet 
at this writing fully understood, fell in sudden ruin on the 
14th of July, 1902, to the great loss not only of Venice, but of 
the world of art, though fortunately without injuring the 
neighboring buildings on the Piazza and Piazzetta of St. 
Mark. Since then the campanile of S. Stefano, in the same 
city, has been demolished to forestall another like disaster. 
The Leaning Tower of Pisa (see p. 160, Fig. 92) dates from 
1 1 74, and is unique in its plan and its exterior treatment 
with superposed arcades. Begun apparently as a leaning 
tower, it seems to have increased this lean to a dangerous 
point, by the settling of its foundations during construction, 
as its upper stages were made to deviate slightly towards 
the vertical from the inclination of the lower portion. It 
has always served rather as a watch-tower and belvedere than 
as a bell-tower. The Campanile adjoining the Duomo at 
Florence is described on p. 263 and illustrated in Fig. 154, 
and does not require further notice here. The black-and- 
white banded towers of Sienna, Lucca, and Pistoia, and the 
octagonal lanterns crowning those of Verona and Mantua, 
also referred to in the text on p. 264, need here only be 
mentioned again as illustrating the variety of treatment of 
these Italian towers. 



The Renaissance architects developed new types of cam- 
panile, and in such variety that they can only be briefly 
referred to. Some, like a brick tower at Perugia, are simple 
square towers with pilasters ; more often engaged columns 
and entablatures mark the several stories, and the upper 
portion is treated either with an octagonal lantern or with 
diminishing stages, and sometimes with a spire. Of the latter 
class the best example is that of S. Biagio, at Montepulci- 
ano, one of the two designed to flank the facade of Ant. 
da S. Gallo's beautiful church of that name. One or two 
good late examples are to be found at Naples. Of the 
more massive square type there are examples in the towers 
of S. Michele, Venice ; of the cathedral at Ferrara, Sta. 
Chiara at Naples, and Sta. Maria dell' Anima one of 
the earliest at Rome. The most complete and perfect of 
these square belfries of the Renaissance is that of the 
Campidoglio at Rome, by Martino Lunghi, dating from the 
end of the sixteenth century, which groups so admirably 
with the palaces of the Capitol. 

C. BRAMANTE'S WORKS. A more or less animated contro- 
versy has arisen regarding the authenticity of many of 
the works attributed to Bramante, and the tendency has of 
late been to deny him any part whatever in several of the 
most important of these works. The first of these to be 
given a changed assignment was the church of the Conso- 
lazione at Todi (p. 293), now believed to be by Cola di 
Caprarola ; and it is now denied by many investigators that 
either the Cancelleria or the Giraud palace (p. 290) is his 
work, or any one of two or three smaller houses in Rome 
showing a somewhat similar architectural treatment. The 
evidence adduced in support of this denial is rather specu- 
lative and critical than documentary, but is not without 
weight. The date 1495 carved on a doorway of the Can- 
celleria palace is thought to forbid its attribution tc 



Bramante, who is not known to have come to Rome till 
1503 ; and there is a lack of positive evidence of his author- 
ship of the Giraud palace and the other houses which seem 
to be by the same hand as the Cancelleria. To the advocates 
of this view there is not enough resemblance in style 
between this group of buildings and his acknowledged work 
either in Milan or in the Vatican to warrant their being 
attributed to him. 

It must, however, be remarked, that this notable group of 
works, stamped with the marks and even the mannerisms of 
a strong personality, reveal in their unknown author gifts 
amounting to genius, and heretofore deemed not unworthy 
of Bramante. It is almost inconceivable that they should 
have been designed by a mere beginner previously utterly 
unknown and forgotten soon after. It is incumbent upon 
those who deny the attribution to Bramante to find another 
name, if possible, on which to fasten the credit of these 
works. Accordingly, they have been variously attributed to 
Alberti (who died in 1472) or his followers; to Bernardo di 
Lorenzo, and to other later fifteenth-century artists. The 
difficulty here is to discover any name that fits the condi- 
tions even as well as Bramante's ; for the supposed author 
must have been in Rome between 1495 and 1505, and his 
other works must be at least as much like these as were 
Bramante's. No name has thus far been found satisfactory 
to careful critics ; and the alternative theory, that there ex- 
isted in Rome, before Bramante's coming, a group of 
architects unknown to later fame, working in a common 
style and capable of such a masterpiece as the Cancelleria, 
does not harmonize with the generally accepted facts of 
Renaissance art history. Moreover, the comparison of these 
works with Bramante's Milanese work on the one hand and 
his great Court of the Belvedere in the Vatican on the other, 
yields, to some critics, conclusions quite opposed to those 
of the ad of another authorship thai) Bramante's. 



The controversy must be considered for the present as 
still open. There are manifest difficulties with either of the 
two opposed views, and these can hardly be eliminated, 
except by the discovery of documents not now known to 
exist, whose testimony will be recognized as unimpeachable. 

D. L'AET NOUVEAU. Since 1896, and particularly since 
the Paris Exposition of 1900, a movement has manifested 
itself in France and Belgium, and spread to Germany and 
Austria and even measurably to England, looking towards 
a more personal and original style of decorative and archi- 
tectural design, in which the traditions and historic styles 
of the past shall be ignored. This movement has received 
from its adherents and the public the name of " L'Art 
Nouveau," or, according to some, "L'Art Moderne"; but 
this name must not be held to connote either a really new 
style or a fundamentally new principle in art. Indeed, it 
may be questioned whether any clearly-defined body of 
principles whatever underlies the movement, or would be 
acknowledged equally by all its adherents. It appears to 
be a reaction against a too slavish adherence to traditional 
forms and methods of design (see pp. 370, 375), a striving 
to ignore or forget the past rather than a reaching out 
after any well-understood, positive end ; as such, it possesses 
the negative strength of protest rather than the affirmative 
strength of a vital principle. Its lack of cohesion is seen in 
the division of its adherents into groups, some looking to 
nature for inspiration, while others decry this as a mistaken 
quest ; some seeking to emphasize structural lines, and 
others to ignore them altogether. All, however, are united 
in the avoidance of commonplace forms and historic styles, 
and this preoccupation has developed an amazing amount 
of originality and individualism of style, frequently reaching 
the extreme of eccentricity. The results have there- 
fore been, as might be expected, extremely varied in 



merit, ranging from the most refined and reserved in style 
to the most harshly bizarre and extravagant. As a rule, 
they have been most successful in small and semi-decorative 
objects jewelry, silverware, vases, and small furniture ; 
and one most desirable feature of the movement has been 
the stimulus it has given (especially in France and Eng- 
land), to the organization and activity of "arts-and-crafts " 
societies which occupy themselves with the encouragement 
of the decorative and industrial arts and the diffusion 
of an improved taste. In the field of the larger objects of 
design, in which the dominance of traditional form and of 
structural considerations is proportionally more imperious, 
the struggle to evade these restrictions becomes more diffi- 
cult, and results usually in more obvious and disagreeable 
eccentricities, which the greater size and permanence of the 
object tend further to exaggerate. The least successful 
achievements of the movement have accordingly been in 
architecture. The buildings designed by its most fervent 
disciples {e.g. the Pavilion Bleu at the Exposition of 1900, 
the Castel Beranger, Paris, by //. Guimard, the houses of 
the artist colony at Darmstadt, and others) are for the most 
part characterized by extreme stiffness, eccentricity, or 
ugliness. The requirements of construction and of human 
habitation cannot easily be met without sometimes using 
the forms which past experience has developed for the same 
ends ; and the negation of precedent is not the surest path 
to beauty or even reasonableness of design. It is interest- 
ing to notice that in the intermediate field of furniture- 
design some of the best French productions recall the style 
of Louis XV., modified by Japanese ideas and spirit. This 
singular but not unpleasing combination is less surprising 
when we reflect that the style of Louis XV. was itself a 
protest against the formalism of the heavy lattk architec- 
ture of preceding reigns, and achieved its highest successes 
in the domain of furniture and interior decoration. 



It may be fair to credit the new movement with one posi- 
tive characteristic in its prevalent regard for line, especially 
for the effect of long and swaying lines, whether in the 
contours or ornamentation of an object. This is especially 
noticeable in the Belgian work, and in that of the Viennese 
" Secessionists," who have, however, carried eccentricity to 
a further point of extravagance than any others. 

Whether " L'Art Nouveau " will ever produce permanent 
results time alone can show. Its present vogue is probably 
evanescent and it cannot claim to have produced a style ; 
but it seems likely to exert on European architecture an 
influence, direct and indirect, not unlike that of the Neo- 
Grec movement of 1830 in France (p. 364), but even more 
lasting and beneficial. It has already begun to break the 
hold of rigid classical tradition in design ; and recent build- 
ings, especially in Germany and Austria, like the works of 
the brilliant Otto Wagner in Vienna, show a pleasing free- 
dom of personal touch without undue striving after eccentric 
novelty. Doubtless in French and other European archi- 
tecture the same result will in time manifest itself. 

The search for novelty and the desire to dispense wholly 
with historic forms of design which are the chief marks 
of the Art Noveau, were emphatically displayed in many of 
the remarkable buildings of the Paris Exhibition of 1900, in 
which a striking fertility and facility of design in the decor- 
ative details made more conspicuous the failure to improve 
upon the established precedents of architectural style in the 
matters of proportion, scale, general composition, and con- 
tour. As usual the metallic construction of these buildings 
was almost without exception admirable, and the decorative 
details, taken by themselves, extremely clever and often 
beautiful, but the combined result was not satisfactory. 

In the United States the movement has not found a firm 
foothold because there has been no dominant, enslaving 
tradition to protest ngainst. Not a few of the ideas, not a 


little of the spirit of the movement may be recognized in 
the work of individual architects and decorative artists in 
the United States, executed years before the movement 
took recognizable form in Europe : and American decora- 
tive design has generally been, at least since 1880 or 1885, 
sufficiently free, individual and personal, to render unneces- 
sary and impossible any concerted movement of artistic 
revolt against slavery to precedent. 

E. RECENT AMERICAN architecture. Architectural ac- 
tivity in the United States continues to share in the general 
prosperity which has marked the years since 1898, and this 
activity has by no means been confined to industrial and 
commercial architecture. Indeed, while the erection of "sky 
scrapers " or excessively lofty office-buildings has continued 
to be a feature of this activity in the great commercial 
centres, the most notable architectural enterprises of recent 
years have been in the field of educational buildings, both 
in the East and West. In 1898 a great international com- 
petition resulted in the selection of the design of Mr. B, 
Bhiard of Paris for a magnificent group of buildings for 
the University of California on a scale of unexampled grand- 
eur, and the erection of this colossal project has been begun. 
An almost equally ambitious project, by a firm of Phila- 
delphia architects, has been adopted for the Washington 
University at St. Louis ; and many other universities and 
colleges have either added extensively, .to their existing 
buildings or planned an entire rebuilding on new designs. 
Among these the national military and naval academies at 
West Point and Annapolis take the first rank in the extent 
and splendor of the projected improvements. Museums 
and libraries have also been erected or begun in various 
cities, and the NVw York Public Library, now building, will 
rank in cost and beauty with those already erected in Boston 
and Washington. 


In other departments mention should be made of recent 
Federal buildings (custom-houses, post-offices, and court- 
houses) erected under the provisions of the Tarsney act 
from designs secured by competition among the leading 
architects of the country ; among those the New York 
Custom House is the most important, but other buildings, 
at Washington, Indianapolis, and elsewhere, are also con- 
spicuous, and many of them worthy of high praise. The 
tendency to award the designing of important public build- 
ings, such as State capitols, county court houses, city halls, 
libraries, and hospitals, by competition instead of by per- 
sonal and political favor, has resulted in a marked improve- 
ment in the quality of American public architecture. 

the past two years, extensive repairs and partial restorations 
of the Erechtheum at Athens, undertaken by the Greek 
Archaeological Society, have afforded opportunities for a 
new and thoroughgoing study of the existing portions of 
the building and of the surrounding ruins. In these inves- 
tigations a prominent part has been borne by Mr. Gorham 
P. Stevens, representing the Archaeological Institute of 
America, to whom must be credited, among other things, 
the demonstration of the existence, in the east wall of the 
original structure, of two windows previously unknown. 
Other peculiarities of design and construction were also 
discovered, which add greatly to the interest of the build- 
ing. These investigations are reported in the American 
Journal of Archaeology, Second Series ; Journal of the 
Archaeological Institute of America, Vol. X., No. 1, et sea. 
The illustrations, Figures 35 and 36, are, by Mr. Stevens' 
courtesy, based upon, though not reproductions of, his 
original drawings. 



Alcazar (Span., from Arabic A I 
A'asr), a palace or castle, especially 
of a governing official. 

Archivolt, a band or group of 
mouldings decorating the wall-face 
of an arch ; or a transverse arch 
projecting slightly from the sur- 
face of a barrel or groined vault. 

Astylar, without columns. 

Balnea, a Roman bathing estab- 
lishment, less extensive than the 

BEL Etage, the principal story of a 
building, containing the reception 
rooms and saloons ; usually the 
second story (first above the ground 

Broken Entablature, an entabla- 
ture which projects forward over 
each column or pilaster, returning 
back to the wall and running along 
with diminished projection between 
the columns, as in the Arch of 
Constantine (Fig. 63). 

Cantoned Piers, piers adorned with 
columns or pilasters at the corners 
or on the outer faces. 

Cartouche (Fr.), an ornament 
shaped like a shield or oval. In 
Egyptian hieroglyphics, the oval 
encircling the name of a king. 

Cavetto, a concave, quarter-round 

CHEVRON, a V-shaped ornament. 

Chryselephantine, of ivory and 
gold ; used of statues in which the 
nude portions are of ivory and the 
draperies of gold. 

Console, a large scroll - shaped 
bracket or ornament, having its 
broadest curve at the bottom. 

Corinthianesque, resembling the 
Corinthian ; used of capitals having 
corner-volutes and acanthus leaves, 
but combined otherwise than in 
the classic Corinthian type. 

Empaistic, made of, or overlaid 
with, sheet-metal beaten or ham- 
mered into decorative patterns. 

Exedr.'E, curved seats of stone ; 
niches or recesses, sometimes of 
considerable size, provided with 
seats for the public. 

Fenestration, the whole system or 
arrangement of windows and open- 
ings in an architectural composi- 

Four-part. A four-part vault is a 
groined vault formed by the inter- 
section of two barrel vaults. Its 
diagonal edges or groins divide it 
into four sections, triangular in 
plan, each called a compartment. 

Gigantomachia, a group or compo- 
sition representing the mythical 
combat between the gods and the 


ilAi.K-TiMHKKKD, constructed with a 
timber framework showing exter- 
nally, and filled in with masonry 
or brickwork. 

Imaum, imam, a Mohammedan priest. 

Kaabah, the sacred shrine at Mec- 
cah, a nearly cubical structure 
hung with black cloth. 

Karafah, a region in Cairo con- 
taining the so-called tombs of the 

Laconicum, the sweat-room in a 
Roman bath ; usually of domical 
design in the larger thernuv. 

MEZZANINE, a low, intermediate 

Mi Ki>i)i.\, a Mohammedan mosque- 
official who calls to prayer. 

NAk i HEX, a porch or vestibule run- 
ning across the front of a basilica 
or church. 

Neo-GOTHIC, ) in a style which 

Nko-Mi M l \ \I . J M-i-ks to revive 
and adapt or apply to modern uses 
the forms of the Middle Ages. 

OcULUS, a circular opening, espe- 
cially in the crown of a dome. 

< >. .1 i Am 1 1, one composed of two jux- 
taiHised S-shaped " r wavy curves, 
meeting in a point at the top. 

; k A, an establishment EBXNBg 
the ancient Greeks for physical 
Pavilion (Fr. favi Hon), ordinarily a 
light open structure of ornate de- 
sign. As applied to architectural 
composition, a projecting MCtloo 
of a facade, usually rectangular in 

plan, and having its own distinct 
mass of roof. 

Quarry Ornamknt, any ornament 
covering a surface with two series 
of reticulated lines enclosing ap- 
proximately quadrangular spaces or 

Quartrkkoii., with four leaves ci 
foils; composed of four arcs ot 
circles meeting in cusps pointing 

Quoins, slightly projecting blocks 
of stone, alternately long and 
short, decorating or strengthening 
a corner or angle of a facade. 

REVETMENT, a veneering or sheath- 

Rustication, treatment of the ma- 
sonry with blocks having roughly 
broken faces, or with deeply 
grooved or bevelled joints. 

SOFFIT, the under-side of an archi- 
trave, beam, arch, or corona. i 

SFANDEIL, the triangular wall-space 
between two contiguous an lies. 

SQUINCH, a bit of conical vaulting 
Tilling in the angles of a square I > 
as to provide an octagonal or circu- 
lar base for a dome or lantern. 

STOA, an open colonnade for public 

TSFIOAEIUM, the hot-water hall or 
dumber of a Roman bath. 

I A mi \m m, the flat space comprised 
between the horizontal and raking 
cornices of a pediment, or between 
a lintel and the arch over it. 

V'.ismhk, any one of the radial 
stones composing an arch. 


The surname is in all cases followed by a comma. 

Abadik, 373 
Adam:-, Robert 234 
Agnolo, Baccio d' 291 
Agnolo, Gabriele d' 287 
Alberti, Leo Battista 277, 280 
Alessi, Galeazzo 299, 302 
Ammanati, Bartolomeo 300 
Anselm. Prior 219 
Anthemius of Tralles,. 127 
Antonio, Master 259 
Arnold, Master 243 
Arnolfo di Cambio, 162, 265 

Baccio d' Agnolo, 291 

Ballu, 371, 373 

Baltard, Victor 371 

Barry, Sir Charles 380 

Bassevi, 356 

Battista, Juan 351 

Benci di Cione, 266 

Benedetto da Majano, 280, 281 

Bernardo di Lorenzo, 282 

Bernini, Lorenzo 295, 303, 319 

Berruguete, Alonzo 348, 350 

Bianchi. 305 

Bondone, Giotto di 258, 263, 272 

Boromini, Francesco 303, 304 

Borset, 334 

Bramante Lazzari, 289, 290, 294, 295, 

Brandon, Richard 378 
Bregno, Antonio 284 
Broagniart, 363 
Brunelleschi, Filippo 275, 276, 280, 

281, 289 

Bullant, Jean 316, 317 

Bulfinch, Charles 390 

Buon, Bartolomeo 284 

Buonarotti, Michael Angelo 289, iiii2, 

2 94, 295, 296, 299 
Burges, William 380 

Callicrates, 63 
Cambio, Arnolfo di 162, 265 
Campbell, Colin 333 
Campello, 255 
Caprarola, Cola da 293 
Caprino, Meo del 286 
Chalgrin, 362 

Chambers, Sir William 333 
Chambiges, Pierre 313 
Chrismas, Gerard 327 
Christodoulos, 150 
Churriguera, 348, 352 
Cimabue, 258 
Civitale, Matteo 281, 283 
Columbe, Michel 310 
Cortona, Domenico di 316 
Cossutius, 68 
Cronaca, 280, 291 

Dance, George 334 

De Brosse, Salomon 318, 319 

De Fabris, 261 

De Key, Lieven 336 

De Keyser, Hendrik 336 

Delia Porta, Giacomo 292, 299, 300 

Delia Robbia, Luca 281 

De l'Orme, Phihbert 316, 317 

Deperthes, 373 



Deirand, Francois 319 

Desiderio da Settignano, 281 

De Tessin, Nicodemus 337 

De Vriendt (or Floris), Cornelius 334, 

Diego de Siloe, 348 
Domenico di Cortona, 316 
Donatello, 275 

Dosio, Giovanni Antonio 291 
Duban, Felix 364 
Due. 364, 365 
Du Cerceau, Jean Batiste 318 

Epington, 226 
Emerson, William 382 
Enrique de Egaz, 349 
Krwin von Steinbach, 241 

Fain, Pierre 310 

Federighi, Antonio 282 

Ferstel, H. von 375 

Fiesole, Mino da 281 

Filarete, Antonio 283 

Flitcroft, 333 

Floris (De Vriendt). Cornelius 334, 335 

Fontaine, 362 

Fontana, Domenico 295, 299, 300, 304 

Fra Giocondo, 286 

Fra Ristoro, 256 

Fra Sisto, 256 

Fuga, Ferdinando 305 

Gabriel. Jacques Ange 324. 367 

le d'Agnolo, 287 
Gaddi, Taddeo 263 
Galilei. Alessandro 305 
tiarnier, Charles 372 
Gerhardt von Kiel. 243 
Giacomodi Pietrasanta. 286 
Gibbs. James 332. 333, 356, 385 
Giocondo. Fra 286 
Giotto di Bondonc, 258. 263. 272 
Giuliano da Majano, 286, 287 
Giulio Romano. 289, 292 

Goujon, Jean 316, 321 
Gumiel, Pedro 349 

Hai.lbt, Stephen (Etienne) 389 

Hansen, Theophil 360 
Have, Theodore 327 
Hawksmoor, 332 
Hendrik de Keyser, 336 
Henri de Narbonne, 249 
Henry of Gmiind. 255 
Herrera, Francisco 352 
Herrera, Juan d' 348, 350, 35' 
Hitorff, J. J. 364, 372 
Hoban, Thomas 390 
Holbein, Hans 327 
Hubsch, Heinrich 375, 376 
Hunt, Richard M. 393 

Ictinus, 62. 63, 65 
Isodorus of Miletus, 127 
Ivara, Ferdinando 352, 365 

Jacobus of Meruan, 255 
Jansen, Bernard 327 
Jefferson, Thomas 390 
John, Master 243 
John of Padua, 328 
Jones. Inigo 328, 332, 333 
Juan Battista, 351 
Junckher of Cologne, 241 

Kkarsi.ey. Dr. 386 

Kent. 333 

Klenze. Leo von 359, 360, 367 

Labroiste. Henri 364 
Lassus. J. B. A. 371 
Latrobe. Benjamin H 389 
Laurana. Francesco 310 
I-anrana. Luciano 287 

Lc Breton, QfDei 313 

l.cfu-l. Hector 372 

I^mercier, Jacques 312, 319, 32a 
I - Nepveu, Pierre 3^4 

1 Pierre 316 321 



Le Vau (or Levau) 320 

Lieven dc Key, 336 

Ligorio, l'irro 293 

Lippi, Annibale 293 

Lira, Valentino di 343 

Lombardi, Antonio 284 

Lombardi, Martino 284 

Lombardi, Moro 284 

Lombardi, Pietro 284 

Lombardi, Tullio 284, 293 

Longhena, Baldassare 304 

Lorenzo, Bernardo di 282 

Louis, Victor 362 

Luca della Robbia, 281 

Lunghi, Martino (the elder) 304, 305 

Machuca, 351 

Maderna, Carlo 295, 303 

Majano, Benedetto da 280, 281 

Majano, Giuliano da 286, 287 

Mansart, Francois 322 

Mansart, Jules Hardouin 320,321,322 

Marchionne, 305 

Marini, Giovanni 339 

Martino, Pietro di 287 

Matthew of Arras, 243 

Meo del Caprino, 286 

Meruan, Jacobus of 255 

Metezeau, 318 

Michelozzi, Michelozzo 279, 283 

Mino da Fiesole, 281 

Mnesicles, 65 

Mullet, A. B. 392 

Narbonnk, Henri dk 249 
Nenot, Henri P. 374, 375 

Palladio, Andrea 299, 301, 319, 

328, 350 
Percier, Charles 362 
Perrault, Claude 320 
Peruzzi, Baldassare 289, 291, 292, 294 
Phidias, 62 


Philibert de l'Orme, 316, 317 
Pit- trasanta, Giacomo di 286 
Pintclli, Baccio 286 
Pisano, Giovanni 260 
Pisano, Niccolo 272 
Polaert, 382 
Poyet, 363 

Pugin, A. Welby 378 
Pythius, 71 

Raphael Sanzio, 289, 290, 291, 292, 

Renwick, James 391, 392 
Revett, Nicholas 355, 358 
Richardson, Henry H. 393, 394 
Rickman, Thomas 378 
Riel, Gerhardt von 243 
Ristoro, Fra 256 
Rizzio, Antonio 284 
Romano, Giulio 289, 292 
Rossellini, Bernardo 286 
Ruiz, Fernando 352 

Salvi, Niccola 305 
Sammichele, Michele 293, 299, 300, 329 
San Gallo, Antonio da (the Elder) 294 
San Gallo, Antonio da (the Younger) 

289, 291, 294 
San Gallo, Giuliano da 278, 291, 292, 

Sansovino, Giacopo Tatti 289, 293, 

299, 300. 304 
Satyrus, 71 

Scamozzi, Vincenzo 299, 339 
Schinkel, Friedrich 358, 360, 376 
Schmidt, F. 378 
Scott (General) 382 
Scott, Sir Gilbert 380 
Semper, Ottfried 376 
Sens, William of 219 
Servandoni, 323 
Settignano, Desiderio da 281 
Shaw, Norman 382 
Siccardsburg, 376 
Smirke, Robert 356 



Smithson, Robert 328 
Sonne, Sir John 356 
Soufflot, J.J. 362 
Sti-iiihaih. Krwin von 241 
Stella, Paolo della 339 
Stern, Raphael 305, 365 
Street, George Edmund 380 
Stuart, James 355, 358 
Stilhler, 359 

Tai.enti, Francesco di 259, 263 

Talenti, Simone di 266 

Taylor, Robert 334 

Tessin, Nicodemus de 337 

Thomson, Alexander 357 

Thornton, 389 

Thorpe, John 328 

Tiu. 376 

Torregiano, 327 

Trevigi, 327 

Upjohn, Richard 392 

Vai. del Vira, 348 
Valentino di Lira, 343 
Van Aken. 343 
Van Hrugh. Sir John 332 
Van Noort, William 336 
Van Noye, Sebastian 336 

Van Vitelli, 304 

Vasari, Giorgio 162 

Viart, Charles 311 

Viel, 372 

Vignola, Giacomo Barozzi da 289, 292, 

296, 299, 300, 301 
Vignon, Pierre 362 
Viollet-le-Duc, Eugene Emmanuel 370, 

Vischer, Kaspar 343 
Vischer, Peter 347 
1 Visconti, Louis T. J. 371, 372 
Vitoni, Ventura 293 
Vitruvius, 56, 71, 77 
Von der Null, 376 

Wai.lot, Pali, 377 
Wallot, Jean 333 
Walter, Thomas Ustick 391 
Waterhouse, Alfred 381 
Webb, Aston 382 
Wilkins, 357 
William of Sens, 219 
William of Wykeham, 222, 226 
Wood, 333 

Wren, Sir Christopher 329, 331, 332, 
356, 385, 37s 


The buildings are arranged according to location. Those which appear 
only in the lists of monuments at the ends of chapters are omitted. 
Numerals in parentheses refer to illustrations. 

Abayagiri. Tope, 403 
Abbeville. St. Wulfrand, 209, 213 
Abl-Seir. Stepped pyramid, 9 
Abydos. Columns, 12. Temple, 19, 

21. Tombs, 11 (5) 
Addeh. Grotto-temple, 22 
JEmUA. Churches in, 157, 262 
Agra, 149. Pearl Mosque, 148. Taj 

Mahal, 148 (86) 
Agrigentum. Temple of Zeus, 56, 

61 (33) 

Ahmedabad, 148 

Aix-la-Chapelle. Minster (Pala- 
tine Chapel), 172. Palace of Char- 
lemagne, 176 

Aizanoi. Temple of Zeus, 67. 
Theatre, 70 

Ajmir, 148 

Ajunta. Brahman chaityas, 404 ; 
viharas, 405 

Albano. Tomb, 89 

Albany. All Saints' Cathedral, 394. 
Capitol, 391 

Alby Cathedral, 185, 205, 206, 212, 
249 (123) 

Alcala de HeSares, 352. Arch- 
episcopal Palace, 350. College, 349 

Alcantara. Bridge, 108 

Alencon Cathedral, 209, 213 

Alexandria Troas. Palaestra, 71. 

Allahabad. Akbar's Palace, 148 
Altenburg Cathedral, 242. Town 

hall, 344 
Amada. Columns, 12 
Amboise Castle, 310 
Amiens Cathedral, 189, 197, 201, 

203, 205, 206, 219, 232 (122) ; 

west front of, 207, 208, 212, 227 
Amravati. Topes, 403 
Amsterdam. Bourse (Exchange), 

Hanse House, Town hall, 336 
Ancy le Franc. Chateau, 317 
ANET. Chateau, 317 
Angers. Cathedral S. Maurice, 200. 

Hospital, 214 
Angora (Ancyra), 118 
Angouleme Cathedral, 164 
Ani, 134 

Annapolis. Harwood and Ham- 
mond Houses, 386 
Antioch, 115 
Antiphellus. Theatre, 7a Tombs, 

Antwerp Cathedral, 190, 246, 247. 

Town hall, 334, 336 
Aquitania. Churches of, 164, 167, 

168, 179, 373 
Aranjuez. Palace, 352 
Arezzo Cathedral, 257. Sta. Maria 

della Pieve, 159 



AJtGOS. dates, 45 

ARIZON \. Spanish churches in, 388 

Aki.ks. St. Trophime, 165 

Aschakkenburg. Church, 243 

Asheville. Biltmore House, 399 

Am \ Minor, 53, 55, 58, 62, 66, 122 

Amindis. Theatre, 70 

A.SSISI. Church of St. Francis (S. 
Francesco), 255, 256, 258 

AlSOS, 55. Public square, 69. Tem- 
ple, 61 

Asti. Church, 256 

hstorga. Rood-screen, 352 

Athens. Academy, 365. Acropolis, 
65, 69. Agora Gate, 68. Cathe^ 
dral, 134. Choragic Monument of 
Lysicrates, 66 (30, 38). Erech- 
theum, 64 (35, 36). Museum, 
365. Odeion of Regilla (of He- 
rodes Atticus), 68, 69, 70. Par- 
thenon, 56, 58, 63, 64, 131, 359 
(Frontispiece, 31 </, 34). Pro- 
pylaea, 58, 65, 69, 358 (37). Stoa 
of Attalus, 67. Temple of Nike 
Apteros, 64, 65. Temple of Olym- 
pian Zeus, 68 (39). Theatre of 
Dionysus, 69, 70. Theseum (Tem- 
ple of Theseus or Heracles), 62. 
r of Winds (Clepsydra of 
Cyrrhestes). 53,07. I niversity, 365 

A 1 1 ica, 50, 55 

i I own hall, 344 

1 KIA. 330 
Ai lis Cathedral, 166, 167 
Ai VEkt.NK. Churches, 204 

i KRE Cathedral, J97, 201 
A vi<. son. Notre 1 >aine des Doms, 

Avil.A. S. Yincente, ifeo, 247 ; 

tombs in, 352 
Azav-i . 316 

BAALBKC (Heliopolis), 83. Circular 
Temple, 94. Temple of Sun, 92 

B IB-l 1.-M01 <n k, 14 

BAGDAD. Tombs, etc., 145, 146 

Bagh. Viharas, Great Vihara, 405 

Bailixr. Temples, 409, 410 

Bamberg. Church, 243 

Barcelona. Cathedral, 189, 249. 
Sta. Maria del Pi, 249 

Barolli. Hindu temple, 409 

Basle. Spahlenthor, 246 

Bass/E (Phigalrea). Temple of Apollo 
Epicurius, 65 

Batalha. Church, mausoleum, 251 

Bavaria, 342 

Bayeux Cathedral, 197, 205 

Bayonne Cathedral, 197 

Bealgency. Town hall, 316 

Pi At Ml -MI . Chateau, 319 

Pi vine. Hospital, 214 

BeaUVAM Cathedral, 189, 197, 211, 
219; chapels, 205 ; size, 206, 211, 
212, 243 

Beit-el-Wali. Rock-cut Temple, 

Bei.em. Church, 251, 352. Clois- 
ter, tower, 352 

I '.I I i.HM, 334. 

Pknakks. Hindu temples, 408, 409 ifAMAM. Columns, 11,24, 50. 

Speos Artemidos, 22. Tombs, 1 1 

BHtOAMO. Town hall, 206 
Berlin. BaotcfatUe, 376. Braoden- 
burg Gate, 358. ( )1<1 Museum, 359 
(200). New Museum, 359. Par- 
liimeut House, 377. Theatres, 
360, 376 
Bl nil 1 iikm. Church of the Nativity, 

BHAJA. ( haityas, 404 


437 Topes, 403 
Bhuvvaneswar. Hindu temples, 

BlDAR, 146 

Bijapur. Tomb of Mahmud, 148, 
153 (85). Jumma Musjid, 148. 
Mogul architecture, 149 

Bui more House, 399 

BlNDRABUN. Ruined temple, 408 

Birs Nimroud. Stepped pyramid, 

Blenheim House, 332 (188) 
Blois. Chateau of, 216, 310, 313 

(i75, 176) 

Bohemia, 338 

Bologna, 157. Brick houses, 266. 
Campo Santo, 382. Frati di S. 
Spirito, 279. Local style, 283. 
Pal. Bevilacqua, Pal. Fava, 283. 
Palazzo Communale (town hall), 
266. Renaissance churches in, 
2 77. 2 93- S. Francesco, 256, 263. 
S. Petronio, 257, 258, 259, 263. 
Sta. Maria dei Servi, 263 

Bonn. Minster, 174. Baptistery, 175 

Bordeaux. Cathedral, spires, 209. 
Grand Theatre, 362 

Boston. Ames Building, 397. Cus- 
tom House, 390. Faneuil Hall, 
388. Fine Arts Museum, 394. 
Hancock House, 387. Old State 
House, 388. Old South Church, 
386. Public Library, 399. State 
House, 390. Trinity Church, 394 

Bourges Cathedral, 189, 197, 199, 
202, 249 ; chapels, 205 ; size, 206 ; 
portals, 208. House of Jacques 
Coeur, 215 (127) 

Bournazf.l. Chateau, 315 

Bowdbn Park, 357 

Bozrah Cathedral, 117 (70) 

Brandenburg. St. Catherine, St. 

Godehard, 244 
Bremen. Town hall, 246, 344 
Brescia. Sta. Maria dei Miracoli, 

Brieg. Piastenschloss, 343 
Bristol Cathedral, piers, 178 
Bruges. Ancien Greffe, 334. Cloth 
hall, 247. Ste. Anne, 334. Town 
hall, 247 
Brunswick. Burg Dankwargerode, 

176. Town hall, 246 
Brusa, 150 

Brussels. Bourse, 382. Cathedral 
(Ste. Gudule), 246. Pal. de Jus- 
tice, 382. Renaissance Houses, 
335 ( x 9)- Town hall, 247 
Bubastis. Temple, 13 
Buda-Pesth. Synagogue, 378 
Buddh Gaya. Tope or stupa, 404 
Buffalo. Guaranty Building, 397 
Bulach. Basilica, 375 
Burgundy. Cathedrals in, 197 

BURGHLEY House, 328 (184) 

Bury. Chateau, 315 

Burgos Cathedral, 248, 249, 251 (145) 

Byzantium, 92 ; see Constantinople 

Caen. Churches, 167, 178 ; St. Eti- 
enne (Abbaye aux Hommes) and 
Ste. Trinite (Abbaye aux Dames), 
168 ; St. Pierre, 312. Hotel d'Eco- 
ville, 316 

Cahors Cathedral, 164 

Cairo. Karafah (Tombs of Kha- 
lifs), 137, 138, 139. Mohamme- 
dan monuments (list), 136, 153. 
Mosque of Amrou, 136 ; of Ibn 
Touloun, 136 ; of Barkouk, 137 ; 
of Kalaoun, 137 ; of Sultan Has- 
san, 137, 138 (80) ; of El Muayyad, 
137 ; c f Kaid Bey, 137 (81) 



California. Spanish missions and 
churches, 388 

Cambodia. Temple of Nakhon 
Wat, 413 

Cambray Cathedral, 197 

Cambridge. Caius College, Gate of 
Honor, 328. Fitzwilliam Muse- 
um, 356. King's College Chapel, 
223, 227, 234. Trinity College 
Library, 332 

Cambridge (Mass.). Craigie (Long- 
fellow) House, 387 (219) 

CAMhkiii'KY Cathedral, 219; cen- 
tral tower of, 228 ; chapels, 231 ; 
transepts, 232; minor works in, 

Caprarola. Palace of, 300 

Capua. Amphitheatre, 103 

Caria, 71 ; see Halicamassus 

("\KI.\IHI\, 338, 339 

Carlton House, 357 

Carter's Grove, 386 

< w.kta. Royal Palace, 304 

(' in i.k Howard, 332 

Crisy-la-Foret. Church, 178 

( kvi'in. Topes, 403 

Chaise-Dieu. Cloister, 213 

ChIIjOMI (Chilons-sur-Marne) Ca- 
thedral, 205 

CHALVAU. Ch4teau, 314 

Chambord. Chateau, 314 (177, 

Chwiiii.y. " Petit Chateau." 317 

Charleston. St. Michael's, 385 

Chari.oi 1 i- vii 1 k. University of 
Virginia, 390 

Charlton Hall, 328 

Charlton-i.n-< ixmhrk. Plate tra- 
cery (no) 

Chartrks Cathedral, 197, 201, 203 ; 
chapels of, 205 ; size of, 206 ; W. 

front, 207 ; transept porches, 208 ; 
spires, 209 ; capital from (126 c). 
Hospital, 214 
Chemnitz Cathedral, 245 
Chenonceaux. ChSteau, 316, 317 
. Chiaravalle. Certosa, 255 
CHICAGO. Auditorium Theatre, 
399. Columbian Exposition, 393, 
399. Masonic Building, 31/). 
Fisher Building, Schiller Build- 
ing, 397 
Chichester Cathedral, spire, 229 
Chihuahua. Church, 352 
Chili. ambaram. Dravidian temple, 

Mantapa of Parvati, 411 
Ciiiswk k. Villa, 328, 329 
Chittore. Hindu temples, 400. 
Palace, 409. Towers. 407, 408 

Ci.KKMovi (Clermont-Ferrand) < a- 

thedral, 197 ; chapels of, 205, 212. 

Notre- Dame-du- Port, 165, 204 

(96, 97) 
CLUNY. Abbey church, [66. Houses 

at, 214. Hotel de (at Paris), 216 
Cohi.kntz. Church of St. Castor, 

Coimbra. Sta. Cruz, 352 
HULL. House, 329 
COLOOMK, Apostles' Church, 174. 
243 (101). Cathedral. 189. 102, 
205, 243, 249; vaulting of , 239 ; 
spires, 240, 241 : plan, 189, 20c, 
242 (141). Church of St. Marv- 
in-the-Capitol, 174- ( ireat St. 
Martin's, 174, 243. Romanesque 
houses, etc., 176 
Como. Town hall (Broletto), 266 
ComOSTSLLA. St. lago, 180 
Conjkvkram. Dravidian temple, 



Constantine. Amphitheatre, 92 

Constantinople, 120. Byzantine 
monuments (list), 134. Church of 
Hagia Sophia (Santa Sophia, Di- 
vine Wisdom), in, 123, 124, 127- 
131, 132, 133, 150, 151 (72, 75, 76, 
77). Church of the Apostles, 132. 
Early Christian monuments (list), 
119. Fountains, Fountain of Ah- 
met III., 152, 153. Mosque of 
Ahmet II. (Ahmediyeh), 151 (88) ; 
of Mehmet II., 150, 151 (87) ; of 
Osman III. (Nouri Osman), 151 ; 
of Soliman (Suleimaniyeh), 151 
(89) ; of Yeni Djami, 151. Pal- 
aces, 153. St. Bacchus, 127. St 
John Studius(Emir Akhor mosque), 
118. St. Sergius, 117, 127 (74). 
Tchinli Kiosque (Imperial Muse- 
um), 153 ; sarcophagi in, 66. 
Tombs, 152. Turkish mosques, 150 

Copenhagen. Exchange, Frede- 
ricksborg, 336 

Cordova, 141 ; Great Mosque, 142, 

143 (83) 
Corinth. Temple of Zeus, 60 
Coutances Cathedral, 197 ; chapels 

of, 205 ; spires, 209 
Cracow Castle, 338. Chapel of Ja- 

gellons, 338 
Cremona. Town hall, 266 
Ctesiphon. Tak-Kesra, 145 

Damascus, Mosque of El-Waltd, 136 
Dantzic. Town hall, 344 
Dashour. Pyramid, 9 
Deir-el-Bahari. Tomb-temple of 

Hatasu, 15, 21 
Deir - el - Medineh. Temple of 

Hathor, 19 
Delhi. Jaina temples, 407. Jum- 

ma Musjid, 148. Mogul architect- 
ure of, 149. Palace of Shah Jehan, 
148. Pathan arches, etc., 148 
Delos. Gates, 45 ; Portico of Phil- 
ip, 67 
Dknderah. Temple of Hathor, 
17. Group of temples, 22, 24. 
Hathoric columns, 24 
Detroit. Majestic Building, 397 
Dieppe. Church of St. Jacques, 213 
Dijon. St. Michel, 312 
Dol Cathedral, east end, 205 
Dresden. Castle, Georgenflugel, 
342. Church of St. Mary (Mari- 
enkirche) 346 (194). Theatre, 376 
(213). Zwinger Palace, 346 (193) 
Drugelte. Circular church, 175 
Durham Cathedral, 177, 178, 220, 

221 (116); central tower of, 228 ; 
Chapel of Nine Altars, 232 

Earl's Barton. Tower, 176 

Ecouen. Chateau, 316 

Edfou. Great Temple, 16, 17, 22 

(9, 10, 14). Peripteral temple, 22 
Edinburgh. High School, Royal 

Institution, 357 
Egypt. Early Christian buildings 

in, 118 
Elephantine. Temple of Ameno- 

phis III., 22 
El Kab. Temple of Amenophis 

III., 18 
Eleusis. Propylsea, 69 
Ellora. Chaityas, 404. Dravidian 

Kylas, 413 
Elne. Cloister, 170, 213 
Ely Cathedral, 220 ; choir vault, 

222 ; octagon, 224, 330 ; clearstory, 
225 ; towers, 228 ; interior, 229 ; 
size, 232 ; Lady Chapel, 234 



BpHBSUS. Temple, of Artemis (At- 
temisium), 66 ; Ionic order, 53. 
Palaestra, 71 
F.rk<h, 31 

Ks( trial. Monastery, 351 
l&SNBH. Hathoric columns, 25. 
Temple, 23. 

Nun's choir, 172 
Esslingen. Church spire, 240 
Kuhmiadzin. Byzantine monu- 
ments, 134 
Evrkux Cathedral, 197 
Exeter Cathedral, 221 (129) 
Ezra. Church of St. George, 117 

: ;. Rock-COt Temple, 22 
Ferrara Cathedral, 261, 304. 

Churches, 277, 293. Palaces Scro- 

fa, Roverella, 283 
Firouzabad. Sassanian buildings, 

Florence. Bo pth fc er y , 162. Barto- 

lini, Guadagni, Larderel, Pandol- 
fini, Serristori palaces, 291. Cam- 
panile, 263, 264 (147 ,/). Cathe- 
dral (Duomo, Santa Maria del 
Fiore), 257, 258, 263 ; facade, 
261 ; marble incrustation 
done, 273-275 (147, 148, 159, 

160). Church of San Miniato, 115, 
I'll. 102 ; of Or San Michele, 264. 
Goodi Palace, 291. I-oggia dei 
I Oggtfl di San Paolo. 
281. Minor works, 287. < k 
degli Innocenti, 281. Pala/ 
chio, 265. Pitti Palace, 280, 300, 
Kiccardi I'alace. 279, 280, 
281, 290 (163). Ruccllai ! 

280, 282. s 

Chapel of, 276 ; pulpit in, 281 ; 

Marsupini tomb, 2$ I. San Loren- 
zo, 276. San Spirito, 276 (1611. 
Santa Maria Novella, 256, 258 ; fa- 
cade, 277 ; fountain in sacristy of. 
281. *Strozzi Palace, 280, 290 
FLUSHING. Town hall (Hotel de 

Ville), 335 
Fontainebleau. Palace. 313, 318 
1<>\ 1 1 \ KAii.T. Abbey, 164 
FOHl 1 koidk. Cloister, 213 
Frame. Romanesque monuments 
(list), 170, 171 ; Gothic monu- 
ments (list), 216, 217; Renais- 
sance monuments (list), 324, 325 
Frankfort. Salt House, 346 
Freibi rg Cathedral, 239, 24- 

spire, 240 

portal, 242 
Frii/i.ak. Church. 243 
1 ri.HA. Monastery. 172, 173. 17: 
Firness. Abbey, pointed arches, 

1- 1 111 iii'ork Sikhri. Mosque of 
Akbar, 148 

( i WDii \k \. Monasteries, 404 
G ULLOM. < hatcau. 310 
GSLNHAQSSM. Abbey church, 243. 

-tie ruins, 1 

< ampo Santo, 382. Cathe- 
dral, west front, 261. PAJ \> 1 - 
Balbi, BrigBOtt, Cambiasi, I >o- 
ria-Tursi ( Municipio). I)ura//o 
(Keale), Pallavicini, I "niversity, 
302. Sta. Maria <li Carignano, 2<y) 
v. Mcdi.rval, 172. Roman- 
esque monuments (list), 180. 
Gothk monuments (list), 252. 
Renaissance monuments (list), 353 



Gernrode. Romanesque church, 

Gerona Cathedral, 185. 249, 250 
Ghent (Gand). Cloth hall, 247 
Gherf Hossein. Rock-cut temple, 

Ghertashi (Kardassy). Temple, 


Ghizeh. Pyramids, 4 ; Pyramid of 
Cheops, 7 (1, 2) ; of Chephren, 8 ; 
of Mycerinus, 8. Sphinx, Sphinx 
temple, 10 (3, 4) 

Girnar. Jaina temples, 407. Tem- 
ple of Neminatha, 407 

Glasgow. Churches in Greek style, 


Gloucester Cathedral, 178, 220, 
222 ; cloisters, 222 ; east window, 
227 ; central tower, 228 ; Lady 
Chapel, 234 

Goslar. Palace of Henry III., 176 

Gournah. Columns, 24. Temple, 

Gran. Cruciform chapel, 338 

Granada, 141. Alhambra, 142, 
143, 144, 351 (84). Cathedral, 
348, 350 ; minor works in, 352. 
Palace of Charles V., 352 (197) 

Grange House, 357 

Great Britain. Gothic monuments 
(list), 235, 236. Norman monu- 
ments (list), 181. Renaissance 
monuments (list), 337 

Guadalajara. Infantado, 350 

Gujerat, 146 

Gwalior. Jaina temples, 407. Pal- 
ace, 409. Teli-ka-mandir, 409 

Haddon Hall, 326 

Hague, The. Town hall, 336 

HAmelschenburg Castle, 343(191) 

Cathedral, 244. 
Mausoleum, 4, 
Temple, 410 



Town hall, 245 

53. 7i. 72 (41) 
Hampton Court, 326, 332 
Hartford. State Capitol, 393 
Hauran. Roman works in, 

domestic buildings, 118 
Hardwicke Hall, 328 
Hatfield House, 328 
Hecklingen. Romanesque church, 


Heidelberg. Castle, 343 (192). 
Ritter House, 346 

Heilsberg Castle, 245 

Heldburg Castle, 342 

Hengreave Hall, 326 

Herculanum, 86. Amphitheatre, 
92. Houses, 107. Theatre, (61) 

Hereford Cathedral, 220 

Hierapolis. Early Christian build- 
ings in, 118 

Hildesheim. Kaiserhaus, 346. Re- 
naissance houses, 345. St. Gode- 
hard, 173. Town hall, 245. We- 
dekindsches Haus, 346 

Holland House, 328 

Howard Castle, 332 

HullabId. Temples, 409 ; double 
temple, 410 (228) ; Kait Iswara, 

Iffley. Church, 179 (104) 
India, 146-149. Moslem monu- 
ments (list), 154- Non-Moslem 
monuments (list), 415 
Innsbruck, Schloss Ambras, 339 
Ipsamboul (Abou Simbel). Grotto 
temples, 21, 22 (13) 



Ireland. Celtic towers, 176 
ISPAHAN. Meidan (Meidan-Shah), 
Mesjid-Shah, Bazaar, Medress, 
Issoire. Church of St. Paul, 165, 204 
Italy. Early Christian monuments 
(list), 119; Romanesque monu- 
ments (list), 170 ; Gothic monu- 
ments (list), 268-269 ; Renais- 
sance monuments (list), 306-307 

JAKM Cathedral, 348, 350 
Jam\i.<;iki. Monastery, 405 
JntUSAUM. Church of the Ascen- 
sion, 115. Early Christian church- 
es, III. Herod's temple, 41, 83. 
Ifoaqoe of Omar (Dome of the 
Kock. Kubbet-es-Sakhrah), Il6, 
136. Octagonal church on temple 
site, 115, 1X6. Tombs of the 
Kings, etc.. 39. Tomb of Absa- 
lom, of llciekiah, Golden Gate, 
Solomon's temple, 40. Wall of 
Lamentations, 4:. Zerubbabel's 
temple, 41 
J u KFOU, 146 

KaLAMHA. Columns, 12. Temple, 

Kai.h LOCZEH. Church, 117 (69) 

K \i I'.i r*GAH, 146 

KANAKI K. Hindu temples, 408 

K INTOKNI 1. 1. ik. Hindu temple, 408 

Kardassv (Ghcrtashi). Temple, 23 

Kaki.i. ('haityas, 404 

KARLSTSm < .iMlc. 245 

Karnak, 50. Great Temple (of 

Amen Ra) and Hypostyle Hall. 

xxiii., 17, 18, 19, 24, 36 (ii, 121. 

Ancient temple, 13. Temple of 

Khonsu, 16, 20 

K KS* 11 \t Cathedral, 245 

Ka>k. Mound, 31 


K11 \i Skman. Church of St. Sim 

eon Stylites, 117 
Khaji KAito. Jaina temples, 407. 

Kandarya Mahadeo, 408 
KhOKSABAD. Palace of S 

31, 32 (18). City Gate, 32, 33, 

KlRKSTAi.1. Abbey, pointed arches, 

KONIGSBEKG. Church at, 244 
K<>\ 1 NjiK. Palaces of Sennacherib 

and Assur-bani-pal, 31 

Ki 11 1 \i:i rg. < hurch of St. Bar- 
bam, 239, 240 

Laach. Abbey of, 174 
Labyrinth (of Moeris or Fayoum 

in Egypt), 26 
I. \ Mi ill 1:. Chateau, 314 
I.AM'sini. Kesidenz, 342. St. 

Martin's, 240, 244 
LaNGRSS (.'athedral, 167 
LaON 'athedral, l<>7, 205, SO) 

porches, 208 
I. A ROCHEFOUCAULD. < hateati, 315 

Laval Cathedral (La Triahe), 201 
1 1 Mans Cathedral, n>7, boo, B05, 
B06 (118) ; tomb in, 310 

I 1 .\. Cathedral, 189 249. I'an- 
ti on of S. MdorO, I7<), 180 

(I'uv-en-Yelay). Church, 
204 ; cloister of same, 21 3 
LEIPZIG. Hlrstenhaus, 346 

. Town hall, 344 
LeYDSN. Town hall, 336 
LH 111 II I l> Cathedral, 225. 229 

(135) : aneaj front, 22S (134) ; 




Liege. Archbishop's Palace, 334. 

Church of St. Jacques, 247 
Limburg-on-the-Hardt. Church, 

Limburg-on-Lahn. Abbey Church, 
174. Cathedral of St. George, 

239 (139) 

Limoges Cathedral, 197, 205, 212 

Lincoln Cathedral, 219, 225, 229, 
232 ; west front, 227 ; central tow- 
er, 228 ; chapter-house, 223 

Lisbon, 352 

Lisieux Cathedral, 197 

Liverpool. St. George's Hall, 358 

Loire Valley. Churches of, 165 

Lombardy. Romanesque monu- 
ments in, 157 

London. Albert Memorial, 380. 
Albert Memorial Hall, 382. Bank 
of England, 334, 356. British Mu- 
seum, 356 (198) ; Elgin marbles 
in, 57 ; mausoleum fragments in, 
71. Cathedral (St. Paul's), 329- 

331 (186, 187). Chapel Royal 
(Banqueting Hall, Whitehall), 329 
(185). churches : Bow Church, 

332 ; St. George's, Bloomsbury, 

333 ; St. Martin's-in-the-Fields, 
333 (189) ; St. Mary's, Woolnoth, 
332 ; ' St. Pancras's, 357 ; St. 
Paul's Cathedral, 329-331 (186, 
187) ; St. Paul's, Covent Garden, 
329 ; St. Stephen's, Walbrook, 
331 ; St. Stephen's Chapel, West- 
minster, 234 ; Temple Church, 
pointed arches in, 219 ; Westmin- 
ster Abbey, 220 (137) ; Henry 
VII. 's chapel in same, 192, 223, 
227, 229, 234 (136). Greenwich 
Hospital, 332. Mansion House, 

334. Natural History Museum, 
South Kensington, 381 (216). 
New Law Courts, 380. Newgate 
Prison, 334. Parliament Houses, 
234, 380 (215). Somerset House, 
329, 333- South Kensington Mu- 
seum, new building, 382. Uni- 
versity, 357. Westminster Abbey, 
see above. Westminster Hall, 233. 
Whitehall Palace, 329 ; Banqueting 
Hall (Chapel Royal) in same, 329 
Longleat House, 328 
Louvain Cathearal, 246, 247. Cloth 
hall, 247. Town hall, 248 (144) 
LUbeck.. City Gates, 246. St. 
Mary's, 242, 244. St. Catharine's, 
244. Town hall, 246 
Lucca. Campanile, 264. Cathe- 
dral (S. Martino), 161, 257, 258, 
260(149) ; tempietto in same, 281 ; 
tomb of P. di Noceto in same, 281 
(164). S. Frediano, S. Michele, 
161. Minor works, 282, 283. 
Palazzo Pretorio, Pal. Bernardini, 
Lupiana Monastery, 350 
Luxor, 50. Temple, 19, 20. Osirid 

piers, 24 
Luz. Church at, 352 
Lycia. Tombs, 37, 39, 52 

Madrid. First palace, 350. New 
Palace, 352 

Madrid, Chateau de (at Boulogne), 

Madura. Choultrie of Tirumalla 
Nayak, 411. Great Temple, cor- 
ridors, 411. Palace, 413 

Mafra. Palace, 353 

Magdeburg Cathedral, 189, 242, 243 



Mahrisch Trubau. Castle portal, 

Maisons. Chateau, 322 

Malaga. Alcazar, 142, 143. Ca- 
thedral, 348 

Malines (Mechlin). Cathedral of 
St. Kombaut, 246, 247. Cloth 
hall, 247. Hotel du Saumon, 324 

Mam hkstkr. Assize Courts, 380 

Manikyala. Tope, 403 

Manresa. Collegiate Church, 249 

Mantinv.a. Theatre, 6g 

Mantua. Campanile, 264. Church 
of S. Andrea, 279. Early Renais- 
sance palaces, 283. Palazzo del 
Te, 289 

Marhi k<.. St. Elizabeth, 240, 242 

Marienburu Castle, Great Hall, 245 

M \kiknwkrdkr. Castle, 245 

Marseilles. Chapel of St. I^zare. 
310. Fountain of Longchamps, 

372 (a") 

M whta. Palace of Chosroes. 145 

Massachusetts. Country house in 

Maii.hronn. Monaster)-, 176 

M IYBM I Cathedral, 174 

Ml VOX Cathedral, 212 

Mn \. Kaabah, 136 

Mkiuna dk Ri<> Seco. Rood- 
screen, 352 

Mm>i\m Abou. Osirid piers, 24 
(15). Pavilion of Rameses III.. 
26. Peripteral temple, 22. Tomb- 
temple of Rameses HI., 15, 21 
Albrechtsburg, 245 

Mf.RoE. Pyramids, 9 

Ml 1/ < 'athedral. 244 

Mkvi'I m. Stepped pyramid, 9 

Milan, 157. Arcade, 382. Cathe- 
dral, 243, 255, 257, 260, 261, 262, 
263, 264. Domical churches, 27^. 
Ospedale Maggiore, 283. S. Am- 
brogio, 158, 159 (90). S. Eustor- 
gio, Portinari Chapel in, 283. S. 
Satiro, sacristy of, 289. Sta. Ma 
ria delle Grazic, 278, 289 

Miletus. Temple of Apollo Didy- 
ma?us, 53, 66 (28, 29) 

Minden Cathedral, 244 

Minneapolis. State Capitol, 400 

M'KRis. Labyrinth of, 2(< 

Moissac Cloister, 170, 213 

Monreale. Churches, cathedral. 

Mons. Cathedral, St. Wandru, 246, 


Biagio, 294 

MOMTMAJOVK. Cloister, 170, 213 

MOVI Si. MJCRKL. Abbey, 1 r>7. 
168, 213, 214; cloister of same. 

MOM 1. House of Francis I., 316 

MOSCOW. The Kremlin, 366 

Mosul, 33 

Mm m Am . Jaina temples. Tem- 
ple of Vimalah Sah, 405, 406 (226) 

Motnn Amos. Monastery, 134 

Mi .hur. Temple of Sin or Hur- 

ki, 30 
Mi ji ! mm. Mound, 31 

MVKTBStV \k \ 

MOlh a 
Mi m< 11, 366. 

silica, 375. 

Hindu temples. 

Town hall. 344 
Auekirche, 375. Ba- 
Cathedral. 240. 242. 
( ilyptothek, 359. Ludwigsk'rch**, 
375. I'ropybea, 360 (201). Ruh- 
meshalle, 359. St. Michael's, 344. 



MrssiKR. Church at, 243. Town 

hall, 245 
MONZBNBERG. Castle ruins, 176 
Mycen.h. Fortifications, 44 (23). 

Lion Gate, 44 (22). Tholos of 

Atreus, 45, 46, 148 (24, 25). 

Tombs, 4 
M \ 1 \ssa. Tomb, 72 
Myra. Theatre, 6g. Tombs, 72 

Nakiion Wat, Temple of, 413 
Naksh - 1 - Roustam (Persepolis), 

36. Tomb of Darius, 37 
Nancy. Ducal Palace, 216, 311 
Nankin. Porcelain Tower, 414 
Naples. Arcade, 382. Arch of Al- 
phonso, 287. Church of Gesu 
Nuovo, 304 ; of S. Francesco di 
Paola, 305, 365 ; of S. Lorenzo, 
263 ; of S. Severo (173) Minor 
works, 281, 282. Pal. Gravina, 
Porta Capuana, 287. Royal Mu- 
seum, 304. Royal Palace, 304, 
305. Theatre of S. Carlo, 305, 


Narbonne Cathedral, 197, 205, 211 

Nassick. Chaityas, 404 

Naukratis, 44 

Naumburg. Church at, 243 

Netherlands, 146. Gothic monu- 
ments (list), 252-253. 

Neuweiler. Church of St. Peter 
and St. Paul, 243 

Nevers. St. Etienne, 165 

New Mexico. Spanish churches, 

Newport. Town hall, 388. Trin- 
ity Church, 386 

New York. American Surety 
Building, Broadway Chambers, 
397. Casino, 399. Cathedral of 
St. John the Divine, 399 ; of St. 

Patrick, 375, 391. Century Club, 
399. City Hall, 389. Custom 
House, 390 (221). Grace Church, 
392. Huntington house, 399. 
Madison Square Garden, Metro- 
politan Club, 399. St. Paul's, 386. 
Sub-Treasury, 390. Times Build- 
ing (224). Trinity Church, 392. 
Vanderbilt and Villard houses, 399 

NtMES. Amphitheatre, 92. Maison 
Carree, 93, 94 

Nimroud. Palaces of Assur-nazir- 
pal and Shalmaneser, 31, 32 

Nineveh, 31 

Nippur (Niffer). Ruins of, 29, 31 

Normandy. Romanesque churches 
in, 167, 177; cathedrals in, 197, 213 

North Germany. Brick churches 
in, 244 

North Woburn. Rumford House, 

Norwich Cathedral, 177, 178, 220 
Noyon Cathedral, 197, 200, 203, 

205, 246 
Nubia. Early Christian buildings, 118 
Nuremberg, 238. Churches of St. 

Sebald, St. Lorenz, 245. Funk, 

Hirschvogel, and Keller houses, 

346. Renaissance houses, 345. 

Town hall, 344. Shrine of St. 

Sebald, 347 

(Olympia. Altis, Echo Hall, 69. 

Heraion, 50, 62. Temples, 55 ; 

sculptures from, 57. Temple of 

Zeus, 62 
Oppenheim. St. Catharine's, 239, 

242, 244 

ace, 409 
Orance. Theatre, 101 
Orchomenos. Ceiling, 47 

Hindu temples, pal- 



Orleans. Houses, 316. Town 

hall (hotel de ville), 31 1 
Okvieto Cathedral, 257, 259, 261 ; 
f;i9ade of same, 260 

\bruck. Church at, 243 
On marsmeim. Church at, 172 
( )i dknariik. Town hall, 247 
OURSCAMF. Hospital, 214 
Oxford. All Souls' College, 333, 
Cathedral (Christ Church), 220 
222. Christ Church Hall, 233 
234. Merton College Chapel, 234 
Kadcliffe Library, 333. Sheldoni 
an Theatre, 332 

Padf.rrorn. Town hall, 344 

Paula. Arena chapel, 258. Palaz- 
zo del Consiglio, 287 

PitsTUM. Basilica, 69. Temples, 61 

Pailly. Chateau, 317 

PALERMO. Churches of Eremitani, 
I. a Martorana, 162 

Palmyra, 83. Temple of the Sun. 
92. Ceiling panels (50 </) 

Parasnatma. Jaina temples, 407 

Paris. Arch of Triumph of the Car- 
rousel, 362, 363 ; of l'Etoile, 362, 
363 (204). Bourse (Exchange), 
363. Cathedral (Notre Dame). 
189, 197-202, 249 (116, 117, 
124); rose windows, 203, 212; 
chapels, 205 ; size, 206, 232 ; west 
front, 207, 227 (124) ; capital 
from (126 /') ; early carving (122). 
I in k< UM : Chapel and Dome 
of the Invalides, 321 (182) ; Ma- 
deleine, 362, 363(205) ; Pantheon. 
301, 362 (202,203); Sa< p' 
at Montmartre, 373 ; Sainte <"ha- 
pelle, 185, 203, 224(106, 121); 
capital from same (126 a) ; Sop 

bonne, 319; St. Augustin, 371; 
Ste. (lothilde, 371, 375 ; St. 
Etienne-du-Mont, St. Eustache, 
312 ; St. Jean de Belleville, 371 ; 
St. Merri, St. Severin, 21- ; St. 
Paul -St. Louis, 319; St. Sulpice, 
323, 361 (183) ; St. Yinient-de- 
l'aul, 364 ; Val-de-Grice, 322. Col- 
lege Chaptal, 371. Colonnades of 
the Carde-Meuble, 361, 367. Col- 
umn of July (Colonne Juillet), 365. 
Corps Legislatif (Palais Bourbon), 
363. Ecole dec Beaux-Arts, 355, 
37. 39 2 . 393 ; library of same, 
364 ; door (206). Ecole de Mede- 
cine, new buildings, 374. Exhibi- 
tion buildings, 374. foi Nl 
of Cuvier, Moliere, St. M 
372. Halles Centrales, 371. H6- 
tel-de-Ville (town hall), 316 ; new- 
building, 373. II<* I ELS : ( arnava- 
let (de Ligeris), 316; de Cluny, 
216 ; des Invalides, 321. II.. 11- ! 
Erancis I. (Maison Erancois I,), 
316. Library of the Beaux-Arts, 
364 ; of Ste. Genevieve, 365. 
Louvre (see palaces). Museum 
(Musee) Cialliera (212). Open 
House (Nouvel Opera), 372 (2101. 
PALACES: l'alais Bourbon (I 
Legislatif), 363 ; Palais de l'ln- 
dustrie, 364 ; Pal. de Justice, 364 ; 
Ixmvre and Tuileries, 215, 315- 
319, 321, 362, 371, 372 (179, 208, 
209) ; Luxemburg Palace, 318 
(180). PLACE! (Squares): de la 
le, 324 ; Koyale, 319 ; Ven- 
dome, 32 . Railway stations (du 
Nord, de l'Est, d"Orleans), 372. 
Sorbonne, new academic build- 
ings, 374- 



Paulinzelle. Romanesque church, 

Pavi \, 157. Certosa, 255, 262, 263, 
278, 283, 284 (152, 153). Church 
of S. Michele, 159. Domical 
churches, 278 

I'kkin. Summer pavilion, Temple 
of Great Dragon, 414 

PERGAMON (Pergamus). Altar of 
Eumenes II., 67. Christian build- 
ings, 118 

Perk;ueux. St. Front, 164 (94,95) 

Peroor. Temple, 411 

Persepolis, 145. Columns, 37, 38 
(21). Hall of Xerxes, 36, 37. Pal- 
aces, 35, 69 

Persia. Moslem architecture, 145 
146 (list 154). Sassanian build- 
ings, 144, 145 

Perugia. Oratory of San Bernar- 
dino, 279. Town hall (Pal. Com- 
munale), 266. Roman Gates, 88 

Petkrborough Cathedral, 178, 220 ; 
retro-choir, 222 ; west front, 227 

Phigal^ea (Bassse). Gate, 45. 
Sculptures from, 57. Temple of 
Apollo Epicurius, 65 

Philadelphia. Christ Church, 386 
(218). Girard College, 390, 391. 
Independence Hall, 388. Marine 
Exchange, Mint, 390. Municipal 
Building, 391 

Phil^. Great Temple, 22. Perip- 
teral temple, 22 

Piacenza, 157. Campanile, 159 
(91). Cathedral (91). Town hall, 

Piastenschloss at Brieg, 343 

Pienza. Palazzo Piccolomini, etc., 

Pik.rrefonds. Chateau, 371 

Pisa. Churches in, 115, 261 ; minor 
works in, 282 ; early Renaissance 
in, 282-283. Baptistery, 160 (92). 
Cathedral (Duomo), 159, 160, 276 
(92, 93). Leaning Tower, 160 
(92). Sta. Maria della Spina, 264 

Pistoia. Campanile, 264. Churches, 
161, 261. Podesta, Palazzo Com- 
munale, 266. Sta. Maria dell' 
Umilta, 293 

Pittsburgh. Carnegie Building, 
397. Carnegie Library, 399. 
County Buildings, 394 

Plagnitz. Castle, 343 

Plassenburg. Castle, 343 

Poitiers Cathedral, 197, 201, 205 

Pola. Amphitheatre, 92, 102 

Pompeii. Amphitheatre, 92. Baths, 
86. Houses, 72, 107, 108 ; House 
of Pansa (65). Theatre, 101. 
Tombs, 105 

Pont du Gard. Bridge, 108 

Portsmouth. Sherburne House, 

Portugal, 352. Gothic monuments 
(list), 253 

Potsdam. St. Nicholas Church, 359 

Prague. Belvedere, 339. Cathe- 
dral, 239, 242, 244. Palace on 
Hradschin, Schloss Stern, Wald- 
stein palace, 339 

Prato. Churches in, 161, 293. Ma- 
donna delle Carceri, 278 

Prentzlau. Church, 244 

Priene. Ionic order, 53 ; Propylaea, 

Provence, 164. 

Provins. Houses at, 214 

Purl Temples, 408. Temple of 
Jugganat, 409 

Purudkul. Rock-cut raths, 413 



RANESSKBM (Thebes). Tomb-temple 

of Kameses II., 15, 21, 24 (8) 
Ramisseram. Temple, corridors. 4 i 1 
Ratisbon (Regensburg) Cathedral, 
239, 241, 244. Town hall, 245. 
Walhalla, 359 
Ravenna, 114. Baptistery of St. 
John, 119. Byzantine monuments 
(list), 134. Cathedral, 304. Early 
Christian monuments (list), 119. 
S. Apollinare Nuovo, S. Apollinare 
in Classe, 114. S. Vitale, 117, 122, 
127, 172 (73) 
Reugio. Amphitheatre. 92 
Reims Cathedral, 189, 197, 201, 202, 
203, 205 ; size, 206 ; west front, 
207, 213, 227 ; towers, 209 ; por- 
tals, 208, 210 
Rimini. S. Francesco, 277 
Rochester Cathedral, 220 
RODBZ Cathedral, 197, 212 
ROME, Ancient monuments, (list) 
108, 109 Amphitheatre of Statil- 
ius Taurus, 102. ar< ties : in 
general, 77, 103 ; of Constantine, 
80, 103 (63) ; of Septimius Severus, 
103 ; of Titus, 0.2, 103 ; of Trajan, 
97,103. i:\Mi i< \n : in general, 
07, 98; Basilica .Emilia, 98; of 
< onstantine, xxiii, 80, 82, 98, 99 
'5 / '. 58, 59) ; Julian BmIHw, 
98 ; Sempronian, 98 ; L'lpian, 97, 
98 (57)- (FOT Early Christian Ba- 
silicas, see Churches.) baths 
(Thermae): in general, 71, 92, 
99; of Atfrippa. 91. loo; -,f ( .,- 
racaJla, 87, 92 (60) ; of I >iocletian, 
92, 100, KM ; of Titus, 86, 91, 
lOOi, 10;. ( "ampanile of < "ampi- 
doglio (Capitol). 305. Capitol, 0.1 ; 
palaces on, 2</>. < in k< I 

in general, 293 ; Church of (lesu, 
Sistine Chapel of Vatican, 
285, 289 ; Sta. Agnese (basilica), 
112 (modern church), 303; S. 
Agostino, 286; S. Clemente, 114; 
Sta. Costanza, in (66); St. John 
I-ateran, 113, 251, 304, 305 ; clois- 
ter of same, 281 ; S. Lorenzo, 
112; S. Lorenzo in Miranda, 93 ; 
Sta. Maria degli Angeli, 101 ; Sta. 
Maria Maggiore, 113, 305 ; Chapel 
of Sixtus V. in same, 299 ; Sta. 
Maria del Popolo, 286, 287 ; Chigi 
Chapel in same, 293 ; Sta. Maria 
della Vittoria, 303 ; Sta. Mana 
sopra Minerva, 256 ; St. I'aul-be- 
yond-the- Walls, 113, 2S1 (67, 681 ; 
St. Peter's, original basilica, 113 ; 
existing church of, 274, 2S( 
290, 294-296, 299, 321 (169, 170, 
171) ; colonnade of same, 295, 
303, 367 ; sacristy of same. 
S. I'ietroin Montorio, Tempi< 
court of, 209. CUtCCSES :- 
mus, 103 ; of Caligula and v 
103, 113. Cloaca Maxima, 81, 90. 
CototOm (Tlavian amphitheatre; 

91, 92, I02 (45,62). <DI I \|\v 

103; of Marcus Aurclius, 104; 
of Trajan, 97, 104. Early Chris- 
tian monuments, in ; (list). 118, 
119. Eora : in general, 97; of 
Augustus, 91, 97 ; of Julius, Ner- 
p.i^ 07 ; 1 '.rum koma- 
num (Magnum), 97, 98 ; Forum of 
Trajan, 97, 98 (57). Fountain of 
Trevi, 305. HorsES : in general, 
105, 106, 108 ; of Vestals (Atrium 
04. lOfi ; of I.ivia. 107. 
I.ateran, carved ornament from 
Museum of (49); palae of, 300. 



Mausoleum of Augustus, of Hadri- 
an, 104. Minor Works in Rome, 
287. Monument to Victor Em- 
manuel, 3S2. National Museum, 
382. palaces (Ancient) : of Cae- 
sars on Palatine Hill, 86, 91, 105 ; 
of Nero (Golden House), 91, 92, 
100, 105 ; Septizonium, 105. pal- 
aces (Renaissance): Altemps, 
292; Barberini, 304, 305 ;. Bor- 
ghese, 304 ; Braschi, 305 ; of 
Capitol, 299 ; Cancelleria, 290, 
291 ; Corsini, 305 ; Farnese, 292 
(167, 168) ; Farnesina, 291 ; Gi- 
raud, 290, 291 (166) ; Lante, 292 ; 
Massimi, Palma, 291 ; Quirinal, 
300; Sacchetti, 291; Vatican, 
Belvedere, greater and lesser court, 
Court of S. Uamaso, Loggie, 209, 
291; Braccio Nuovo, 305, 365; 
Casino del Papa in gardens, 293 ; 
papal residence, 300 ; Scala Reg- 
gia, 305 ; palazzo di Venezia, 286. 
Pantheon of Agrippa, 82, 91, 94- 
96, 100, 118, 122, 127, 365 (54, 
55, 56). Pons yElius (Ponte S: 
Angelo) 108. Porta Maggiore, 
108. Portico of Octavia, 91. 
temples : Of Castor and Pollux 
(Dioscuri), 84, 91, 94 (44) ; of 
Concord, 94 ; of Faustina, 93 ; 
of Fortuna Virilis, 89, 90, 93 ; 
of Hercules or Vesta, 90 ; of Ju- 
lius, 94 ; of Jupiter Capitolinus, 
68, 89, 91 ; of Jupiter Stator, so 
called (see Temple of Castor and 
Pollux) ; of Jupiter Tonans, 91 ; 
of Mars Ultor, 91 ; of Minerva 
Medica, 127 ; of Peace, 98 ; of 
Trajan, 97 ; of Venus and Rome, 
94 (53) I of Vesta, in Forum, 94 ; 

of Vesta, so called, or Hercules, 

90. theatres : Of Marcellus, 

91, ior (42) ; of Mummius, of 
Pompey, 101. tombs : 86, 104 ; 
of Caius Cestius, of Cecilia Me- 
tella, 104 ; of Helena, 118 

Rosenborg Castle, 336 
Rosheim. Church facade, 175 
Rothenburg. Town hall, 344 
Rouen, 310. Cathedral, 192, 197, 
201, 202, 205 ; size of, 206 ; west 
front, 207 ; rose windows, 212. 
Hotel Bourgtheroude, 316. Palais 
de Justice, 214. St. Maclou, 209. 
St. Ouen, 212, 213, 375 ; rose win- 
dow from (112) 
Rouheiha. Early Christian church, 

Royal Domain, 166, 167, 197 
Ruanwalli. Topes, 403 
Russia, 367. Byzantine monuments 
(list), 134 

Sadri. Temple, 406 
Sakkarah. Pyramid, 9 
Salamanca. Casa de las Conchas, 

349. Cathedral (old), 180, 248 ; 

(new), 250, 348. Monastery of S. 

Girolamo, 348. S. Domingo, 348. 

University, 349 ; portal of (195) 
Salisbury Cathedral, 219, 223, 225, 

229. 232 (128) ; west front, 228 ; 

spire, 228, 229. Market cross, 234 
Salonica. Church of St. George, 

118. Other monuments (list), 134 
Salsette. Viharas, 405 
Salzburg. Church of St. Francis, 

Samos. Gate, 45 
Sanchi. Brahman temple, 404. 

Tope, 403 



San IlDKFOMSO. Royal Palace, 352 
JjABAGOSSA. Casa tie Zaporta, 350 

Saxony, 173 

SCHALABURG. Castle, 339 
S. 111.1.1 i>TADT Cathedral, 239 
ScHLOSS Hamklschenblkc;, 343 

SCHLOSS PORZIA at Spital, 338 
SCHL09S STERN at Prague, 339 
S< HWAkz-kiiKiNDoKK. Church, 174 
S< HWKiNKt'-kiii. Town hall, 344 
SCINDE, 14^ 

SCCUNDRA. Tomb Of Akbar, 143 
SbDINGA. Hathoric columns, 24 
Si-'i / Cathedral, 197 

via Cathedral, 190, 249, 348. 

Church of S. Millan, of Templars, 

Shunts. Temples, 49; northern 

temple, 60 ; Temple of Zeus, 61 
Skmnk.H. Pavilion, 20 Cathedral, 197, 200, 209 

Archbishop's palace, 317. 

Cathedral, 203, 219 
I istan. Sassanian buildings, 


tsar, 142, 143 Casa 

de Pilato (House of Pilate), 142, 

350 Cathedral, 244, 250, 257. 

351. Giralda, 142, 143, 352 
sun ikh . Patbaa arches, 148 
SiKNN \. Prick hoi; 1 am- 

panilc, 204. Cathedral (Duomo), 

-59. 263 (150) ; west front, 
21.0(151). Loggia del I'apa. 282. 
Minor works, 2S2. 1 w \ 

Del Governo. Piccolomini. >pan- 
nocchi, 282 ; Palazzo Pubblico, 
ice church' 
.vanni in Fonte 
SILSII.KH. Grotto temple, 22 

SOISSONS Cathedral, 197, 200, 203. 

205, 243 
SOMNATH. Jaina temple, 407 
Somnaimi'I R. Chalukyan temples, 

409. 410 
Soitiiuii.i. Minster, carving from. 

Spain, 347. Gothic monument 

253. Romanesque churches 

SpaJ-ato. Palace of Dioclcti 

106, 113 (64) 
. Sitiai.. Schloss Porzia, 33? 
SPIRES (Speycr) Cathedral, 174 


\ iiian's Abt>ey, tombs, etc, in, 


ST. AUGUSTWR. Fort Marion 
Marco), 388. Ponce del. eon Ho 
tel, 399. Roman Catholic cathe- 
dral, 388. 

St. Benoit - sir - Loire. 
church, 177 

St. Dents. Abbey church 

joo, 202, 203 (120) ; tomb of 
I>ouis XII. in, 316 ; of Krai 

ST. < .1 km un-kn I v, 1 . (bateau, 

313 ; Royal chapel in, 2>>4 
Si. Gills*. Church, 165 
St, Louis. Union Trust M\ 
ST. PETERSBURG, 366, 367. Admi 
rait v. 307. Cathedral of St 
367 (207). CHURCHES : of the 
Citadel, <>f the (.reek Kit- 
of < >ur Lady of Kazan, 367 
Museum, Palace of Grand Duke 
Michael, 307. Smolnoy 
t<ry, 366. 
Si . IU'.my. Tombs, 105 


STW RHOLM. Palace, 337 



Strasburg Cathedral, 243 ; spire 

of, 238, 240, 241, 243. University 

Buildings, 376 
Stuttgart. Old Castle, 343. Tech. 

nical School, 376 
Styria, 339 
Sully. Chateau, 317 
Sultaniyeh. Tomb, 145 
SUNIUli. Propylzea, 69 
SUSA, 145. Palaces, 35 
Syracuse. Theatre, 70 
Syria, 122; early Christian churches 

in, 115, 116, 117 ; (list), 119 

Tabriz. Ruined Mosque, 145 
Tafkhah. Early Christain Church, 

Takht-i-Bahi. Monastery, 405 
TangermUnde. Church, 244 
Tanjore. Great temple, 412. Pal- 
ace, 413. Shrine of Soubramanya, 

412 (229) 
Tarputry. Gopura, 411 
Teheran, 146 
Tel-el-Amarna, 27 
Tewkesbury Abbey, 222 (130) 
Thebes. Amenopheum, 15. Ram- 

esseum, 15 (8) 
Thoricus. Gate, 45 ; Stoa Diple, 

Tinnevelly. Dravidian temples, 

Tiruvalur. Dravidian temples, 

Tiryns, 44 
Tivoli. Circular temple, 90, 356 

(52). villas : D'Este, 293 ; of 

Hadrian, 87, 106 
Tokio. Great Palace, 415 
Toledo. Archbishop's Palace, 360. 

Cathedral, 189, 248, 348. Gate of 

S. Martino, 350. Hospital of Sta. 
Cruz, 349. S. Juan de los Reyes, 

Tonnkrre. Hospital, 214 
Torgau. Hartenfels Castle, 342 
Toro. Collegiate church, 180 
Toulouse Cathedral, 212. Church 

of St. Sernin, 204. Houses, 317 
TOURNAY Cathedral, 190, 197, 205, 

209 ; rood-screen in, 335 
Tours, 310. Cathedral, 197, 205, 
209 ; towers of, 312 ; tomb of chil- 
dren of Charles VIII. in, 310, 342 
Trausmtz Castle, 342 
Treves (Trier). Cathedral, 174. 
Frauenkirche (Liebfrauenkirche, 
Church of Our Lady), 189, 242, 
243 (142) 
Troyes Cathedral, 197, 201, 205 ; 
size, 206 ; west portals, 209. St. 
Urbain, 212 
Tucson. Church, 352 
Tuparamaya. Topes, 403 
Turin. Church of La Superga, 365 
Turkey, 149. Monuments (list), 154 
Tusculum. Amphitheatre, 92 
Tyrol, 338, 339 

Udaipur (near Bhilsa). Hindu tem- 
ples, 409 

Ulm Cathedral, 238, 239, 241, 243 ; 
spire, 241 

Ur, 30 

U RBI no. Ducal palace, 287 

Utrecht Cathedral, 244 

Valencia Cathedral, 249 
Valladolii>. Cathedral, 350. S. Gre- 

gorio, portal (146) 
Vellore. Gopura, 411 
Vend6me Cathedral, portal, 209 



Venetia, 157, 262, 305 

Venice, 300. Campaniles of St 
Mark, of S. Giorgio Maggiore, 
305. churches : Frari 
Cloriosa dei Frari), 256 ; Reden- 
tore, 299 ; S. Giobbe, 284 ; S. 
(iiorgio dei Grechi, 293 ; S. Gior- 
gio Maggiore, 299, 305 ; SS. Gio- 
vanni e Paolo, 256 ; Sta. Maria 
Formosa, 293 ; S. If. dei Miracoli, 

283 ; S. II. della Salute, 304, 
(174) ; St. Mark's, 132, 164 (78, 
79) ; Library of same (Royal Pal- 
ate), 301 (172) ; S. Salvatore, 
293 ; S. Zaccaria, 284. Doge's 
I'alace, 267, 284 (157). Minor 
works, 287. palaces : 267, 283, 

284 ; Ca d'Oro, Cavalli, Contarini- 
Fasan, 268 ; Cornaro (Corner de 
Ci Grande) 301 ; Dario, 285 ; 
Docak (Doge's I'alace), 267, 284 
(157) ; Foscari, 268 ; Grimani, 
300 ; Pesaro, 304 ; Pisani, 20S ; 
Rez/onico, 304 ; Vendramini (Yen- 
dramin-t'alergi), 284, 285 (165); 
Zoivi, capital, 275 (158) 

I i 1. S. Andrea, 256, 263 
1 II.. < Iiatcau, 317 

Vienna, 347. Arsenal at Wiener 
Neustadt, 338. Burgtheater, 376. 
Cathedral (St. Stephen), 239, 840, 
241 ; spire of, 240, 241. Church 
of St. Charles Borromeo, 358. 
Imperial Palace, portal, 339. Mu- 
seums, 37S. Opera House, 376. 
Parliament House, or Keichsraths- 
gebaiide, 360, 378. K. - 
block (Maria- Thcrcsicnliof), 37S 
(214). Sta. Maria in < lestade, 24- 
Town hall, University, 378. ^Bi 
Kirche, 375 
Vijayanagar. Palace, 413 
Vim knnes. Royal chapel, 204 
VriEkiso. Houses, 267. Tow i ha" 
(Palazzo Communale), 266. V 
I. ante, 293 
Ydii kka (Volaternv). Gate, 88 

Waltham. Abbey, 178. Flea 

C'lcivS, 234 

Wakiieid. St. Michael's, window 

Wakk All (Freeh). Palace t< 

Waktiurc; Castle, 176 
W amiim;-|(iv. ( apitol, 389, 391 

\A, 157. Amphitheatre, 92, 

102. Campanile, 264. Church of 

\nastasi.i, 256, 258; of S. 

/.. 1 J ,. 17:. 1AI \< Rfl :- j 

Pevilacqu.i 300 ; del 

isiglio, 286; Poni|R-ii, Yer/i, . 
300. Tombs of Scaligcrs, 264 
\ eksaii 1 h Palace, 320 
Vf/1'1 ay. Abbey, 166, 198, 203 
/A, 300, 301. Basilica, 301 
palaces: 283; Barbarano, (hi 
eregati, Tiene, Valmarano, 301 
Villa Capra, 30I, 328 

(220). Congressional I ibnuy, 

2'/)- l'atent Office, 390. State, 
Army, and Navy Building, 392. 
White I louse, 390 

Willi Cathedml, 222, 225, 232 

west front, 228 ; chapter house of 

Wi 1 miss ikk. See LONDON 
WBST0NXOTLAMD. Ceiling of St 

Marys (138) 

. i.k House, 386 
WlENI k-.\'i.iM aim . See Vll 

Williamsburg. Town hall, 385 



Wilton House, 329 

Winchester c^fchedral, 178, 220, 

222, 226, 229 (103); tombs, etc., 
in, 234 

Windsor. St George's Chapel, 

223, 227, 234 

Wismar. Castle (FUrstenhof), 343. 

City Gates, 246 
VVoi RN. Public Library (223) 
Wi.u.aton Hall, 328 
Wol i-enbuttei.. Marienkirche, 345 
Wo terton Castle. 326 
VVokANc.UL. Kurti Stambha, 410 
Worcester Cathedral, 232 

Worms. Minster (Cathedral), 174 

WCrzburg. University Church, 345 

Xanten. Church, 242 
Xanthus. Nereid monument, 71 

York Cathedral, 192, 225, 226 ; 
west front, 227 ; tower, 228 ; mi- 
nor works in, 234 

Yl'RES. Cloth hall, 247 

Zurich. Polytechnic School, 376 
Zwetti. Cathedral, 242 

CsMormft, Los AnQSws 


L 005 492 155 6 


A A 00011 

2 727 3