Architecture

ARCHITECTURE (Latin architectura, from the Greek αpχιτeκτωv, a master-builder) is the art of building according to principles which are determined, not merely by the ends the edifice is intended to serve, but by considerations of beauty and harmony. It cannot be defined as the art of building simply, or even of building well. The end of building as such is convenience, use, irrespective of appearance; and the employment of materials to this end is regulated by the mechanical principles of the constructive art. The end of architecture as an art, on the other hand, is so to arrange the plan, masses, and enrichments of a structure as to impart to it interest, beauty, grandeur, unity, power. Architecture thus necessitates the possession by the builder of gifts of imagination as well as of technical skill, and in all works of architecture properly so called these elements must exist, and be harmoniously combined. The combination of technical with imaginative features removes architecture from the precise position occupied by painting, sculpture, and music, but does this more in appearance than in reality, since the greatest works of the architect must always be those in which the imagination of the artist is most plainly seen.

Like the other arts, architecture did not spring into existence at an early period of man’s history. The ideas of symmetry and proportion which are afterwards embodied in material structures could not be evolved until at least a moderate degree of civilisation had been attained, while the efforts of primitive man in the construction of dwellings must have been at first determined solely by his physical wants. Only after these had been provided for, and materials amassed on which his imagination might exercise itself, would he begin to plan and erect structures, possessing not only utility, but also grandeur and beauty. Before proceeding to inquire into the history of architecture, it may be well to enumerate briefly the elements which in combination form the architectural perfection of a building. These elements have been very variously determined by different authorities. Vitruvius, the only ancient writer on the art whose works have come down to us, lays down three qualities as indispensable in a fine building, viz., Firmitas, Utilitas, Venustas, stability, utility, beauty. In an architectural point of view the last is the principal, though not the sole element; and, accordingly, the theory of architecture is occupied for the most part with aesthetic considerations, or the principles of beauty in designing. Of such principles or qualities the following appear to be the most important: size, proportion, harmony and symmetry, ornament, and colour. All other elements may be reduced under one or other of these heads.

With regard to the first quality, it is clear that, as the feeling of power is a source of the keenest pleasure, size, or vastness of proportion, will not only excite in the mind of man the feelings of awe with which he regards the sublime in nature, but will impress him with a deep sense of the majesty of human power. It is, therefore, a double source of pleasure. The feelings with which we regard the Pyramids of Egypt, the vast monoliths at Rome, the massive templee of Sicily and the Parthenon, and the huge structures of Stonehenge, sufficiently attest the truth of this principle.

The qualities in the general disposition of the parts of a building which are calculated to give pleasure to the beholder, are proportion, harmony, and symmetry. To obtain a clear idea of the general plan in order to appreciate these qualities, the best method is to contemplate the building under conditions that prevent the mind from being disturbed by the consideration of the details—at a distance, for instance, or by moonlight, when its outlines may be seen standing boldly out against the sky. Thus the mass of a Gothic cathedral, the proportion of its parts, the outline of tower, nave, choir, and lady-chapel, the deep shadows which show the projection or recess of its various parts, are in themselves beautiful even when there is not fight enough to distinguish mouldings, carvings, or tracery.

Proportion itself depends essentially upon the employment of mathematical ratios in the dimensions of a building. It is a curious but significant fact that such proportions as those of an exact cube, or of two cubes placed side by side —dimensions increasing by one-half (e.g., 20 feet high, 30 wide, and 45 long)—or the ratios of the base, perpendicular, and hypotenuse of a right-angled triangle (e.g., 3, 4, 5, or their multiples)—please the eye more than dimensions taken at random. No defect is more glaring or more unpleasant than want of proportion. The Gothic architects appear to have been guided in their designs by proportions based on the equilateral triangle.

By harmony is meant the general balancing of the several parts of the design. It is proportion applied to the mutual relations of the details. Thus, supported parts should have an adequate ratio to their supports, and the same should be the case with solids and voids. Due attention to proportion and harmony gives the appearance of stability and repose which is indispensable to a really fine building. Symmetry is uniformity in plan, and, when not carried to excess, is undoubtedly effective. But a building too rigorously symmetrical is apt to appear cold and tasteless. Such symmetry of general plan, with diversity of detail, as is presented to us in leaves, animals, and other natural objects, is probably the just medium between the excesses of two opposing schools.

Next to general beauty or grandeur of form in a building comes architectural ornament. Ornament, of course, may be used to excess, and, as a general rule, it should be confined to the decoration of constructive parts of the fabric; but, on the other hand, a total absence or a paucity of ornament betokens an unpleasing poverty. Ornaments may be divided into two classes—mouldings and the sculptured representation of natural or fanciful objects. Mouldings, no doubt, originated, first, in simply taking off the edge of anything that might be in the way, as the edge of a squaro post, and then sinking the chamfer in hollows of various forms; and thence were developed the systems of mouldings we now find in all styles and periods. Each of these has its own system; and so well are their characteristics understood, that from an examination of them a skilful architect will not only tell the period in which any building has been erected, but will even give an estimate of its probable size, as professors of physiology will construct an animal from the examination of a single bone. Mouldings require to be carefully studied, for nothing offends an educated eye like a confusion of mouldings, such as Roman forms in Greek work, or Early English in that of the Tudor period. The same remark applies to sculptured ornaments. They should be neither too numerous nor too few, and, above all, they should be consistent. The carved ox skulls, for instance, which are appropriate in a temple of Vesta or of Fortune, would be very incongruous on a Christian church.

Colour must be regarded as a subsidiary element in architecture, and although it seems almost indispensable and has always been extensively employed in interiors, it is doubtful how far external colouring is desirable. Some contend that only local colouring, i.e., the colour of the materials, should be admitted; but there seems no reason why any colour should not be used, provided it be employed with discretion and kept subordinate to the form or outline. This subject is of too much importance to be dismissed summarily here, and will be treated in a supplementary notice at the end of this article.

As has been already pointed out, the origin of the art is to be found in the endeavours of man to provide for his physical wants. A picturesque account of the early stages in its progress is given by Vitruvius. According to him, man in his primitive savage state began to imitate the nests of birds and the lairs of beasts, and constructed arbours with twigs of trees. To these arbours succeeded huts with walls composed of dried turf, strengthened with reeds and branches. From huts to houses the progress is gradual and easy. Other writers have endeavoured to trace three orders of primitive dwellings—the cave, the hut, and the tent—constructed severally by the tribes who devoted themselves to hunting and fishing, to agriculture, and to a pastoral and nomadic life. There can be no doubt that climate and surrounding circumstances affected not only the form of the primitive, buildings but also the materials employed. Thus, where trees abounded, stone was probably a material seldom used, as it entailed a much greater amount of labour than timber; but as stone would neither burn nor rot, it was preferred for all durable purposes. Where wood was plentiful, as in Greece and in Lycia, stone architecture exhibits traces of an original timber construction. The columns were originally posts, and the architraves and triglyphs beams resting on each other. The Lycian tomb in the British Museum furnishes a strong proof that there the art of the carpenter preceded that of the mason, and suggested forms, which became conventional, and from which the latter could not venture to depart. On the other hand, in the plains of Egypt, where building timber is scarce, and where there is abundance of large stone in the mountains, the mason element seems to have prevailed. In such plains as those of Nineveh and Babylon artificial stone was made from lumps of dried or burnt clay. Finally, in vast sandy deserts, where there are neither trees nor stones, the skins of beasts, sewed together and supported by sticks, formed the earliest shelter. This soon grew into the tent, and its form still influences the architecture of the Chinese and the Tartars. Much ingenuity has been expended in the inquiry whether it was timber or stone that first gave birth to the art of architecture; the probability is, that the hut, the cairn, and the tent, all contributed their share in different countries.

No traces remain of the steps by which the beautiful temples of Egypt or the magnificent halls of Persia and Assyria were developed from these rude beginnings. The earliest known structures of those countries belong to an age already considerably advanced in civilisation and in the art of construction. And the history of architecture from its earliest specimens in Egypt is not one continuous line of progress. We can indeed show how from these early structures sprang the art of Greece; how that was modified by the Romans; and finally, how the Pointed architecture of the 13th century arose. But the development is not gradual; it proceeds by a series of steps, and one style does not shade imperceptibly into another. No doubt the architects of each country borrowed somewhat (in detail more especially) from the designs of the adjacent countries; but, nevertheless, each country originated forms peculiar to itself, and in all its artistic efforts continued to repeat and elaborate them. So definite are the characteristics of the styles of different nations, that from the mere form, carving, or decoration of any structure, its age and its architects can, usually, be fairly determined.

PREHISTORIC STRUCTURES.

The numerous relics of structures left by primeval man have generally little or rio architectural value. The only interesting problem regarding them, the determination of their date and purpose, and of the degree of civilisation which they manifest, falls within the province of archaeology.

The principal specimens of such prehistoric erections may be classified thus—

(1.) Monoliths (Maenhir, from Maen, a stone, hir, high), or single upright stones (fig. 1). The best example is at Carnac, in Brittany. This huge stone, when perfect, was 63 feet high, and 14 feet in diameter at its widest -part. It is rudely shaped to a circular form, and weighs about 260 tons.

(2.) Cromlechs, table-stones, generally consisting of one large flat stone supported by others which are upright (fig. 2). The cromlech is also named Dolmen, from Taal, or Daul, a table, and Maen, a stone. A good example of the cromlech is the structure known as “Kit’s Coity House,” near Maidstone. Other examples occur in different parts of Great Britain and

Ireland, and numerous specimens are found in Algeria, in India, in the country east of the Jordan, in Guernsey, and near Saumur, on the Loire.

(3.) Circles of Stone.— The most important specimen of these in Britain is Stonehenge (fig. 3). Others are found at Avebury, in Wiltshire (fig. 4); at Stanton Drew, in Somersetshire; at Stennis, in Orkney; and at Callernish, in Lewis; and several have been discovered in the districts around Mount Sinai and Aden. In some circles, as at Stonehenge, as well as separately, are found trilithons (fig. 1), which appear to be a modification of the dolmen.

(4.) Tumuli.— These include the heehiυe huts, so called from their shape, found scattered throughout Cornwall, Wales, and Scotland (fig. 5). Similar, but superior, edifices are to be met with in Ireland; and of these, New Grange, near Drogheda, apparently a burial mound, is the finest specimen (fig. 6). The design of the

“nurhags” (fig. 7), which are found in great numbers in the island of Sardinia, has greatly puzzled archaeologists. It has been conjectured that they were sepulchres, the dead being exposed on their summits. Of the so-called “Picts’ houses” of the Orkney Islands, some are chambered tumuli, while others may be more properly described as underground dwellings (fig. o).

(5.) Wooden huts, the submerged remains of which have been recently discovered in the lakes of Switzerland, as well as in Sweden, in Italy, and in Ireland. These erections, which rose on piles just above the surface of the water, present no features of architectural interest.

Λ specimen of prehistoric sculpture, on stone, taken from ruins in the island of Gozo, in the Mediterranean, is given in fig. 11.

Prehistoric remains are separated by a wide gulf from those which now fall to be noticed, inasmuch as, whether or not they led, by improvement in their forms, to anything really architectural, no evidence remains of such progress, and they must therefore be regarded as practically dissociated from anything that we have now to describe.

Egyptian Architecture.

For the beginnings of the art—its earliest efforts* grand even in their infancy—we must turn to Egypt.

A short description of the general configuration of the country may be useful here. Its habitable land is a narrow strip a few miles wide, extending from the Nile, on one or both its banks, to the rocks or desert. About 100 miles up the river is Cairo, and close to it Memphis, the old capital of Lower Egypt, Heliopolis, and the great pyramids of Ghizeh, Abooseer, Sakkara, and Dashour; 450 miles higher up th© river is the site of the great Thebes, with Karnak and Luxor on the right or eastern bank, and Medinet Haboo on the west. Beyond this in succession are Esne, Edfoo, Elephantina, Syene, and Philae, close to the first cataract. Higher up (in Nubia) are the great caves of Aboosimbel, and at a still greater distance the pyramids of Meroë, or Dankelah. The rock is generally limestone up to Thebes, sandstone and breccia to Syene, where the well-known variety of granite, with hornblende, is found; these with the addition of unburnt brick, are the chief materials used in the construction of the Egyptian architectural monuments. The granite was principally supplied by the quarries at Elephantina and Syene, for which the Nile offered a ready mode of conveyance, although it appears that the obelisks and other enormous blocks were sent by land. Some species were brought down the river from Ethiopia^ but we do not find that the materials were brought from any other foreign country. It may be remarked, too, that in the earliest structures the common grès or sandstone ia principally employed. Excepting the obelisks and some few of the propylaea, all the temples at Thebes are of that material. In Lower Egypt, on the contrary, and in the works of later date generally, almost everything is constructed of granite.

It seems quite certain that Egyptian art is original and not derived from that of India; and it may be concluded with great probability that the structures of Egypt are the oldest specimens of architecture in the world. The origin of the structures themselves has been matter of some discussion. By several writers it has been thought that the rockcut caves of Upper Egypt were the earliest efforts of architectural design, and furnished models for the enormous piles raised along the banks of the Nile. An examination of these caves, however, will show clearly that the very reverse is the case, and that the carvings of the excavations are imitated from the above-ground buildings.

The oldest works of the Egyptians, according to Herodotus, were the embankment of the Nile by Menes, the foundation of the city of Memphis, and the commencement of a temple to Vulcan. Next we learn from Manetho, as cited by Eusebius, that Venephes, the fourth king of the first dynasty, built some pyramids at a place called Cocho-men, but this is all we know of them. Eusebius further records that Tosorthus, or Sosorthus, the second king of the third dynasty, found out how to build with polished or smooth stone (και την διa ζeστωv λίθων οικοδομήν evpeτo).

The next structure of which we have notice is the Great Pyramid, the most gigantic work in the world—one which never has been, and perhaps never will be surpassed. At this time the Egyptians must have reached a proficiency in the mechanical arts of which we can form no conception. They seem to have been able to quarry rocks of the hardest stone, even granite—to transport them to great distances —to raise huge blocks, vast monolith obelisks, that would puzzle our engineers with their best tackle—and, more wonderful still, they appear to have had the power not only of polishing granite, but of carving on that most stubborn material with the utmost facility, large surfaces and even huge statues being covered with hieroglyphics of the most minute kind and of the highest finish. It is impossible to discover how this was done, for though Herodotus (ii. 124, 125) tells us they had iron tools, it was long before the conversion of that metal into steel had been found out; and with all the best modern tools of steel, it is difficult and costly to carve even plain letters in granite. According to the account of Herodotus, the occasion of the erection of this great work was tho caprice of a king, Cheops, who is supposed to be the Suphis of Syncellus, and the Chembes of Diodorus. This king was a tyrant of the very worst kind; he closed all the temples throughout Egypt, forbade every sort of religious observance, and forced all his subjects to labour for him as he pleased. Among other whims, he determined to build this pyramid as a tomb for himself. The stones wero quarried in the Arabian mountains, and none were less than 30 feet long. They were then conveyed by the Nile to a newly-constructed road, three-quarters of a mile long, GO feet broad, and in a cutting of 48 feet. This road, of polished stone, and carved with figures, took ten years to complete. Twenty years were spent in building the pyramid itself.

The site of this extraordinary structure is at Ghizeh, in the neighbourhood of Cairo. The base was, Herodotus tells us, 8 plethra (about 808 English feet) square, and the height the same. This, however, is not the case, the Greek author having probably measured the sloping edge. The dimensions are variously given by the various persons who have measured it. Μ. Nouet, who was of the French commission in Egypt, and had perhaps the best means of ascertaining the truth, states its base to be a square whose side is 716 French or 768 English feet, and gives the height as 421 French or 452 English feet. The dimensions of the pyramid in its original state, as given by Colonel Vyse, are 764 feet length of base, 720 feet slant side, and 480 feet high. According to Sir Henry James {Notes cn the Great Pyramid, 1869), the side of the base is 760 feet: while Professor Piazzi Smyth gives this as 763 81, and the height as 486 ’ 2567. The pyramid thus covers upwards of 13 acres, and is about 150 feet higher than St Paul’s cathedral. As compared with the largest building in the world, St Peter’s, Rome, the Great Pyramid covers an area which is as 58 to 22, or nearly three times as much, and is 50 feet higher. Like almost all the other pyramids, its sides face the cardinal points, and it is entered from the north by a descending passage, which leads to a few small chambers or cells, the largest of which is but 17*7 feet wide. In one of these a solitary sarcophagus was found.

The pyramid appears to be a solid mass of stone, and is built in regular courses or layers, which vary in thickness from 2 to 5 feet, each receding from the one below it to the number of 202; though even this is variously stated from that number to 2GO, as indeed the height is given by various modern travellers at from 444 to 625 feet. And the ancient writers differ as widely both among themselves and from the moderns. On the top course the area is about 10 English feet square, though it is believed to have been originally two courses higher, which would bring it to the smallest that in regular gradations it could be. This vast erection, on which the labours of 100,000 men were bestowed for twenty years, and which contains 85 millions of cubic feet of stone, must have cost (reckoning quarrying, transport— twice by land and once by river—squaring, hoisting, and setting at 2s. per foot) something like 8⅜ millions of English money.

A second pyramid, close to the first, was built by the successor of Cheops, whom Herodotus calls Chephren; the inscriptions on the stones, however, give the name Shafra. The side of its base is about 60 feet less than that of the former. About forty years later, Mycerinus, or Men-cheres, built a third; but the side of the base is only about 364 feet, or less than half that of the Great Pyramid. It was, however, entirely faced with polished granite, while the others were of limestone. A statue of King Chephren has recently been found in a temple close adjacent to the pyramids, and now forms one of the most remarkable objects in the museum at Cairo. Canina (Architectura Antica, part i.) has described altogether twenty large and twenty-seven small pyramids, some not more than 30 feet square. But the researches of Lepsius and others prove that the number is much greater than this, and on the range of cliffs overlooking the Nile, from Abooroash in the north to Illahoon in the south, the number is probably not under 100.

A great deal of trouble has been taken to discover the principles on which the Egyptians planned these erections. The most reasonable theory is that each side was meant for an equilateral triangle, four of which, laid sloping and brought to a point, would compose the pyramid; but neither the dimensions nor the angles agree with this. It is true that the sides of the three great pyramids have an angle with the horizon of from 51⅜ o to 52∣ o or thereabouts; but those at Abooseer and at Sakkara, as given by Canina, measure 55°, while at Barkal, near Meroë, the angle is no less than 72°. At Dashour the pyramid has a slope about half way up of 53°, which afterwards is flattened to 44°. At Meydoum there is a pyramid in three great steps. If, therefore, the Egyptians had begun to work on the above theory, they departed from it in many notable instances.

The following seems to have been the manner in which the pyramids were generally constructed. A level platform was cut in the rock, a portion of which was, however, left in the centre above the general level to serve as a sort of core to the pyramid. A deep chamber was then sunk in the rock, with a passage leading from it always on the north side, and usually at an angle of 26° to 28°, to the surface of the ground. It is curious that these passages were almost always of one dimension, viz., 3 ft. 5 in. wide, and 3 ft. 11 in. high. Over the chamber was built a mass of masonry, which was gradually added to at the side and top, according to the power, or the wealth, or the length of life of the founder. Finally, the angles of the stones were cut off to the proper slope, or a casing added, and the pyramid thus completed from the top. Some of the casings were highly finished. Those of the first and second pyramid were of polished stone; that of the third was of polished granite. Occasionally, as in the Great Pyramid, and in the southern one at Dashour, there was a chamber built above the one which was cut in the rock. Their entrances were carefully concealed, and even the doors of the chamber defended by gigantic portcullises of granite, some 8 to 10 feet square, weighing 50 to 60 tons, so as to render the security of the chambers as great as possible. Yet every chamber in the chief pyramids, at least, except perhaps “the false one” at Meydoum, has been rifled ages ago, and so the great purpose of their erection utterly set at nought. Most of the sarcophagi which they once contained have also been carried away. One, that of Mycerinus, was lost in its passage to England; but the mummy-case and mummy which it contained are now in the British Museum. The sarcophagus of the Great Pyramid still rests in its chamber. An extra interest belongs to the third pyramid (of Mycerinus) owing to its chamber being ceiled with a pointed arch. But it is not a true arch, the stones being merely strutted against each other, as over the entrance to the Great Pyramid (see fig. 13 supra), and the underside cut to the above form. The chamber of a pyramid at Sakkara was lined with blue and white tiles like the Dutch style; and at the false one at Meydoum there is, about two-thirds up, a band about 12 feet wide, left rough all round, and it has been supposed that this may have been left as a ground for decoration. But there is nothing to prove this. Herodotus, however, expressly says that the exterior was richly sculptured, and a model of a pyramid that is to be seen at the Museum of Cairo bears out his statement. The construction of pyramids seems to have ended in Lower Egypt at a very early date, with the old dynasty of Memphis. But some of crude brick, and containing arched chambers, are found at Thebes, and are supposed to be of date about 1200 b.c. Many similar structures, but on a very much smaller scale, were erected in Ethiopia and Meroë down to about 700 b.c.

Many theories have been stated as to the purposes for which these gigantic monuments were erected, but the opinion of Μ. Mariette, the latest, as well as one of the most learned writers, may be taken as correct, viz., that every pyramid was a tomb and the gigantic enclosure of a mummy. It is certain that every pyramid is on the western bank of the Nile, the region of the setting sun, and thus associated by the Egyptians with the regions of death, and that each group of pyramids is the centre of a necropob’s.

Next to the pyramids in massive grandeur comes the Great Sphinx, and an additional interest has lately been associated with this statue, from the finding of an inscription, which seems to prove that it was sculptured before the time of the builder of the first pyramid. The Egyptian sphinx was quite different from the Greek, which usually had a female head on the body of a winged lion; whereas the Egyptian was wingless, and had usually the head of a man, bearded and capped, and thus represents strength and wisdom. Those with the head of a ram, or crio-sphinxes, are supposed to be dedicated to Amen (Jupiter Ammon); those with the head of a hawk are called hieraco-sphinxes, and are sacred to Ba, or the sun. The

Great Sphinx at Ghizeh has the body of a lion crouching close to the ground; the height from the floor, or platform on which it lies, to the top of the head is 100 feet; the total length is 146 feet; across the shoulders it measures 34 feet. The head, from the top to the chin, is 28 feet 6 inches, and is calculated to be 40,000 times the bulk of an ordinary human head. A small temple or sanctuary was built between its paws. With the exception of this, and the paws themselves, which are of masonry, the whole appears to be carved out of the solid rock. Indeed, it may safely be assumed to be solid; for Colonel Vyse drilled a hole 27 feet deep into the shoulder, and found that, so far at least, it was so.

Another grand memorial of the old dynasty must be mentioned, viz., the Serapeum, near the pyramid of Sakkara, discovered in 1851 by Μ. Mariette, and excavated 30 feet deep in the solid rock. It contains the mummies of the sacred bulls, placed in gigantic sarcophagi, 11 feet high, 7 to 8 feet wide, and 13 to 18 feet long, each of which is placed in a chamber. The chambers, forty in number, are excavated on each side of galleries about 12 feet wide, the ceilings being cut (not built) to the form of an arch.

No great distance beyond Sakkara, in the district called the Fayoom, was the famous Labyrinth, an immense mass of buildings mentioned by Herodotus as the palaces built for the twelve kings. From his description of it this appears to have been as great a work and as great a wonder as the pyramids themselves. It was close to Lake Moeris, and contained in the time he wrote 3000 chambers, half above and half below ground, besides immense halls, corridors, courts, gardens, &c. The roofs were wholly of stone, and the walls covered with sculpture. On one side stood a pyramid 40 orgyiae, or about 243 feet high. It appears from the ruins that huge masses of buildings once occupied three sides of an open quadrangle, about 200 yards square in the inside— the two wings being about 300 yards long, and the third side about 400, measured on the outside. The pyramid, as stated by the various authorities, occupied the greater part of the fourth side, and measured about 348 feet square. There are a multitude of small chambers in two stories, as described by Herodotus; and Canina supposes there was a third story above these supported on columns—a sort of open gallery.

Tombs. —The great reverence paid by the Egyptians to the bodies of their ancestors, and their careful preservation of them by embalmment, necessitated a great number and vast extent of tombs. Some of these, erected long after the building of pyramids had ceased, are built up above ground; others are caves cut in the sides of rocks; others are passages tunnelled under ground to a great extent. The tombs above ground have been for the most part destroyed. But some very interesting ones are found near the Great Pyramid. They are of well-squared stone, in the form of truncated pyramids; the tops are level, and they show no appearance of anything having been built above them. But there must have been a covering of some kind, as pits, leading to sepulchral chambers beneath, are cut down directly from the surface level. The most curious tomb at Ghizeh is known as Campbell’s, of the supposed date of about 660 b.c. It is an open excavation, 53 ft. 6 in. deep, 30 ft. by 26 ft. 3 in. on plan, with niches, <tc., leading out of it. In these were found four sarcophagi, one of which, of basalt, is in the British Museum. This excavation is supposed, from some indications left of a springing stone, to have been covered by an arch. If so, this would be the oldest known stone arch of a large size. In fact, it is difficult to imagine any other way in which this large excavation could have been covered. But the special object actually found was a tomb built up in the centre of the excavation, of good masonrv, covered by three stones as struts, over which was a perfectly formed voussoired arch. This arch was destroyed not long ago by the Egyptian Government, in order to build a mill. Outside the whole excavation was a deep trench 5 ft. 4 in. wide, and 73 feet deep, from which branch out a number of chambers. This excavation was probably finished above with some such truncated pyramid as we have already described.

Even more interesting are the tombs at Beni Hassan and Thebes. There is little attempt at architectural decoration in these, except the façade and some columns cut in the rock inside; but they are filled with the most interesting paintings, representing even the minutest incidents of private life. A model of one was exhibited in London by Belzoni; and there is a valuable series built up, and painted in fac-simile, in the Vatican at Rome. It appears that as soon as a king succeeded to the throne, the excavation of his tomb commenced, and proceeded year by year till his death. Canina has given plans and sections of several of the royal tombs, extending from 250 to 400 feet direct into the solid rock. Several of these tombs at Beni Hassan have external façades high up in the cliffs, consisting each of two columns in antis, to which we shall have again to refer when treating of the origin of the Grecian Doric. Others, as at Ghizeh and Sakkara, have their entrances level with or below the ground, and without external decoration; whilst others, as at Thebes, have their entrances high up in the face of the cliffs, and not only without ornament of any kind, but closed up as if for purposes of concealment. But each, no matter of what size or description, had one or more chambers or corridors, in the floor of some one or other of which was sunk a deep pit. Leading out of this pit, again, were other chambers, in one of which was deposited the sarcophagus. When this was done the pit was filled up so as to render the concealment of the place of sepulture as complete as possible. One of the grandest at Thebes is that of a priest, otherwise unknown to fame, which comprises a series of halls, passages, and chambers, at various levels, branching off in one place three different ways. In all, it is 862 feet long, and the part actually excavated occupies an area of 23,000 feet.

Many of the paintings already alluded to are often simply executed in colour, but others are emphasised by being sculptured also in slight intaglio. This came into use, it would seem, about the 14th century B,c., the earlier work being in relief. The stone was usually prepared for painting by being covered with a very thin fine stucco. Even the fine granites were so covered sometimes, and the woodwork also. Imitations of costly woods, <fcc., are to be found even at this early time.

Temples. —The Egyptian temples range from the time that Thebes became the capital (about 2000 b.c.) down to the time of the Caesars.

Of all the temples, the most remarkable is perhaps the rock-cut one of Aboosimbel, in Nubia, supposed to have been excavated in the 14th century B.c. The façade was cut in the steep face of a rock, the entrance doorway being flanked by two gigantic statues (66 feet high) on each side. The main feature internally was a grand hall supported by two rows of detached piers, in front of each of which is a statue 17 ft. 8 in. high. Another remarkable temple exists at Ghizeh, built up within a great excavation in the rock; here was found the statue of Chephren before mentioned. The temple is lined with immense blocks of polished granite, as are also the piers, each of these being of one stone about 15 feet high, 5 feet wide, and 3 ’ 2 thick. Over this structure there was clearly another, above ground, as extensive remains of fine stonewalling still exist. This singular edifice is without inscription of any kind, and evidently was connected in some way with sepulture, as tomb-chambers lead out of it. The apparently great antiquity of these and other excavations lent countenance to the theory to which we have before alluded, viz., that the origin of Egyptian art is to be found in them. But the evidence before us distinctly shows that all the forms used in the great excavations at Aboosimbel, Thebes, Beni Hassan, and other places, are clearly copied from built buildings. Thus, we have the ceilings arched out of the solid rock, or formed with clear imitations of beams, squared or round, also cut out of the rock, just as square beams or round logs were used in ordinary buildings; and so with the other parts of the excavations.

The grandest architectural efforts of the Egyptians are shown in their built temples, whose construction ranges from the time at which Thebes became the chief capital (about 2000 B.o.) down to so late even as the time of the Caesars. Sir Gardner Wilkinson, in his Architecture of Ancient Egypt, gives a very full account of these edifices, and classifies them thus :—1. Sanctuary Temples, or those with only one single chamber. 2. Peripteral Temples, or the like, but surrounded with columns. 3. Temples in Antis, with a portico of two or four columns in front. 4. Those with porticos of many columns, as Esne, Dendera, &c., and many inner chambers. 5. Those with large courts, and with pyramidal towers or propylons in front. The earliest temples were small, consisting of a simple chamber to hold the statue of the deity, with one opening or doorway in front, through which the votary might look, and with an altar for sacrifice. They were sanctuaries into which only priests might enter. The building was surrounded with a wall of brick forming a court or temenos, which was entered by a tall stone gateway or propylon, and was often planted with trees. In process of time these temples were enlarged, and there were added chambers for the priests, and large doorways flanked by towers with sloping sides (Plate VII. fig. 5), and sometimes by a portico or pronaos (fig. 2) supported by columns. The vestibule, or court-yard, was surrounded by a colonnade (fig. 4); the propylon was of gigantic proportions, and full of chambers (figs. 1, 4). The sanctuary, adytum, or σr ∣ κo∙i (fig. 4), still contained the idol and its altar. Across the court, and, in fact, sometimes for an immense distance outside, there was a δρό/wç, or avenue of sphinxes, through which processions defiled. At the commencement of this avenue there was frequently an open or hypaethral building, or peristyle of columns, where it is supposed the processions assembled and were marshalled. This building is called a canopy by Sir Gardner Wilkinson.

The pyramidal form of the propylaea, peculiar to Egyptian temples, may have been suggested by the pyramids, as neither that form nor those adjuncts to a temple appear to have been used before the period at which it is supposed the former were constructed. The grandeur and dignity inherent in that form would indeed hardly be suspected till its appearance in the pyramids themselves; and certainly the impression of its effect must have been strong, to induce men to seek it in a truncated pyramid under a very acute angle, as in the propylaea, relying on the effect of its outline alone. It was gradually, too, that this tendency was generally applied, for in the earliest Pharaonic structures the vertical outline is most common, except in the propylaea, where they exist; and in the structures of the Ptolemies the inclined outline pervades everything. The larger and more perfect structures do not externally present the appearance of being columned, a boundary wall or peribolus girding the whole, and preventing the view of any part of the interior,—except perhaps the towering magnificence of some inner pylônes; of the lofty tops of an extraordinary avenue of columns, with their superimposed terrace; of the tapering obelisks which occupy, at times, some of the courts; or of a dense mass of structure, which is the body of the temple itself, enclosing the thickly columned halls. The immense magnitude of these edifices may perhaps have made them, in their perfect state, independent of considerations which have weight in architectural composition at the present time, and on which indeed its harmony depends. The various portions of the same temple differ in size and proportion; whence it happens that the cornices of the lower parts abut indefinitely against the walls of the higher, while the latter are not at all in accordance among themselves.

The structure selected here to exemplify Egyptian architecture, and figured in elevation, plan, and details in Plate VIL, though not ranked among the Pharaonic monuments, is perfectly characteristic of the style and arrangement of Egyptian temples, and is a more regular specimen than any other possessing the national peculiarities. It 13 known as the temple of Apollinopolis Magna, or of Edfoo, in Upper Egypt, on the banks of the Nile, between Thebes and the first cataract. It has recently been cleared out, and its magnificent ruins now stand forth grandly and clearly.

The plan of the enclosure behind the propylaea is a long paralielogram, the moles or propylaea themselves forming another across one of its ends. The grand entrance to the great court of the temple is by a doorway between the moles, to which there may have been folding gates, for the notches, as for their hinges, are still to be seen. Small chambers, right and left of the entrance, and in the core of the propylaea, were probably for the porters or guards of the temple: a staircase remains on each side, which leads to other chambers at different heights. To furnish these w ith light and air, loop-holes have been cut through the external walls, disfiguring the front of the structure. The grand doorway (fig. 4) is about 51) feet high, and is flanked by two massive towers 110 feet high. The whole façade measures about 250 feet, or about 70 feet longer than that of St Paul’s. The propylon is covered with numerous figures, all of colossal proportions, and some as high as 40 feet. The court is 160 feet by 140, and is surrounded on three sides by columns 32 feet high, forming a covered gallery. The pronaos, or covered portico, measures 110 feet by 44, and consists of three rows of six columns, each 34 feet high, parallel and equidistant, except in the middle, where the intercolumniation is greater, because of the passage through. The front row of columns is closed by a sort of breastwork or dado, extending to nearly half their height, in which moreover they are half-imbedded; and in the central opening a peculiar doorway is formed, consisting of piers, with the lintel and cornice over them cut through, as exhibited in the elevation of the portico. From the pronaos another doorway leads to an atrium or inner vestibule, consisting of three rows of smaller columns, with four in each, distributed as those of the pronaos are. Beyond this vestibule there are sundry close rooms and cells, with passages and staircases which were probably used for storing the sacred utensils. The insulated chamber within the sixth door was most probably the adytum, or shrine of the deity or deities to whom the temple was dedicated. It measures only about 33 feet by 17 feet, while the whole edifice within the walls covers about as much ground as St Paul’s, London.

The longitudinal section of the edifice (fig. 3) shows tho relative heights of the various parts, and the mode of constructing the soffits or ceilings, which are of the same material as the walls and columnar ordinances; that is, in some cases granite, and in others freestone. The elevation of the pronaos (fig. 2) shows also a transverse section of the colonnades and peribolus. It displays most of the general features of Egyptian columnar architecture; the unbroken continuity of outline, the pyramidal tendency of the composition, and the boldness and breadth of every part. The good taste with which the interspaces of the columns are covered may be remarked. Panels standing between the columns would have had a very ill effect, both internally and externally: and if a continued screen had been made, the effect would be still worse, as the columns must then have appeared from the outside absurdly short; but as it is, their height is perfectly obvious, and their form is rendered clear by the contrast of light and shade occasioned by the projection of the panels, which would not exist if they had been detailed between the columns. The lotus ornament at the foot of the panels is particularly simple and elegant; and nothing can be more graceful and effective than the cyma above their cornice, which is singularly enriched with ibis mummy-cases (figs. 6 and 7). The jambs forming a false doorway in the central interspace are a blemish in the composition; they injure it very much by the abruptness of their form, and their want of harmony with anything else in it. The front elevation of the moles or propylaea (fig. 1) with the grand entrance between them, is peculiarly Egyptian; and very little variety is discoverable between the earliest and latest specimens of this species of structure. It is an object that must be seen to be appreciated; simplicity and an inherent impressiveness in the pyramidal tendency are all on which it has to depend for effect, with the exception of its magnitude. The projecting fillet and coving which form a cornice to the structures, though large and bold, appear small and inefficient when compared with thé bulk they crown; and there is nothing particularly striking in tho torus which marks the lateral outline and separates the straight line of the front from the circular of the cornice. Neither are they dependent for their effect on the sculpture, for their appearance is as impressive at a distance, which makes the latter indistinct, as when they are seen near at hand.

A portion of the portico is given on a larger scale (fig. 5), to show more clearly the forms and arrangement of Egyptian columnar composition. The shaft of the column in this example is perfectly cylindrical. It rests on a square step, or continued stylobate, without the intervention of a plinth or base of any kind; and it has no regular vertical channelling or enrichment, such as fluting, but is marked horizontally with series of grooves, and inscribed with hieroglyphics. The capitals are of different sizes and forms in the same ordinance. In this example the capital, exclusive of its receding abacus, is about one diameter of the column in height. It3 outline is that of the cyma, with a reversed ovolo fillet above, and its enrichment consists principally of lotus flowers. The capital of the column next to this (fig. 2), in the front line, is much taller, differently formed, and ornamented with palm leaves; the third is of the same size and outline as tho first, but differently ornamented; and the corresponding columns on the other side of the centre have capitals corresponding with these, each to its fellow, in the arrangement. Above the capital there is a square block or receding abacus, which has the effect of a deepening of the entablature, instead of a covering of the columns, when the capitals spread, as in this case. In the earlier Egyptian examples, however, in which the columns are swollen, and diminished in two unequal lengths, the result is different, and the form and size of the abacus appear perfectly consistent. The height of this column and its capital, without the abacus, is six diameters. The entablature consists of an architrave and cornice, there being no equivalent for the frieze of a Greek entablature, unless the coviilg be so considered, in which case the cornice becomes a mere shelf. The architrave, including the torus, is about three-quarters of a diameter in height, which is half that of the whole entablature. The architrave itself is in this example sculptured in low relief, but otherwise plain. The torus, which returns and runs down the angles of the building, is gracefully banded, something like the manner in which the fasces are represented in Roman works. The coving is divided into compartments by vertical flutes, which have been thought to be the origin of triglyphs in a Doric frieze; but these are arranged without reference to the columns, and are in other respects so totally different from them as to give but little probability to the suggestion. The compartments are beautifully enriched with hieroglyphics, except in the centre, where a winged globe is sculptured, surmounting another on the architrave, as shown in the elevation of the pronaos. The ciowning tablet or fillet is quite plain and unornamented. Angular roofs are unknown in ancient Egyptian buildings, and consequently pediments are unknown in its architecture.

The temple at Edfoo, though its dimensions are considerable, is small when compared with that at Karnak. This covers about 420,000 feet, or five times as much as St Paul’s, London, and more than twice as much as St Peter’s at Rome. The propylon is 370 feet long, or twice as much as that of St Paul’s. The hypostyle hall / a parallelogram of about 342 feet long, and 170 feet wide, is the most wonderful apartment in the world. It has fourteen rows of columns, nine in each row, and 43 feet high; and two rows, six in each, of the enormous height of 62 ft., 11 ft. 6 in. in diameter, and carrying capitals which measure 22 feet across. This hall (with the two gigantic pylônes) is said to cover 4000 superficial feet more than St Paul’s. Beyond it is the adytum or shrine, a small apartment, measuring only 26 feet by 16 feet.

In many cases the temples want the peribolus and propylaea, the edifice consisting of no more than the pronaos and the parts beyond it. In others, particularly in those of Thebes, this arrangement is doubled, and there are two pairs of the colossal moles, and another open court or second vestibule intervening between them and the portico. The central line across the courts is formed by a covered avenue of columns, of much larger size than ordinary; and the galleries around are of double rows of columns instead of one row with the walls. The obelisks indicated in the plan and section of Edfoo (Plate VII.), before the propylaea, occupy the situation in which they are generally found, though in this case there are none. Colossal seated figures are sometimes found before the piers of the gateway; and from them, as a base, a long avenue of sphinxes is frequently found ranged like an alley or avenue of trees from a mansion to the park gate, straight or winding, as the case may require.

Statues. —Connected with the temples, and forming an important part of their decorative features, were gigantic statues and obelisks. The statues are of enormous proportions. The sitting figure of Memnon is about 53 feet without the pedestal; and that in the sepulchre of Osy-mandyas (the Memnonium) is nearly 60 feet high. The face of Memnonis 7 feet high, and the ear 3 feet 6 inches long, and the shoulders measure nearly 26 feet across.

Obelisks. —The obelisks of Egypt are generally huge monoliths of red granite or syenite. Their use originated, no doubt, in the custom of setting up stones to commemorate particular events. The Egyptians embellished these stones, first, by working them to a fine face, and afterwards by covering them with carvings. They stand frequently in pairs before the propylon of the temples, as at Karnak and at Philae. After the conquest of Egypt the emperors transported many of these monuments to Rome. At the time the celebrated Regioniaries (accounts of each of the wards or Regiones of Rome) were written, there were six great obelisks, and forty-two small ones at Rome. Of these twelve only are now left, varying in height from over 100 feet to 8⅜ feet. The first, which now stands close to the church of St John Lateran, is 148 Roman palms in height, or a little over 108 English feet, is about 8 feet square at the base, and weighs, as is estimated, nearly 450 tons. It is covered with hieroglyphics, from which we gather it was erected in honour of Thothmes IV. It stood originally before the temple of Amen Ra, and was brought over by Caligula. Each obelisk diminishes equally towards the top—that near the Lateran, ∙253 part of the base; that at St Peter’s, *261; two at Thebes, ’ 3; and the one near S. Maria Maggiore, '307, or nearly one-third. The diminution from the base may therefore be estimated roughly at from one-quarter to one-third.

The Barberini obelisk is about 7f times as high as the diameter of the base; Cleopatra’s needle, 8∣; the one at St Peter’s 9 times, at Luxor 10 times, at the Lateran 11 times; while two at Thebes, and one in the Piazza Navona at Rome, have an altitude of no less than 12 times the diameter of the base.

The obelisks have no entasis or swell from top to bottom like a column, but in almost all cases there is a slight convexity on the horizontal, section of each face. The one in the Place de la Concorde at Paris has the peculiarity of being convex on one side, and slightly concave on another.

In all ancient examples, the small pyramid which covers the obelisk is at least 1⅜ times as high as the diameter of the top of the obelisk in which it is placed. In modern examples the pyramidion is almost always too flat, which gives a bad effect. Obelisks appear to have been used in contrast with the long horizontal lines of the temples; so that wo are unable to judge of the effect produced by these gigantic monoliths, when placed in their original positions, for the few examples in Rome, Paris, &c., are isolated and have nothing near them to contrast them with. The enormous labour and care expended upon the Egyptian obelisks may bo judged from the fact, that the largest one at Karnak, which weighs 297 tons, must have been lifted out of the quarry, lowered into a ship, raised out of this into a carriage, transported more than a hundred miles on land, and then raised upright, and to a considerable height, to its pedestal.

Columns. —In the rock-cut tombs and temples we come to the earliest forms of columnar architecture now existing; and Sir Gardner Wilkinson considers that he can trace the process by which the plain, square, uncarved pier was gradually developed into the ornamental column of the complete Egyptian style. Thus in the case of a plain pier, the first thing was to cut off the angles, making it an octagon; a second cutting produced a 16-sided column. The sides slightly curved formed flutes, and a large slab on the top brought the whole to much the appearance of a rude Doric column.

Suppose, however, that the pier was painted on each side with the stem and bud or flower of a plant, e.g., the lotus. The figure would be cut in intaglio; the plain spaces between being then cut away, the column would represent 4 or 8 stalks, supporting buds in flower conjoined. These would be united together by sculptured bands, and the whole would form one column of 4 or 8 stalks, supporting a capital.

Sir G. Wilkinson has classed Egyptian columns into eight orders. First, The square pillar, or post of stone. This often has a line of hieroglyphics running down it verti cally. Second, The polygonal coïüion, plain or fluted. This is sometimes painted, or otherwise ornamented with devΓces. Third, The bud capital, or one formed like the bud of the papyrus. Of this there are three varieties. The oldest, from Beni Hassan, is composed of four plants bound together by a sort of necking of fine bands under the buds, the columns coming down straight to the plinth. Then there are columns of eight similar shafts, and these generally turn in at the bottom. After the reign of Amenoph III. simple round shafts came into use. The second variety is composed of similar shafts, capitals, and neckings; but there are similar bands or necking on the bud itself, and a sort of short rods or reeds, descending vertically from the neckings on the sides of the column. The third variety has a single circular shaft, without any indication of the united water plants, but still with bands round the necking, and the capital itself. In these two last varieties the lower part of the shaft is generally ornamented with a sort of sheath or spathe, resembling the lower part of a water plant.

In the fourth order the capital is like an inverted bell. It formerly was called the lotus capital, but in reality it has no resemblance to that flower. The capital is so much undercut that the ornaments on its edge are not visible, except to a spectator who is immediately beneath them.

The fifth order is the palm tree column, and resembles the head of that tree, with the lower or drooping boughs cut off. The neckings are composed of five bands, but have the peculiarity of a piece hanging down like a knot at the end. These columns are found as early as the time of Amenoph III. In the time of the Ptolemies the shafts came straight down to the plinths, and were not drawn in at the bottom as in the earlier periods.

The sixth order is called the Isis-headed order, the capital being formed of one or more heads of that deity, surrounded by a representation of a doorway, or small shrine with an image, and sometimes a votary worshipping placed over it. At Dendera the faces, exclusive of the head-dress, are five feet across. Sometimes the Isis head is formed on a square or polygonal column. Sometimes the head is that of Athor, the Venus of the Egyptians. In this order also are included the capitals at the tomb of Rhamses III. at Thebes, lhese are the heads of cows painted blue and red, and with long reverted horns.

The seventh is called the composite order. The shafts are generally round, and the capitals, as the name imports, are a mixture of styles. Ihe bell and palms, or the palm and the Isis head, are frequently found in combination. A most curious instance is ranked under this style, of columns of the third order with inverted shafts, and also inverted capitals, taken from Karnak, the work of Thothmes III.

The eighth order is called the Osiride, from containing statues of the deity Osiris. This order is something like the Persian, or the Caryatides of the Greeks and Romans; but it differs, inasmuch as the figure does not support the entablature, but stands in front of a square pier which discharges that duty. This order is sometimes used in the courts and sometimes in the halls. Grotesque figures of Typhon are found in a building called the Typhonium at Barkal. These, however, partly support the entablature with their odd-shaped caps.

The following list of heights, diameters, and distances between the columns, selected from those given by Canina and Sir G. Wilkinson, shows at one view the peculiarities of the various styles :— [table]

Pilasters. —These are employed in all ages, though they do not always accord with the order of the columns. For instance, at Thebes the pilasters of the Temple in antis of Dayr el Medeeneh are of the sixth or Isis-headed order, while the columns between are of the seventh or composite order. They are generally square, and without diminution.

Entablatures. —These are nearly alike in all orders, and may be described as a cornice and architrave without a frieze. The former consists of a fillet or regula, beneath which is what is generally called a large hollow or cavctto; but in reality the upper half is a quarter round, and the lower nearly straight. Under this moulding is a bold torus which separates the cornice from the architraves, and runs down the sloping sides of the angle of the building to the ground. The cornice is generally ornamented with divisional vertical lines, like triglyphs. Between these the cartouches or ovals of the reigning monarch, or other devices, are carved. The centre is generally occupied by the winged globe, or emblem of the Good Daemon. The torus is often ornamented as if strings were bound round a bundle of sticks, like the fasces of a Roman lictor. On the upper part of the smaller cornices there is often a row like the antefixae of a Greek temple, but their form is peculiar, and is supposed to represent the pots in which the mummies of the sacred cats and ibis were preserved. The architraves are plain, without being broken into fasciae, and are generally covered with hieroglyphics.

Fortifications. —Next to the temples, the grandest buildings were perhaps the fortifications. We know that the temples themselves were often used as citadels, few of the towns being fortified. Even Thebes seems not to have been so. Of the actual citadels we have a few remains, as at Dakkeh. But several are shown on the drawings, and bear a curious resemblance to mediaeval works, the ramparts of the walls and towers having battlements which overhang like our machicolations, while, in the centre of the enclosure formed by the walls, was generally a high square tower or keep. Of the further details we know little.

Private Dwellings. —Of these little is known, except from paintings found in the tombs. One noted ruin at Medinet Haboo has, indeed, been supposed to be that of a palace; but one of the latest authorities, Μ. Mariette, throws doubt on this, considering that it was erected partly for defence and partly as a triumphal monument. The ordinary dwellings seem, like the houses in the Labyrinth, to have been in two stories, with an open gallery at the top, supported by columns probably of wood. The larger houses consisted of rooms ranged round three sides, and sometimes four, of a large court-yard planted with trees, and with a tank, and perhaps a fountain, in the middle. There was an entrance porch, on which are hieroglyphics, being, as Sir G. Wilkinson supposes, the name of the inhabitant. Larger houses are supposed to have had two courts—the outer, in which to receive vistors, the inner for the females of the family. Smaller houses, particularly in the country, had a similar court, with granaries and store-rooms below, and living apartments above, like those of the modern Fellah in Egypt, or the small vigna houses in Italy. The roofs seem to have been flat, like those of the modern Egyptians; and the houses appear, from a painting found at Thebes, to have been ventilated in the same way as at present, by the contrivance called a mulkuf, or wind-shaft, over which are two screens, like large square fans back to back, bending forward each way to catch any air that may chance to be stirring, and direct it down the shaft into the house.

Although we have only ruins to guide us (for no man living has seen an Egyptian temple as it appeared to the old Egyptians), yet we can gather that to the Egyptians we owe the earliest examples of columnar architecture, and at the same time that they had not got beyond the rudiments of it. The stable effect of their massive columns disappears when we notice that scarcely any, except those of very recent date, have the wide-spreading base which we know so well in every other style; that the massiveness of the column is in fact wasted, as the lower part is rounded off and cut away so as to render {th of it simply useless; and that the bold projecting capital carries no weight, and adds nothing to the strength of the stone beam above it, for that beam rests on a small block of stone above the capital, borrowing no strength whatever from it. It will also have been noticed, that nearly every Egyptian work is rectangular in plan, and that in exceptional cases, as, e.g., the buildings at Philae, Kalabsche, and Luxor, no attempt has been made to soften down the harshness of the lines. With the elevation it was the same. The square was never changed into the circle or the octagon. Nearly every form is bounded by the rectangle, and the only varieties found in the grandest of the buildings in Egypt are the slope of the massive pylon and the tapering obelisk. The minaret and the dome, which give such charming variety of outline, and the varied mouldings, without which it now seems to us that no building could be perfect, were unknown to the Egyptians. But of all things, the neglect of the arch is the most curious. Crude brick arches are found at least as early as the 16th century b.c., and others have been found of the same date, it is thought, as the pyramids. Yet the Egyptians of later times systematically employed enormous stones for their coverings and lintels, and left the arch unused. We must remember, in justice to the Egyptians, that their efforts in art were fettered, to an extent which we are perhaps unable to appreciate, by the restrictions imposed upon them by conventionalities connected with their religion. That they were so fettered in sculpture at least is abundantly clear from many examples. The freedom which characterises one of their earliest statues, that of King Chephren, the exquisitely bold yet delicately graceful sculptures in the Serapeum and in the tomb of Tih at Sakkara, and other examples, show clearly that the Egyptians had a power for design and execution which only such a cause as that referred to above could have suppressed.

Jewish Architecture.

The long sojourn of the Jews in Egypt, and the fact that their chief employment there seems to have been the manufacture of bricks, must have made them acquainted with the architecture of that country. On the conquest of Canaan, the Israelites seem to have taken possession of the dwellings of the vanquished people; and we have no record of any important building constructed by the Jews till the days of Solomon. The piety of this prince seems to have induced him to carry out his father’s wishes with regard to the*temple, but at so low an ebb was the art of building that the Jews did not even know how to hew timber properly (1 Kings V. 6). The king therefore applied to Hiram, king of Tyre, with whom he was on friendly terms, and that monarch sent an architect and staff of skilled workmen. Materials were collected for the building, and careful accounts of the whole work are given in the books of Kings and of Chronicles.

The early temple is described (1 Kings vi. vii.) as a building of stone, roofed and floored with cedar. It appears to have been rectangular, with a single roof, and divided into two parts by a wall. It was 60 cubits long, 20 wide, and 30 in height, or about 110 feet by 36 feet, and 55 feet high. In front was a porch the same width as the temple (20 cubits), but only 10 cubits in depth.

Round the house—which, of course, must mean on three sides only, as the porch occupied the front—were the priests’ chambers, in three stories, one over the other, the lowest 5 cubits broad, the middle 6, and the upper 7,—a passage which has puzzled most commentators, but which will be considered presently. On the right side was a winding-stair leading to the upper stories of chambers. The walls of the house, as well as the ceiling, were lined with boards of cedar. The joists of the floor seem also to have been of cedar; but the floor itself was of planks of fir. The cedar was carved with “knops” and open flowers.

The house was, as has been said above, divided crossways into two parts—the outer temple and the oracle, or Holy of Hohes. The one was 40 cubits long, by 20 broad; the other was 20 cubits square. The oracle had doors and door-posts of olive-wood. The temple door-frames were of olive, and the doors of fir, a∏ being hung folding. Both doors were carved with cherubim, palm trees, and open flowers. The entire fabric, even the floors, were gilt —“overlaid with gold.” The account in the Second Book of Chronicles (ch. iii iv. Ac.) is substantially the same, except (a difference easily to be accounted for) that it describes the greater house, i.e., the outer temple, as ceiled with fir tree; and we gather also from the description, that the whole was roofed with tiles of gold: the nails were also of gold, and weighed 50 shekels. At the door of the porch were two columns of bronze, or “pillars of brass,” each IS cubits, or 33 feet high, and 12 cubits round, or about 7 feet in diameter. They had capitals (chapiters) also of molten brass, five cubits high, decorated with lily work, chain work, and pomegranates. In front of the porch was the altar, surmounted by a low wall three courses of stones in height. The whole building was enclosed by a walled court, called the inner court, or that of the priests. In front of this was another, called the lower court; and the whole of this area was enclosed by a circumscribed court going round the whole of the other courts and buildings; and this was called the outer court, or that of the Gentiles. It will be noted that in the careful description of the pillars, <fcc., no mention is made either of base or of moulded cornice.

Canina (Tempio di Gerusalemme, Rome, fo.) conceives the style of the building to have been Egyptian; that the temple was lighted like the hypostyle halls, by a range of windows over the roofs of the cells or priests’ chambers; that these windows were like those of the clerestory of a church splayed at the bottom and sides; that the walls of the temple itself sloped towards the top on the outside, or, to use the technical language, were built “battering,” while the walls of the priests’ chambers were built perpendicular, and for this reason each story measured a cubit more than the room below. He also supposed that the capitals of the columns, which are described as of lily work, were in fact the lotus (water lily) capital of Egypt. The porch itself he considers to have been like the propylon, containing other chambers like those of Egypt.

Mr Fergusson’s restoration, as given both in his History of Architecture and more at length in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, is different. He assumes that the plan was somewhat analogous to that of the still existing building known as the palace or temple of Darius at Persepolis, which has a range of chambers on each side. The difficulty as to the upper chamber being wider than the lower he solves in a very satisfactory way, by supposing that there was a set-off in each story on which the flooring just rested, so as not to cut into the walls of temple.

In the prophecy of Ezekiel (ch. xl. sqqf) we have a very full and interesting account of what the temple was in his time. The house itself and the oracle do not appear to have been altered, but the old courts seem to have been swept away and succeeded by vast atria, and a mass of halls and chambers.

In the time of Cyrus the temple was rebuilt, but this second temple was demolished by Herod, who constructed a new one of the same dimensions as that of Solomon. The outer house was 40 cubits long, and the Holy of Holies 20 cubits; but it was nearly double the height of the first temple. The porch also, instead of being the width of the house, 20 cubits, was 100 cubits long and 100 high, crossing the temple in the form of a T, and forming a magnificent façade much longer than that of St Paul’s in London. Round the house were three stories of priests’ chambers. The court had three entrances on each side, which were called respectively the water-gates, the fire-gates, and the oblation-gates. But the peculiar difference between Herod’s temple and the earlier building was that there was, in front of the court last described, another of about the same size, surrounded by a colonnade and chambers, which was the place set apart for the women. These courts were surrounded by an outer court, having a species of cloister on the north, east, and west sides, composed of a double row of columns. On the south side was a similar construction a furlong in length. It consisted of three rows of columns, forming with the outer wall, three aisles—the two outer being 30 feet wide and 50 feet high; the centre being 45 feet wide and 100 feet high—no doubt with a species of clerestory. These columns are described to have been so large that it took three men with extended arms to span their circumference. The outer court was elevated six steps above the basement level; the inner courts stood on a sort of plateau, with retaining walls and parapets round it, which was ascended by fourteen steps; this was on the level of the women’s court. Between this and the inner court was a gate called that of Nicanor, in front of which was a semicircular flight of fifteen steps. The temple itself was entered by a flight of twelve steps, so that its floor must have been between 20 and 30 feet above the ground-level of the surrounding city. The whole was built of the most beautiful white marble.

We read in the First Eook of Kings (vii. 2, 8), that Solomon built “the house of the forest of Lebanon,” “his house where he dwelt,” and “a house for Pharaoh’s daughter.” Some have supposed these to have been three distinct palaces, but Canina considers them as all connected, and as three parts of one large structure. The house of the forest of Lebanon—so called, in all probability, from the cedar of which it was constructed— is described as being 100 cubits long, 50 wide, and 30 high (180 feet by 90 by 54). Its horizontal area was thus very nearly equal to that of Westminster Halt It had four rows of cedar pillars, or, as the Vulgate more correctly renders it, four corridors (deambulacra} formed by three rows of cedar columns, fifteen in each, or forty-five in all, with cedar architraves, and covered with cedar. This Canina restores as an Egyptian hall, lighted, as described by Vitruvius, with a portico in front, of 50 cubits by 30. The great hall, he supposes, led on one side to the palace occupied by the king, in which was the hall of judgment and the throne, and on the other side, to the queen’s palace and the women’s apartments, or, as it has been called in later times, the harem. The porticoes and hall seem to have been of cedar, but the houses were “of costly stones” (1 Kings vii. 9).

The excavations recently made, at the expense of tho Palestine Exploration Fund, have disclosed considerable remains of the massive ancient masonry, and of the cisterns, conduits, &c. But, with these exceptions, no part of old Jerusalem appears to be extant. There are, however, some objects, formerly considered to belong to Jewish times, that should be mentioned. There are, first, what are called the tombs of the kings of Judah. These are a number of sepulchral chambers hewn out of the solid rock, and containing sarcophagi They vary from 10 to 20 feet square, and are entered, exactly like the tombs of Beni Hassan, by a portico in antis, about 40 feet wide. There are two columns and two pilasters in front, of Greek Doric character, about 13 feet high. The most curious feature of these is, that a broad band, about 3 feet wide, richly sculptured with foliages, runs down on each side 4 or 5 feet and over the columns horizontally. Above this last, quite independent of the lower construction, is a regular Doric architrave and frieze, of a character between Grecian and Roman; this is ornamented with triglyphs, paterae, and foliage. In front of the portico is a large court-yard, about 100 feet square.

In the Valley of Jehoshaphat, near Jerusalem, are three extremely curious relics; two stand alone, on platforms excavated from the rock, and the third is scarped into the rock itself. The first is called the tomb of Absalom. It is a square building with a solid wall, in which are engaged Ionic columns, about 13 feet high; over this is a Doric entablature with triglyphs, and an altar, surmounted by a very curious sort of hollow-sided cupola of trumpet-mouth section, and a terminal. The whole, including the flight of steps, is about 60 feet high.

Another similar building, of about the same size, is commonly called the tomb of the prophet Zechariah. This is surmounted by a simple pyramidal roof. Beneath it is a handsome doorway leading to a sepulchral chamber. Over the ordinary classic entablature is the regular Egyptian cornice or torus, surmounted by a bold quarter hollow and fillet exactly like those on the propylons of Egypt, which have been already described.

The third building is entirely rock-cut, and consists of a large façade, about 90 feet wide and 100 feet high. This is reported to be the place to which the apostles retired before the siege of Jerusalem. Below is a plain face, about 45 feet high, on each side of which are wings with two pilasters, both running up to the top of the building. Between these is a species of portico, about 40 feet wide, with columns and pilasters, of nearly pure Grecian Doric. There are also several other rock-cut tombs or sepulchres scattered about in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem, but none of them possess much architectural interest. One is called the sepulchre of Jehoshaphat.

From the character of the architecture it is incredible that these buildings can have anything like the age ascribed to them. The Ionic capitals are evidently Roman, and therefore cannot date earlier than the conquests by that people; probably they are of the time of Herod; while the Egyptian cornices show that the traditional ornaments of that people had not been entirely forgotten. Besides this, the general plan of a temple, in antis l scarped into a rock, so entirely resembles the work at Beni Hassan, that it is impossible to deny that these very interesting remains strongly corroborate the views of Canina, that the architecture of the early temples was at least based on the architecture of the Egyptians.

Indian Architecture.

Considerable light has been recently thrown upon the history of architecture in the East. The traditions as to the extremely remote antiquity of the rock-cut temples, the caves of EUora, and the wonderful pagodas, have disappeared before the searching eye of critical investigation. In the time of Herodotus the Persians had no temples; and even in that of Tacitus, the great Indo-Germanic races “would not confine their gods within walls.” The early religion, which appears in the Vedas, was Brahminism, but in the 6th century b.c., the first of the Buddhas seems to have commenced a perversion of the ancient faith. The struggle appears to have gone on for years, till three-quarters of a century after the time of Alexander the Great, about 250 years before the Christian era, when a powerful ruler named Asoka, a grandson of Chandragupta, who is supposed to be the Sandracottus of the Greek writers, abjured Brahminism, and made Buddhism the religion of the state. Certain Lots, or pillars, erected by him, and inscribed with his edicts, are the earliest extant architectural remains of India.

The Buddhist topes are supposed to have been erected at first to commemorate some event, or to show that the spot was sacred; but after a time they were employed to contain relics, such as the tooth or collar-bone of one of the Buddhas. The relics seem in some cases to bave been preserved in a sort of box or case at the top of the tope, called a tee; in others, in regular relic chambers. Where there were relics, the place was called dagoba, or relic shrine, of which, perhaps, our term pagoda is a corruption. A great number of these topes were built in the form of large towers, others in the form of hemispheres. One of these, the Sanchi tope, is described and figured by Mr Fergusson. The diameter is 106 feet. It has a curious species of gate entrance, and is surrounded by a stone fence. Others are partly cylindrical, and are finished with either a flat circle, or pointed terminals like a dome at the top. A fine example has recently been discovered at Bharhut by General Cunningham.

Of the next two classes of Buddhist architecture, the temples (Chaityas) and monasteries (Viharas), no built examples exist in India. They are, in fact, rock-cut caves. At least one thousand temples are known—one-tenth probably Brahminical or Jain, the rest Buddhist They are said to form an uninterrupted series, from the first, in Behar, by the grandson of Asoka, 200 years before Christ, to those at EUora, which, instead of being of an almost diluvian antiquity, as has generally been reported, have been proved to date from the 7th or 8th century of our era, while the most recent is the work of Indra-dyumna, as late as the 12th century. One of these cave-temples at Karli, near Bombay, presents exactly the features of a Roman basilica, or early Christian church. It has a circular end or apse, and is divided into three aisles by two rows of columns. Others are simple square buildings, with a circular or oval chamber at the end entered by a small door. The monasteries, which exceed the temples in number, seem generally to have been square caves supported 1 Figs. 24 to 38 are taken from Fergusson’s History of Architecture, by the kind permission of the author.

by pillars of the natural rock left in their places, and surrounded by a number of small sleeping-places or cells.

The most wonderful excavations are those at Ellora, near Aurangabad. These are a series of hypogea or caves sunk in the solid rock, extending a distance of 3 or 4 miles. Canina has given plans and interior views of six of them. Those called Parasova Rama and Diajannata are simply halls supported on massive piers with level architraves. The piers are richly carved with figures and friezes, and have a sort of cushion capitals, and square abaci, and stand round, forming a kind of atrium. That called Indra has a court open to the sky, in which is a small shrine or temple. In the solid rock are two halls similar to those above described, a larger and smaller. The piers of the Tin Tai are quite plain. In the Viswakarma is a quadrangle, open to the sky and surrounded by pillars. This leads into an atrium with three aisles and an apse, and exactly like a basilican church. The most magnificent of the Ellora caves, and indeed of the native Hindu works, are the chambers and halls called the Kylas, or Kailasa. These are sunk into the rock, and occupy a space of 270 feet deep and 150 feet wide. The roofs are solid rock, supported by pillars, or rest on the walls, or on the divisions of the assemblage of chambers. There is a porch, on each side of which are two columns. This conducts into a hall, supported on 1G such columns, and leading into a sort of adytum. Round this is passage space and five chambers. The whole forms a temple, with its usual appendages, just such a one as would be built on the ground, and round this a wide open space, with a colonnade or cloister encircling the whole. Great part is open to the sky, for the sake of light and air, but the work is entirely cut out of the solid rock.

The date of the construction of the Kylas is about 1000 A.D.

The earliest existing work of the Jains seems to be of the 10th century. They were a sect which arose in the endeavour to re-establish Brahminism, and which first seems to have acquired importance about 450 a.d. This sect rejects the doctrines of Buddhism, as also the practice of monasticism. The famous temple at Somnauth belongs to them. Mr Fergusson has given a description of that built by Vimala Sah, on Mount Abu, as a type of the ordinary Jain temple. In the centre is a cell in which is a cross-legged figure of one of the twenty-four saints worshipped by this sect; in this case it is that of Parswanath. The cell is always terminated by a pyramidal roof. In front of this is a portico of 48 pillars, disposed much like a cruciform church with a dome at the intersection of the transepts. The whole is surrounded by a species of cloister formed by double rows of columns, and a series of small chambers like the cells of a vihara. But as the sect abjure monasticism, each cell is used not as a dwelling, but as a kind of small chapel, and contains one of their cross-legged deities. One of the peculiarities of this style is that richly-carved brackets spring from the pillars at about two-thirds of their height, and extend to the architraves, forming a sort of diagonal strut to strengthen and support them.

The Jains probably adopted the dome at a very early period, and it is doubtful whether the Buddhists ever used this species of construction. “No tope,” Mr Fergusson observes, “has the smallest trace of such a structure, though of domical shape outside, and the design of the rock-cut temples, with the upright supports, the raking struts, and the level architraves, has manifestly been deduced from timber construction.” The Indian dome has no voussoirs radiating from the centre, as in European architecture. The courses are all horizontal; and the domes are therefore necessarily pointed in section, for they would not stand if circular. The Indian dome, however, has this merit, it requires no abutments, and has no lateral thrust. The pressure is entirely vertical; and if the foundation be sound, and the pillars stout enough, there can be no failure.

The leading idea of the plan of the Jain temple is that of a number of columns arranged in squares. Wherever it was intended to have a dome, pillars were omitted, so as to leave spaces in the form of octagons. By corbelling over the pendentives in level courses the dome was gradually formed. The plan and view of the temple at Sadree exhibit a building as large as most cathedrals. It has the great number of 20 domes, varying from 36 feet to 24 feet in diameter, and supported by 420 columns.

Like most architectural peoples, the Jains were also fond of tower-building. The Jay a Sthamba, a tower of victory erected by Khumbo Rana, to commemorate the defeat of Mohammed of Malwa, in 1439, is nine stories high, the two topmost stories being open. The general outline is not unlike that of an Italian campanile, with pilasters at the angles, and an overhanging corbelled top. It is richly ornamented from bottom to apex, and affords a very favourable idea of Indian art.

Hindu architecture has been divided into that of the Aryan or Sanscrit races of North India, that of the South or of the Tamul races, and that prevalent in the Panjab and Cashmere. Of the first and last we have compara tively little knowledge, but South Hindu work is treated of at great length by Râm Râz, a native author. The accompanying view of the temple at Tiravalur (fig. 31), which measures 945 by 700 feet, is from his work on

Hindu Architecture. The remains of the buildings are numerous, as the Tamul races were perhaps the greatest temple builders in the world; and the whole subject has been so well elucidated by the author last referred to, that its principles may be considered to be clearly ascertained and settled. The great pagoda at Tanjore (fig. 32), by far the grandest temple in India, resting on a base 83 feet square, rises in fourteen stories to a height of nearly 200 feet. The interior represented in fig. 33 —a hall in the palace at Madura—illustrates a comparatively recent style.

The architecture of the north-east is known chiefly from the drawings in Vigne's Travels in Cashmere, and in General Cunningham’s Memoir to the Asiatic Society of Bengal. The temple of Martund (fig. 34), reduced from the latter work by Mr Fergusson, shows a cloistered court surrounded by pillars and cells, and entered by a porch. In the middle of this is a temple with a species of naos and pronaos. But the most curious feature is a series of doors with acute pediments over them shaped very much like Gothic gablets, and containing trefoil arches. A similar feature occurs (fig. 35) at Pandrethan, in a temple built about 1000 a.d., or 250 years later than Martund. It seems by no means improbable that these pointed domes, gablets, and trefoiled arches may have strongly affected the architecture of the Saracens.

Of the style of North India Mr Fergusson gives remarkable, and by no means elegant, examples; as the Black Pagoda at Kannaruc, and temples at Ba-rolli and at Benares. The chief features are a sort of entrance porch, sometimes walled and sometimes carried on pillars, called the nuptial hall, leading into a great pagoda, square in plan, and finishing with a sort of tub-shaped dome. The ornamentation is profuse, so much so as to detract from the greatness of the design. There are no buildings in this style anterior to the Mahometan conquest. The date assigned to the temple of Jugemath is 1198, and to the Black Pagoda, 1241 a.d. The ghats, or landing - places (fig.

36), that line the banks of the rivers of Northern India, are often of great architectural merit.

The pagoda forms a very prominent feature in the architecture of Further India. A specimen of the Burmese style of temples is presented in the Shoë-madoo (ι.e., “golden great god”) Pagoda of Pegu (figs. 37, 38).

Assyrian Architecture.

Assyria and Babylonia or Chaldea may be shortly defined as the countries watered by the Euphrates and Tigris, lying between Armenia and the Arabian desert, and reaching down to the Persian Gulf.

The capital, Ninus or Nineveh, was taken by the Medes under Cyaxares, and some 200 years after Xenophon passed over its site, then mere mounds of earth. It remained buried until 1845, when Botta and Layard discovered the ruins of the Assyrian cities. The principal remains are those of Khorsabad, 10 miles N.E. of Mosul; of Nimroud, supposed to be the ancient Calah; and of Kouyunjik, in all probability the ancient Nineveh. In these cities are found fragments of several great buildings which seem to have been palace-temples. They were constructed chiefly of sun-dried bricks, and all that remains of them is the lower part of the walls, decorated with sculpture and paintings, portions of the pavements, a few indications of the elevation, and some interesting works connected with the drainage, Ac.

The structures were built usually on artificial mounds, and approached, it is supposed, by great flights of steps (of which remains composed of black basalt have been found at Khorsabad). They consist of series of halls and chambers of no great size, the largest hall in Sennacherib’s palace at Kouyunjik being only 200 feet by 45 feet, whereas Westminster Hall is 268 feet by 68 feet. In their proportions they are utterly unlike Egyptian structures, and they display the striking peculiarity of being elongated beyond anything known in other styles of architecture; e.g., one of the Kouyunjik halls is 122 feet long by 27 wide, another is 218 feet long by 25 wide. The great hall at Nimroud, though 162 feet by 62, was divided lengthwise in the centre by a wall 12 feet thick, leaving each side only 25 feet wide. Another peculiarity of these structures is the immense thicknes3 of the walls. Those of the Kouyunjik hall (27 feet wide) were 15 feet thick, and those of Nimroud (32 feet wide) were 26 feet thick. It has, indeed, been reckoned by Mr Fergusson, that in some of the palaces the area of the walls is as great as that of the chambers. The reason he suggests for this is that these thick walls supported a double row of columns as a clerestory under the roof, so arranged as to give light and air, while excluding the rays of the sun. He covers the halls with flat roofs, supported on columns, which being of wood have rotted or been burnt. An entirely different theory is that of Μ. Flandin, who studied the subject on the spot. He believes that the halls were vaultçd and had small windows at the springing. Μ. Victor Place has found at Khorsabad several vaults, and also terra cotta tubes, through which he believes that the vaults were lighted, just as domes were in Persia in later times. But no vault has been found large enough to span any of the wide Assyrian halls. Of their elevations there are few traces remaining. At Nimroud, what is supposed to be the tomb of Sardanapalus has its lower part, Λvhich is about 20 feet high, of solid masonry, and the rest of burnt bricks. It has slightly projecting piers, but no ornaments or mouldings. At Khorsabad and the S.E. palace of Nimroud there is some attempt at decoration, by rude semi-columns, without capitals or bases, arranged in clusters of seven, side by side, the groups being separated by recesses. A few detached pieces of moulding have been found at Khorsabad, but of the very simplest kind, and we have no vestiges of capital or entablature. Were our knowledge limited to these and a few similar remains, we should have to form but a poor idea of Assyrian art. But the sculptures have revealed to us a degree of refinement which had been previously looked for only in Greece. These sculptures lined the sides of the halls to a height of 10 feet. In them we see columns with both base and capital, and surmounted by entablatures. Sometimes the columns are combined with pilasters, as in the Greek porticos in antis. In one specimen the columns were carried on the backs of bulls, as is shown by one of the bas-reliefs, and, more conclusively still, by the beautiful small model of a winged bull brought to England By Mr George Smith, which has carved upon its back a base, just as is shown on the slabs.

In these bas-reliefs we have further—1. The façade of a palace, having at top a grand row of window openings divided by Ionic columns; 2. A small building on the banks of a river, having two columns with bases and a kind of Ionic capital, between two plain pilasters, and with rude indications of a cornice; 3. Another façade of two columns, with bases, and Corinthian capitals, between two pilasters, likewise with capitals. Over these is an entablature, somewhat rudely worked, but clearly showing architrave, frieze, and cornice, and antefixae over. The latest of these slabs must have been carved many years before the earliest date assigned to any known Greek work. In view of these and similar remains the following words of Niebuhr are memorable :—“There is a want in Grecian art which no man living can supply. There is not enough in Egypt to account for the peculiar art and mythology of Greece. But those who live after me will see on the banks of the Tigris and Euphrates the origin of Grecian mythology and art.”

The plans of all the Assyrian buildings are rectangular, and we know that long ago, as now, the Eastern architects used this outline almost invariably, and upon it reared some of the most lovely and varied forms ever devised. They gather over the angles by graceful curves, and on the basis of an ordinary square hall carry up a minaret or a dome, an octagon or a circle. That this was sometimes done in Assyria is shown by the sculptures. Slabs from Kouyunjik show domes of varied form, and tower-like structures, each rising from a square base. The resemblance between the ancient form of the dome and those still used in the Assyrian villages is very striking. Whether sloping roofs were used is uncertain. Mr Bonomi believes that they were, and a few sculptures seem to support his view. Of the private houses nothing, of course, remains; but they are represented on the slabs as being of several stories in height, the ground floor as usual having only a door and no windows. All have flat roofs, and we gather from one of the bas-reliefs, which represents a town on fire, that these roofs were made, just aβ they now are, with thick layers of earth on strong beams. These roofs are well-nigh fire proof, and the flames are represented as stopped by them, and coming out of the windows. No remains of a window, or, so far as we are aware, of an internal staircase, have been found.

Of the fortifications we know much more. In the north wall of Nimroud fifty-eight towers have been traced, and at Kouyunjik there are large remains of three walls, the lower part being of stone, and the upper of sun-dried bricks. At Khorsabad there are the remains of a wall, still 40 feet high, built of blocks of stone 3 to 4 feet thick, and the evidences wanting as to the finishing of these is completely supplied by the sculptures, which show an extraordinary resemblance to mediaeval works of the same class. Tier upon tier of walls are represented, enclosing a great tower or keep in the centre. The entrances are great arched gateways flanked by square towers. These and the other towers have overhanging parapets just like the mediaeval machicolations, and are finished at top with battlements, remains of which have been found at Nimroud and Kouyunjik, and at Kaleh Shergat, the supposed capital of Assyria before Nineveh.

Of temples distinct from the palace we have a few supposed remains, but little is absolutely known as to their general form.

But in Chaldea there are some enormous masses of ruins, evidently remains of the vast mounds which formed the substructure of their temples. The grandest of all these and the most interesting is the Birs Nimroud, near Babylon, w τ hich has been identified as the temple of the Seven Spheres at Borsippa. This was reconstructed by Nebuchadnezzar, as appears by a w ell-known inscription. Another example is at Mugeyer, which was 198 feet by 133 feet at the base, and is even now 70 feet high, and it is clear that both it and the Birs were built with diminishing stages, presenting a series of grand platforms, decreasing in length as they ascended, and leaving a comparatively small one at top for the temple cell. This has been found, it is supposed, at the Birs Nimroud, of vitrified brick.

The most interesting parts of the Assyrian edifices are the finishings. The pavements were sometimes of sun-dried bricks, at other times of baked bricks, or of alabaster slabs laid in bitumen. At Khorsabad there was one in a single block 13 feet square, and 3 ft 11 in. thick, and at the Nimroud temple there were two slabs, one 19 ft. 6 in. by 12 feet, and the other 21 feet by 16 feet, and 1 ft. 1 in. thick, both sides covered with inscriptions. Of ornamental pavements there are admirable examples from Kouyunjik at the British Museum, and from Khorsabad at the Louvre, both covered with delicate carving in alabaster of nearly the same pattern. It is difficult to conceive how such delicate work could have been used as paving, and still retain its beautiful sharpness; for it was not filled in to protect the pattern. Directly above the pavement came the sculptured slabs, which are so numerous that at Kouyunjik alone there are some 2 miles in length of them. They are generally about 10 feet high from the ground, and are carved in alabaster. Many of them show traces of having been decorated with colours. Connected with these sculptures were the great winged animals which stand one on each side of the portals of the palaces. Some of the grandest have the body and legs of a bull, with an enormous pair of wings projecting from the shoulders, high over their backs, and covering the breast. They have human heads, bull’s ears with large ear-rings, and horns, winding from the brows upwards, and encircling a coronet of leaves, bound by a fillet of roses. They stood in pairs on each side of the palace doorways, and it is thought by some that generally there were no doors or lintels, all being open to the roof and enclosed with curtains. But doors were sometimes used, as the places or recesses for the bolts, hinges, pins, or sockets have been found; and Mr Smith has discovered a doorway with its actual lintel, now in the British Museum.

Above the sculptured slabs decorations have been found of various kinds. The most lasting seem to have been of baked bricks richly coloured and glazed. At the city gate of Khorsabad blue glazed tiles with yellow reliefs have been found. Victor Place found also that the lower part of the walls near the gate were faced with coloured enamelled bricks, having human figures, lions, <tc., within an ornamental border. The arch over the gateway was also richly decorated with glazed tiles. Large remains of coloured decoration in plaster have also been found at Nimroud, &c. They were of figures outlined in black on a blue ground, and below the outer coat of plaster more extensive decorations have been found on an earlier coat. They were of various colours on a pale yellow ground. In other cases they had merely a black outline and were uncoloured. Now the difference of age between the several structures is some centuries, and it is curious to find that the earliest art works, viz., those in the N.W. palace, are the best in point of variety of detail and ornament, in severity of style and purity of outline. The later have extreme delicacy and minuteness, truth to nature and vigour of treatment, particularly in the animals, but they want, in the opinion of Mr Layard, the vigour of the old decorations. Of external decorations we have a striking account in the inscription relating to the Birs Nimroud, in which the several stages are described as being coloured as follows:—the lowest, black; the others in succession, orange, red, yellow, green, and blue. This vivid colouring may be explained by a discovery made by Mr Loftus at Warka of a wall which was richly decorated in geometrical patterns by means of small earthenware cones, the wide ends outwards and en amelled in different colours; also by Victor Place’s discovery at Khorsabad of four stages of a temple coloured in succession white, black, red, and blue.

In the Assyrian and Chaldean buildings little use was made of marble, granite, or stone, the greater part of the edifices being built with bricks,—the lower parts with burnt bricks put together with bitumen, and the rest with crude bricks and slime. Sometimes the walls were faced with burnt bricks. One wall has been found with 10 feet in thickness of burnt brick facing, and 28 feet of crude bricking,

In Assyrian art generally there is little analogy to that of

Egypt. There is some slight resemblance in the mouldings and in a few of the ornaments, but in Assyria there are no forests of columns, no grand pylons, no enormous cloistered court, and nothing to equal the gigantic pyramids or tombs of Egypt. The sphinx is superseded by the winged bull, and the slightly cut intaglio by the magnificently sculptured slab. In these early Assyrian structures there is art at a high stage of perfection, but we have no means of discovering the steps by which it was attained.

Persian Architecture.

Persia was one of the greatest of ancient nations. A.t one time it embraced all Upper Asia, and Asia Minor, Phoenicia, Egypt, Thrace, and Macedonia, and though the greatness of its glory has departed, it was still a great living nation even in the 18th century when its king Nadir Shah invaded India. Compared thus with Egypt, Assyria, and Babylonia, long since extinct, it has had a wonderful existence, reaching down from Cyrus to our own time.

We know little of its early history. It cannot be doubted, that long before the rise of the Persian power, mighty kingdoms existed in these regions, and particularly in the eastern part of Bactria, yet of those kingdoms we have by no means a consistent or chronological history— nothing but a few fragments. It is probable that from dynasties which ruled in Media properly so called, immediately previous to the Persians, the style of architecture may have been in some measure derived, though indeed we know of no remains of earlier date than those which are properly called Persian.

Of the early times of the empire no authentic remains exist, except those of the tomb of its founder, Cyrus, at Murgab or Pasargadae (east of the head of the Persian Gulf), and some of the walls, &c., of the ancient capital, Ecbatana, in North Media. The former is still in a wonderful state of preservation, but it can scarcely be reckoned amongst Persian edifices, as it is clearly a work designed by some architect from a Greek colony of Asia Minor. The tomb stands on seven bold steps of white marble, the lowest being 43 feet by 37 feet. The tomb itself is 21 feet by 16 ft. 5 in. outside, with bold mouldings to the door; it has a sloping roof of marble, with a pediment at each end, enriched with mouldings. The chamber itself is only 7 feet by 10, the walls being built up with thick blocks of marble. Near the tomb was the famous inscription, “I am Cyrus the king, the Achaemenian,” and though this is now wanting, recent discoveries seem to have disinterred the stone which had borne it, and which had been torn away. Round the tomb outside had evidently been a colonnade of 24 columns, fragments of which, with the bases, alone remain. They resemble those commonly used by the Greeks. This singular structure seems to have been unique in Persia. It is evidently the work of a foreigner, although the outline may represent, as is supposed, a temple. The famous walls of Ecbatana, the ancient capital, are said to have been 75 feet broad and 105 high, its stones 9 feet by 4 ft. 6 in., and its gateways 100 feet high and 60 wide. The remains, however, show walls only 12 feet wide, stones only 2 feet by 1 ft. 2 in., and a gateway only 12 feet high and 10 feet wide. They deserve particular mention on account of their being among the earliest examples of constructive colouring on a grand scale. The walls are said to have been seven in number, one over the other on the sides of a conical hill, and coloured in succession, white, black, scarlet, blue, orange, silver, and the innermost gilt. From what has been discovered at Warka (see above), it is possible that this gorgeous description may have been founded on fact; and we know that the Easterns in early times were profuse in their employment of glazed coloured bricks.

Of the domestic structures of the same early time we have no remains, but it would appear that the grander buildings had courts, surrounded by colonnades, somewhat in the Egyptian style, the columns and beams being of wood, coloured, and sometimes gilt, or coated with metal. Above was a sloping roof. We learn particularly from this that the Persian or Median architects were thoroughly well used to a wooden construction.

Some 50 years after Cyrus, the chief buildings at Persepolis and Susa were constructed; large portions still remain, and form some of the grandest ruins in existence. Of these we have measured drawings worked out by Messrs Texier and Flandin, from which we derive the chief part of our knowledge, although we have very interesting accounts by Sir R. K. Porter, Mr Rich, Mr Morier, Mr Loftus, &c. The existing buildings at Persepolis occupy a remarkable position on an elevated platform (partly, it would seem, artificial) at the foot of a steep rock in the face of which were cut out the tomb chambers of the Persian kings. The platform was 1425 feet on the west side, and 926 feet on the north, about the size of the Horticultural Gardens in London, including the arcades and conservatory. It was raised about 40 feet above the level of the adjoining country, and faced with a wall, built with stones of an immense size. The platform was approached by the grandest flight of steps in the world, each step being 22 feet long. Having scaled these, the stranger would pass through the first building, viz., the Propylaeum of Xerxes, a building whose remains have given rise to several theories as to its original plan and purpose. There remain two grand gateways 24 feet apart, with portions, more or less perfect, between these, of four columns 45 feet high. The gateways had openings of 13 feet, and each of their piers was partly composed of bulls, admirably executed, and strikingly like the Assyrian sculptures at the Louvre from Khorsabad. The human heads of these animals are crowned with coronets of leaves, and from the top of the coronets to the hoofs, the animal measures 19 feet. Nothing further has been discovered which would throw light on the general plan of the building. Mr Fergusson believes that it was enclosed and roofed, and served as a justice hall, or place of assembly at the entrance of the palace. Μ. Flandin’s idea is, that the structure was a mere open portico roofed, but without walls, except perhaps for a few feet in height. Through this structure was the entrance to the grand palace, the Chehil Minar, t.e., hall of 40 columns, an Eastern mode of expressing a great many, as there were really 72. It was approached by a magnificent staircase, each step of which served as a pedestal to a figure (1 ft. 9 in. high) in bas-relief, the whole representing a procession, and of great value as giving the varied costumes, <fcc., of the period. The columns of the palace are arranged in four divisions, viz., one of 36 columns in the centre, and three each of 12 columns in two rows, divided from the centre by a space of about 60 feet. Of all these only 10 are standing, but the bases of most remain, and the whole ground is covered with the ruins of the columns that have fallen. Their height varied from 60 feet (including capital and base) in the front division, to 67 ft. 4 in. in the centre one. In these columns there is an advance upon the architecture of Egypt, for they have bases, richly carved, and capitals of a form unknown to our art, before or since. The typical form is that of the double-headed bull with a deep cavity between the heads, evidently intended to hold a beam. There is a quaint grandeur about these columns, from their design and their gigantic size. The capitals of one division, the western, are 7 feet high, and 12 ft. 2 in. wide, whilst the shafts, 54 ft. 10 in. high, are each composed of only four great marble blocks. Unfortunately we have only fragments of these buildings, with no history or tradition to guide us as to their perfect forms. There are no walls, no doorways, and no roofs. Mr Fergusson in his restoration places walls between the several divisions, and thus forms them into one grand, enclosed structure, with a mass of columns in the centre, and three porticoes at the sides. He also believes that there was an upper story, to which, indeed, some Persian writers have alluded. Sir R. K. Porter’s restoration, with that of Messrs Flandin, Coste, and Texier, is quite different. They believe that the four groups of columns were isolated and had no enclosing walls, but were simply screened by curtains; that the centre division had a flat roof with an opening in the centre, protected by an awning, for light and ventilation; that the roof, cornices, and superstructure of all kinds, were of wood, as no fragment of a stone cornice, lintel, or tile has been found. Now it so happens that at Susa there was another great palace, similar, or nearly so, in size and plan to that at Persepolis, and with an inscription showing it to have been built by Artaxerxes Mnemon, son of Xerxes. The height of the columns is unknown, but the capitals and bases correspond closely with those at Persepolis. The capitals have singular volutes under the double bull’s heads, the whole being 28 feet high, the capitals alone being thus as high as the columns and bases together of St Martin’s, London. Mr Loftus examined this structure carefully, and satisfied himself that no walls had ever existed. In addition to this an ancient drain has been found at Persepolis, in the very line which one of the main walls must have occupied. Mr Loftus therefore agrees with Sir R. K. Porter and the others in their restoration. The description in Esther i. 6, has been supposed to refer to this palace. Two other structures at Fersepolis were really enclosed—viz., the palaces of Darius and Xerxes. Each has the four divisions of columns, as at the Chehil Minar and Susa; but the jambs to the doors and other portions of the enclosure still remain.

These were clearly places for habitation. A still larger enclosed building, the hall of 100 columns, has also left gigantic fragments. The size and arrangement are unknown; but it must have been about 225 feet square, and enclosed by walls, some of the doorways and blank windows of which remain. The excavated tombs of the kings, high up in the face of the mountain, just as described by Diodorus, are the only other important remains of ancient Persia,

To sum up as to our knowledge of Persian art, the greater part of the remains are columnar, not an edifice is built on the Assyrian plan, and there is little to remind us oi Assyria except the human headed bull. The doors and windows somewhat resemble those of Egypt. They have the same plain architrave, the large roll, cavetto, and fillet at top. But the sides of the portals are straight; there are no massive pylons, and the whole character of the columns, bases, and capitals is utterly unlike any known remains of Egyptian or Assyrian art. By what stages the Persian architects arrived at the singular work at Persepolis and Susa we cannot now judge. All we know is that Persian art was developed contemporaneously with that oi Greece, though with utterly different results. The elegant form of the Greek temples, the curve of the Assyrian arch, would seem to have been unknown to the Persians, who, it appears likely, worked out their latest forms by gradua) stage?, from the early structures of wood, and thus originated a style, grand, picturesque, and in its ruins beautiful, but well-nigh isolated in the history of art, there being nothing from which it was quite copied, and nothing which seems quite to have sprung from it.

The few remains which exist of a later date are separated from the above as widely in architectural forms as in chronology. Neither the Greek Seleucidae nor the Parthian Arsacidae have left any buildings (of importance at least) which can be identified; and the well-known edifices at Serbistan, Firouzabad, and Ctesiphon, are late in the time of the Sassanidae. The two former edifices have domes rising from square bases and lighted by small apertures, as Victor Place suggests was the case at Khorsabad, and each is approached, as was the Khorsabad palace, through a deep vaulted entrance. At Ctesiphon this vault is 115 feet deep, 72 wide, and 85 high. Of the famous palace at Dastageod (Artemita), 60 miles north of Ctesiphon, described by the Byzantine writer, Theophanes, no remains are known to exist; but Dr Tristram has discovered at Mashita, in the land of Moab, a palace with its enclosing walls, richly decorated with carving, <fcc., which Mr Ferguson considers to have been built by Chosroes shortly before the Arab invasion. The edifice is minutely described and illustrated in Tristram’s Land of Moab. Architecture of Asia Minor.

Little was known of the antiquities of Asia Minor until, in 1838 and 1840, Sir C. Fellows discovered in its northwestern corner eleven ruined and deserted cities. It was reasonable to think that in these we should have the missing link between Assyrian and Greek art. But although a few of the sculptures show traces of Assyrian influence, and though the later structures are very similar to those of Greece, the productions of native art seem quite isolated and peculiar. The most ancient remains are considerably later than such masterpieces of skill as the tomb of Agamemnon at Mycenae, and the great works of later times were erected long after the Parthenon.

The earliest works remaining are singularly like the Etruscan graves so often found in Italy. Perhaps the first of these is the tomb at Tantalais near Smyrna, which has simply a square chamber, ceiled with a pointed arch, formed with oversailing courses, and all covered with a tumulus. Like to it is the tomb of Alyattes, king of Lydia, on the bank of the Hermus, near Sardis. It has also one chamber, 11 feet by 8, and 7 feet high, in the centre of a circular pyramid, not sloping directly from the ground, as in Egypt, but having a high moulded stereobate, at the starting, some f mile round. This structure would create no surprise if found in Tuscany; and still more to increase the resemblance to Etruscan work, it appears to have been surmounted by five stone pillars. Of the tombs which belong to the races between the above and the time when Greek art was introduced or was invented, the rudest are, perhaps, to be found in Caria. They are sarcophagi, and those at Olinda, e.g., are of enormous size, ranged on each side of the street leading to the city. In the simplest form a cavity was made in a great stone for the body, and a heavy lid put over it, coped, or rising as a pediment in centre. Generally they were plain and oblong in shape. In Lycia, chiefly on the banks of the Xanthus, are found other sepulchres of remarkably singular form. We look in vain for their prototypes, or anything copied from them.. The most simple are cut in the steep rocks which invariably overhang the cities, and are often curiously like Elizabethan windows, with mullions and panels. Some have a Gothic shaped top, which is also peculiar to Lycia, and many are finished with a pediment. Many of them show evident traces of having been copied in stone from wooden originals. For they are shown with joints put together with dovetails and pins, and with cornices like the ends of round trees; not actually so constructed, but all carved out of one solid mass. The designs of these rock-cut tombe were then still further elaborated in the detached monuments. The earlier ones, indeed, are much more simple, and are known as the obelisk tombs, being merely great high blocks of stone or marble, standing on a square base and surmounted by a cornice. They have not the real obelisk form, and have got the name merely on account of their height. In the grander works, the obelisk is surmounted by a sarcophagus of great size, coped with the pointed arch, with mullions and panels as above detailed, and all bearing signs of a wooden origin. Some are of enormous size, the stones weighing 50 to 80 tons. The different parts of the edifice were hollowed out for coffins, a plan of sepulture little known elsewhere. These singular tombs are found all through Lycia, but a beautiful variety of them, found only at Xanthus, has the ridge stone grooved to receive an ornamental crest, sometimes richly sculptured. These singular structures are separated by a wide interval from the forms of Greek art; but that their design was, to some extent, adopted and used by the Greeks, we have various signal proofs. The Harpy tomb, whose sculptures are in the British Museum, is supposed to have been erected so late even as after the capture of Xanthus by the Persians in 547. It has the chief Lycian peculiarities, a base 6 feet high, carrying a square shaft 17 feet high in one block, weighing some 80 tons, and surmounted by a cap stone of 15 tons weight. Near the top, on each face, was carved the famous Harpy frieze. Near this was another, known as the Chimaera tomb, having the Gothic headed sarcophagus, and with a sculptured crest. And near to this again, was another of a similar kind, called the Winged Horse tomb. Doubtless these and other works, both in Lycia and Caria, were wrought by Lycian workmen under Greek guidance, but they seem to have made no lasting impression upon the architecture of the Greeks.

Grecian Architecture.

Hitherto, we have found that, in each country, the artistic forms used in the earliest periods descended to later times, which embodied to some extent the traditionary forms bequeathed to them. Even the Egyptian pyramids, unarchitectural as they are, were copied down to the 7th or 8th century in Nubia, and the earliest columnar architecture clearly shows itself as simply the beginning of a series of works extending from 2000 b.c. even to the Caesars. But in Greece the earliest works are entirely separated from the later by an absolute break both in architectural forms and construction. In various parts of Greece and of Italy, specimens of rude walling are found of such remote antiquity, that they are, as by common consent, referred to the fabulous ages, and, for want of a more distinctive term, are called Cyclopean. Now it appears, from the concurring evidence, in the opinion of most antiquaries, that a people who have been called Pelasgi, or sailors, migrated from Asia Minor, or the coast of Syria, at a very early period, and possessed themselves of various countries, some of which were unoccupied, and others inhabited by Celtic tribes. Professor Heeren, who affixes dates to the various migrations, expressly says that the Pelasgi were of Asiatic origin. “Their first arrival in the Peloponnesus was under Inachus, about 1800 B.C., and according to their own traditions,” he says, “they made their first appearance in this quarter as uncultivated savages. They must, however, at an early period have made some progress towards civilisation, since the most ancient states, Argos and Sicyon, owed their origin to them; and to them, perhaps with great probability, are attributed the remains of those most ancient monuments generally termed Cyclopie.” He adds, that the Hellenes, a people of Asiatic origin also, expelled the Pelasgi from almost every part of Greece, about 300 years after their first occupation of it; the latter keeping their footing only in Arcadia and in the land of Dodona, whilst some of them migrated to Italy, and others to Crete and various islands. The arrival of the Egyptian and Phoenician colonies in Greece, Professor Heeren thinks, was between 1600 and 1400 b.c. The most ancient specimen of Cyclopie walling is found at Tiryns, near Mycenae. It is is composed of huge masses of rock roughly hewn and piled up together, with the interstices at the angles filled up by small stones, but without mortar or cement of any kind. The next species is in stones of various sizes also, shaped polygonally, and fitted with nicety one to another, but not laid in courses. Specimens of this are found at Iulis and Delphi, as well as at the places already mentioned, in Greece, and in various parts of Italy, particularly at Cossa, a town of the Volsci This also was constructed without mortar. The mode of building walls, which took the place of that, is not called Cyclopean; it is in parallel courses of rectangular stones, of unequal size, but of the same height. This was, however, often used in combination with the polygonal, as in one very beautiful specimen at Rhamnus. The parallel masonry is common in the Phocian cities, and in some parts of Boeotia and Argolis. To that succeeded the mode most common in, and which was chiefly confined to, Attica. It consists of horizontal courses of masonry, not always of the same height, but composed of rectangular stones.

The oldest existing structure in Greece of regular form is of far superior construction to the Cyclopean walling, and must be referred to early colonists. It is at Mycenae, and consists of two subt erranean chambers, one much larger than the other. The outer and larger one is circular, and is entered by a huge doorway at the end of a long avenue of colossal walls, built in nearly parallel courses of rect-εngular stones, roughly hewn, however, and laid without mortar. Its external effect is that of an excavation, though the structure of the front is evident; and internally it assumes the form of an immense lime-kiln; its vertical section being of a conical form, with nearly parabolic curves, like a pointed arch. The construction of this edifice was thought to afford clear evidence that the Greeks were acquainted with the properties of the arch; but in the most material point this was destroyed on finding that it consisted of parallel projecting courses of stone in horizontal layers, in the manner called by our workmen battering, or perhaps more correctly, corbelling. It proves, however, that its architect understood the principle of the arch in its horizontal position; for Mr Cockerell discovered, by excavations above it, that the diminishing rings of which the dome is composed were complete in themselves for withstanding outward pressure; the joints of the stones being partly wrought radiating, and partly rendered so by wedges of small stones driven tightly into them behind. The apex is formed, not by a key-stone, for the construction does not admit of that, but by a covering stone, which is merely laid on the course immediately below it. It may be added, that internally the lower projecting angles of the stones are worked off to follow the general outline. Though this is the largest and most perfect, its internal diameter at the base being 48 ft. 6 in., and its height from the floor to the covering stone 45 feet, yet edifices exhibiting similar structure are found in many other places in Greece itself, in Egypt, in Sicily, and in Italy. They all, however, tend to prove, that the principle of the construction of the vertical arch was unknown at the time of their erection in all those countries; and their erection is evidently of the most remote antiquity. But neither could the mechanical powers have been unknown to their constructors. In the edifice which we have described, and which is thought by some to be the treasury of Atreus, or the tomb of his son Agamemnon, mentioned by Pausanias as existing among the ruins of Mycenae in his time, the inner lintel of the doorway is 27 feet in length, 16 feet deep, and nearly 4 feet thick, weighing, it is computed, upwards of 130 tons; and the lintel of the Gate of the Lions in the Acropolis of the same city, is, from its immense magnitude, also strongly illustrative of the great mechanical skill of the people of those times.

As no nation has ever equalled the Egyptians in the extent and magnitude of their architectural monuments, neither have the Greeks been surpassed in the exquisite beauty of form and proportion, in the extreme simplicity and perfect harmony, which pervade every part of their structures. Unfortunately these monuments are known to us only by their ruins, for there is not a Grecian building remaining in a perfect state. In Greece proper, at least, this was not so until a comparatively recent date, viz., that of the war between the Venetians and Turks. The Parthenon itself was nearly perfect until that time, when it was shattered by an explosion of gunpowder (1687).

First in importance in Grecian architecture is the use of the three orders, Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian, with the peculiar mouldings, &c., connected with each. The Doric and Ionic columns, rudely drawn, appear on the early Etruscan or Greek vases. They are very slender, with large projecting capitals and with entablatures, which indicate pretty clearly copies from a construction of wood. Buildings, much as these, and all of wood, are described by Sir C. Fellows as still being constructed in Lycia. That columns of wood were used in the ancient temples of Greece we know from such notices as we have, e.g., of an old wooden column which was preserved in the temple of Juno at Olympia, as having been one of those of a former temple. But a doubt is thrown on the theory that in these light wooden structures we see the origin of the orders, by the earliest stone columns known being the most massive and if we turn to Egypt, the mother of the arts and sciences, we shall find many things in some of the most ancient structures which may have furnished an idea of the Doric arrangements to the fertile imagination of the Greek. Allusion has already been made to the well-known façade at Beni Hassan, on the Nile, as giving us a very likely prototype of the Grecian Doric column.

Of the triglyph, the most distinguishing part of the Doric entablature, there are many indications in the early works of Upper Egypt; and in the structures of the Ptolemies they are still more evident, though it may be objected that in them the indications were borrowed from the Greeks after the Macedonian conquest. But it must be borne in mind that the Egyptian nation did not change its character, religion, or usages by the change of its governors; and the Egyptians were, through the whole period of their existence as a nation, an originating and not an imitative people; whereas the Greeks seized on a beauty wherever they found one, and made it their own by improving it. To the question, why the Greeks cannot be allowed to have originated that beautiful style of architecture which they brought to the perfection it displays in their works, it may be sufficient to answer, that it would be against the common course of events if it were so. It is remarkable that, in Greece, the earliest specimen of columnar architecture that presents itself displays the chief characteristics which are found in works of periods when learning and civilisation were at their acme in that country.

It will be convenient to give here at the outset a list of the principal Greek buildings.

Tabular List of Principal Greek Temples, <kc. [table]

The Grecian Doric (Plates VIII., IX., X.)

Vitruvius gives several accounts of the origin of the Greek Doric order. He states first that “Dorus (the son of Hellenus and of the nymph Orseis), king of Achaia and of all the Peloponnesus, having formerly built a temple to Juno in the ancient city of Argos, this temple was found by chance to be in that manner which we call Doric.” In another place he deduces the arrangements of the order from those of a primitive log hut, settling with the utmost precision what, in the latter, suggested the various parts in the former. But he also tells us that the Doric column was modelled by the Grecian colonists in Asia Minor in the proportions of a human figure, and was made six diameters in height, because a man was found to be 6 times the length of his foot. But this story, even supposing it to be rational, does not coincide with the Greek Doric at all, but, if with anything, with the Boman.

In the Greek examples, this order may be divided into three parts, stylobate, column, and entablature (Plate VIII. fig. 4). The stylobate is from two-thirds to a whole diameter of the column in height, in three equal courses, which recede gradually the one above from the one below it, and on the floor or upper step the column rests. That graduation, it may be remarked, does not appear to have been made by the ancients to facilitate the access to the floor of the stoa or portico, but on the principle of the spreading footings of a wall, to give both real and apparent firmness to the structure, both of which it does in an eminent degree.

The column varies in height in dififerent examples, from four diameters, as at Corinth, to six diameters, as at Sunium. Of this the capital, including the necking, is rather less than half a diameter; in those cases in which a necking does not exist, the capital itself occupies nearly the same proportion (Plate VIII. figs. 4 and 9; Plate IX. fig. 4). The shaft diminishes in a slightly curved line, called an entasis, from its base or inferior diameter upwards to the hypotrachelium, where the diameter is from two-thirds to four-fifths of that at the base. It is the inferior diameter that is always intended when the term is used as a measure of proportion. The capital consists of a necking, an echinus or ovolo, and an abacus; the necking is about one-fifth of the height of the capital, and the other two members equally divide the remaining four-fifths; when there is no necking, the ovolo occupies the greater proportion of the whole height. The abacus is a square tablet, whose sides are rather more than the inferior diameter of the column. The corbelling of the ovolo adapts it to both the diminished head of the shaft and the extended abacus, flowing into the one, and forming a bed for the other by means of a graceful cyma-reversa; but its lower part is encircled by three or four rings or annulets, which are variously formed in different examples, and which give the echinus form to the great moulding, although it is, as we have said, part of a cyma-reversa. (Figs. 6 and 7 of Plates VIII. and IX.) The shaft· is divided generally into twenty flutes; but there are several examples with sixteen, and there is one with twenty-four. The flutes are sometimes segments of circles, sometimes semi-ellipses, and sometimes eccentric curves (Plate VIIL fig. 12; Plate IX. figs. 8, 14.) They always meet in an arris or edge, and follow the entasis and diminution of the column up through the hypotrachelium to the annulets, under which they finish, sometimes with a straight and sometimes with a curved head. At the base they detail on the pavement or floor of the stylobate. In one example at Segesta the columns are not fluted at all, and in two others, at Cnidus and Delos, the flutes are marked at top and bottom only, but in these examples the columna were possibly not finished.

The third part of the order, the entablature, ranges in various examples from one diameter and three-quarters to rather more than two diameters in height, of which about four-fifths is nearly equally divided between the architrave and frieze, while the cornice occupies the remaining one-fifth: this is in some cases exactly the distribution of the entablature. (See Plate VIII. fig. 5; Plate IX. fig. 5.) The architrave is in one broad face, four-fifths, and sometimes five-sixths of its whole height; and the remaining fifth or sixth is given to a projecting continuous fillet called the taenia, which occupies one-half the space, and a regula or small lintel attached to it, in lengths equal to the breadth of the triglyphs above in the frieze. From the regulae six small cylindrical drops, called guttae, depend. There are examples to the contrary, but it may be taken as a general rule, that the architrave is not in the same vertical line with the upper face of the shaft, or its circumferential line, at the superior diameter, but is projected nearly so much as to impend the line or face of the column at the base. In one example only is the architrave known to be sculptured, viz., at Assos, where it has bas-reliefs of bulls fighting. The frieze, vertically, is plain about six-sevenths of its whole height, and is bounded above by a fascia, slightly projecting from it,which occupies the remaining seventh. Horizontally, however, it is divided into triglyphs and metopes, which regulate the intercolumniations; the former being nearly a semidiameter in width, and the latter (the space interposed between two triglyphs) generally an exact square, its breadth being equal to the whole height of the frieze, including the fascia. This latter breaks round the triglyphs horizontally, and is a little increased in depth on them. These metopes are shown on the vases to be holes between the ends of beams, and that the metopes were, at one time, open, seems to be proved by a passage in Euripides, who lived during the construction of the Parthenon. No example, however, early or late, remains to support this view. Each glyph, of which there are two whole ones and two halves to every tablet, is one-fifth of the width of the whole, and the interglyphs are each one-seventh of the whole tablet or triglyph. The glyphs detail on the taenia of the architrave, but are variously finished above. In some examples they are nearly square-headed, with the angles rounded off; in others the heads are regular curves, from a fiat segment to a semi-ellipse. The semiglyphs are finished above in a manner peculiar to themselves, with a turn or drop; but hardly two examples correspond in that particular. The tablets in which the glyphs are cut are vertical to the face of the architrave, the metopes recede from them like sunk panels; these are often charged with sculptures, and indeed almost appear contrived to receive them. The third and crowning part of the entablature, the cornice, in what may be considered the best examples, projects from the face of the triglyphs and architrave about its own height. Vertically, it is divided into four equal parts, one of which is given to a square projecting fillet at the top, with a small congeries of mouldings, different, and differently proportioned to each other, in various examples. Two other parts are given to the corona, and the remaining fourth to a narrow sunk face below it, with the mutules and their guttae. These latter form the soffit or planceer of the cornice, which is not horizontal or at right angles to the vertical face of the entablature generally, but is cut up inwards at an angle of about 80°. The width of the mutules themselves is regulated by that of the triglyphs over which they are placed, to which it is exactly equal. They are ornamented each with three rows of six small cylinders, similar to those which depend from the regulae under the triglyphs and on the architrave. There is twice the number of mutules that there is of triglyphs, one of the former being placed over every metope also in the manner the examples indicate.

This completes the Greek Doric order according to the generally received sense of the term; but there are other parts necessary to it. In the front or on the ends of a temple, or over a portico, a pediment is placed (Plate IX. fig. 1). Its intention is to enclose the ends of the roof, but it forms no less a part of the architectural composition. In reason, it should be raised as much as the roof required; but when the span is great that would be unsightly; and reference appears to have been made to the common standard of proportion, as the pediments of most Doric temples are found to be about one diameter and a half in height at the apex of the tympanum, which in a hexastyle arrangement makes an angle at the base of about 14°, and in an octastyle about 12j o . The pediment is covered by the cornice, without its mutules, rising from the point of its crowning fillet, so that no part of it is repeated in pro file. Another moulding, however, is superimposed: sometimes this is an ovolo with a fillet over it, and sometimes a cymatium. It varies much in its proportion to the cornice, but in the best examples it is about one-half the depth of the latter without its mutules. Ornaments of various kinds, statues or foliage, are believed to have been placed on the apices and at the feet of pediments as acroteria. Of these, however, we have the remains of one only (a very beautiful one), viz., at Aegina; but indications of the plinths or blocks which may have received them exist, and such things appear represented on ancient coins and medallions. The tympana of pediments are well known as receptacles of ornamental sculpture. On the flank of a Doric temple, the cornice supported a row of ornamented tiles called antefixae. These formed a rich and appropriate ornament, but they rather belonged to the roof than to the columnar arrangement or order. The antefixae covered the ends of the joint-tiles as the pediments did those of the roofs; and corresponding ornaments called stelai rose out of the apices of the jointtiles, forming a highly enriched ridge (see Plate VIII. fig. 1).

A secondary Doric order arises in the disposition of a Grecian temple, from the columns of the pronaos and the inner part of the external entablature continued and repeated. Of this the frieze is generally without triglyphs, though there may be regulae and guttae on the architrave. The fascia of the frieze is either moulded or enriched on the face; and, instead of a cornice, the beams of the ceiling are laid at equal intervals to support sunk panels or coffers, in which there may be flowers or other enrichments (Plate VIII. fig. 8).

Propriety in the composition and arrangement of antae is as necessary to the perfection of the Doric order as to that of the columnar ordinance itself, especially if thθ latter be in antis. Slight projections are made on the end and side faces of a wall, so as to form a species of pilaster, whose front shall be nearly equal to the diameter of the columns to which it is attached, exactly equal indeed to the soffit of the entablature, whose faces have been described as impending the circumferential line of the column at a little above its base. This rests on the stylobate in the same manner as the columns do, with sometimes a small continuous moulding as a base; and its capital is a congeries of mouldings, about the depth of the abacus, with a plain fascia corresponding to the ovolo of the columnar capital. The entablature of the order to which it is attached rests on it, and, continuing along the flank of the building, is received by a similar combination at the other end. These, it may be remarked, were seldom diminished or fluted, an example at Paestum being about the only exception. Being projections from and upon the ends and faces of walls, they could not be diminished without involving an absurdity, and fluting on a straight surface must be productive of monotony, as the flutes can only project a series of equal and parallel shadows. Not so, however, with columns, on whose rotund surface fluting produces a beautiful variety of light and shade in all their gradations, which it could not possess without that enrichment; for on a plain column neither are the lights so bright nor the shadows so dark as in the former case, nor are they so finely diffused over the whole surface in the one as in the other.

In the Parthenon the antae, as well as the columns, are without bases. In all other examples the base line of the antae is marked by a few small mouldings. In the only example which occurs in the ancient architectural remains of attached Doric columns—that of the pseudo-peripteral temple of Jupiter Olympius at Agrigentum—the stylobate is peculiarly arranged. The upper gradus is grooved, and detailed round the columns and along the walls between them; and a congeries of vertically arranged mouldings and fillets rests on it, and receives the base of the column.

As before stated, the earliest examples of columns are the heaviest; they are also the most tapering, and there are some other details which help us in identifying the date of a Doric edifice in Greece proper. The hypotrachelium in early examples, as at Corinth, has three grooves; in later, as the Parthenon, only one. The contour also of the chief member, the echinus, varied at different dates. In the earliest it was full and round, as at Corinth, and at Assos (the latter having the greatest curve of any known example); sometimes possibly, as at Segesta, struck with the compass, but almost always part of a conic section (parabola). In later times it became less curved, and in the finest examples almost flat, as in the Propylaeum and Parthenon, but still forming part of a very delicate curve (hyperbola). In one case, at Selinus, where, to an inexperienced eye, the whole temple would appear to be of the same date, the differences alluded to contrast very strongly with each other. In the very late times of Greek work, when art became debased, the coarse round form of earlier work is exhibited, as in the Agora. The width of the abacus in early examples, as Corinth, is as much as two-sevenths the height of the shaft and cap. In later examples it diminishes to one-fifth. And as the column, so the entablature was more massive in the early examples, except in the colonies, where the old proportions continued to a late period. At Paestum the proportion of entablature to column is as 1 to 2 - 4; Aegina, 1 to 2 5 3; Theseum, 1 to 3 nearly.

Such are the materials of which the Greeks composed those beautiful temples, whose peculiar effect and character arise from their simplicity and harmony. These qualities are visible in the long unbroken lines which bound their forms, and the breadth, boldness, and fitness of every part. The entablature, though massive, is fully upborne by the columns, whose spreading abaci receive it, and transmit the weight downwards by the shafts, which rest on a horizontal and spreading basement,—the magnitude of every part, as before remarked, being determined by the capacity of the sustaining power. Besides graceful and elegant outline, and simple and harmonious forms, these structures exhibit a wonderful variety of light and shade, arising from the judicious contour and arrangement of mouldings, every one of which is rendered expressive. The effect is heightened by the fluting of the columns and the peculiar form of the columnar capital, with its broad square abacus, which projects a deep shadow on the bold ovolo. The play of light aud shade about the insulated columns is strongly modified by the deep shadows on the walls behind them; and in front, where the inner columns appear, the effect is enchanting. For all the higher effects which architecture is capable of producing, a Greek peripteral temple of the Doric order is perhaps unrivalled.

The Grecian Ionic (Plate XL)

Of this beautiful and graceful order it is as difficult to determine the origin as of the Doric. The explanation of Vitruvius is that the Ionian colonists, on building a temple to Diana, wished to find some new manner that was beautiful Following the method which they had pursued with the Doric (proportioning the column according to the dimensions of a man), they imparted to this the delicacy of the female figure—in the first place, by making the diameter of the column one-eighth of its height, then by putting a base to it in twisted cords, like the sandals of a woman, and forming the capital with volutes, like the hair which hangs on both sides of her face. To crown all, he says that they channelled or fluted the column to resemble the folds of female garments, by which it would appear that Vitruvius did not know that the Greeks never executed the Doric order without fluting the columns. “Thus,” he goes on to say, “they invented these two species of columns, imitating in the one the naked simplicity and dignity of a man, and in the other the delicacy and the ornaments of a woman.”

From the recent discoveries in Assyria, however, there can be no reasonable doubt that the Greek colonists of Ionia at least obtained their idea of the Ionic capital from Nineveh. As to its earliest forms great differences of opinion exist. An extremely plausible theory, originated and ably worked out by Mr Skidmore, suggests that the delicate Ionic curls were copied from the curved ornamental wire-work of the goldsmiths. On the other hand, a recent French author has found in Sicily a rudely carved capital which is little more than a block of stone with the ends rounded off, the curve being continued, and thus forming a volute; and it is very possible that a crude idea like this might have been worked out, with some help from Assyria, into one of the many forms of the Ionic capitals.

Of this graceful and elegant style we take the proportions and peculiarities from the perfect examples of the Athenian Acropolis. This order may also be considered in three similar parts, stylobate, column, and entablature. The stylobate is in three receding equal courses or steps, whose united height is from four-fifths to one diameter. The column, consisting of base, shaft, and capital, is rather more than nine diameters in height; of which the base is two-fifths of a diameter, and the capital, including tho hypotrachelium, is in one case three-fourths, and in the other seven-eighths of a diameter high. As shown in the vases, it is invariably very long and slender, and without bases; but no actual example remains to us without a base. The base consists of a congeries of mouldings extending gradually from a diameter and a third to a diameter and a half, and its height is in three nearly equal parts, two equal fillets separating them. The lowest, a torus, rests on the top of the stylobate or floor of the portico, a fillet divides that from the scotia, a second fillet intervenes between the scotia and a second torus, and a third fillet bases the apophyge or escape of the shaft The upper torus of the base is, in one example, fillet-fluted horizontally; and in the other, the same member is enriched with the guillochos. The shaft diminishes with entasis from its lower or whole diameter to above five-sixths of it immediately under the hypotrachelium. It is fluted with twenty-four flutes and alternating fillets, which follow the diminution and entasis of the column. The flutes in plan are nearly semi-ellipses, and they finish at both ends with the same curve; a fillet is in thickness nearly one-fourth the width of a flute. The difference in the height of the capital is in the length of the necking, which in one case is separated from the head of the shaft by a carved bead, and in the other by a plain fillet. Above the necking, a height of about one-third of a diameter is occupied by a congeries of three spreading or corbelling mouldings—a bead, an ovolo, and a torus—which are all appropriately carved. On these rests the parallelogramic block, on whose faces are the volutes, and whose ends are concaved into what is technically termed a bolster to connect them. This part is about one-third of a diameter in height, and includes a rectilinear abacus, whose edges are moulded to an ovolo and carved with the egg and tongue ornament. The volutes are three-fifths of a diameter in depth, and extend in front to one diameter and a half; and they are nearly a semi· diameter apart. The volutes and the flowing lines which connect them are represented in figs. 5 and 9, Plate XI. The bolsters are fluted vertically with alternate fillets, on which are carved beads. An ornament composed of the honeysuckle with tendrils encircles the necking of the column It must be remarked, that as the capitals are parallelogramic, and present but two similar fronts, to preserve the appearance of volutes externally on all sides, the capitals of the columns at the external angles of porticoes are differently arranged (compare figs. 15 and 16). The outer volute is bent out at an angle of 45°, and volutes are put on the end or side-front of the capital also, the outer one being the other side of the angular volute of the front. To suit the angle internally, the two volutes of the inner face are placed at right angles to each other: this is, however, at best but an awkward expedient, and need not be employed when a portico projects only one intercolumniation. All the Greek volutes are flat on the surface, except ât Bassae, where the volutes are curved.

The entablature, which is rather more than two diameters in height, is also divided into three parts,—architrave, frieze, and cornice,—which may be proportioned by dividing the whole height into five parts, four of which, as in the Doric, may be again equally divided between the architrave and frieze The cornice, however, in the example referred to, does not occupy one-fifth of the entablature; but if it had a fillet over the upper moulding, which it appears to want, that would be just its proportion. If the architrave (fig. 8) be divided into nine parts, seven of them may be given to three equal fascias, which slightly project the one before the other, the first or lowest, which is vertical to the circumferential line of the inferior diameter, being covered by the second, and the second by the third. The remaining two-ninths form a band of mouldings corbelling a broad fillet, which separates the architrave from the frieze; these mouldings are enriched. The frieze (fig. 7), which doe3 not project quite so much as the lowest fascia of the architrave, is, in the Athenian examples, quite plain; but it may be enriched with foliage, or made the receptacle of sculpture in low relief. In two examples (one at Selinus, and another at Agrigentum) the frieze has the Doric triglyph. The cornice (fig. 6) projects from the face of the frieze rather more than as much as its whole height, and is composed of bed-mouldings, a corona, and crown-mouldings The first are a carved bead and carved cyma-reversa, the former of which only occupies a portion of the height of the cornice, as the planceer is cut up inwards, in the manner represented by dotted lines in the figure, to a sufficient depth for it; the crown mouldings, which consist of a carved ovolo above a carved bead, are rather more than one-fourth of the whole cornice; and the corona occupies the rest of its height, except that small portion given to the bead of the bed-mould. A fillet above the crown-mouldings, as already intimated, is certainly necessary to complete the order and receive the antefixae, as described in the Doric, for the flank of a temple.

The pediments in the examples of Ionic are flatter than in those of the Doric, the angle made by the covering cornice with the base being, in a hexastyle, less than 14°. A vertical fillet, with a small moulding, equal in depth to the two crown-mouldings of the cornice, covers them in the pediment, in the place of the cyma-recta or ovolo used in the Doric order. The intercolumniation differs in these examples; in the one it is two diameters, and in the other three diameters and one-sixth.

A much greater variety is found in the composition of the Ionic than of the Doric order. Indeed, the examples of the Athenian Acropolis alone have neckings. In all the others the shaft runs up to the corbelled mouldings which bed the block of the volutes, and the flutes finish under them. Neither have they a torus in that congeries, but a bead and ovolo alone, the latter projecting inconveniently under the pendent lines that connect the volutes, and thus the capital is not more than half a diameter in height.

The Asiatic or the truly Ionian examples of this order are far inferior to those above referred to. Their bases are differently, and certainly less elegantly composed. They are without hypotrachelia, as may have been inferred; they want the torus in the capital; and, in most cases, instead of flowing, pendent lines, they have straight lines connecting the volutes. Their entablatures are not so finely proportioned, nor so delicately executed. The coronas want breadth, and the bed-moulds of the cornice are as much too heavy as those of Athens are perhaps too light. Indeed, upon the whole, they have more of the grossness of Roman architecture than of the delicacy and elegance of Grecian, though the Ionian examples are supposed to be the models of those of Athens. In the celebrated temple of Diana at Ephesus the columns present an almost unique example of the lower parts being sculptured Fine specimens of these are now in the British Museum. The only instance known of sculptured columns is at Narga in Nubia.

The width of the antae of the Ionic order is determined, as in the Doric, by the soffit of the entablature; and it will, of course, be exactly the same as, or rather less than, the inferior diameter of the column. It is slightly raised, too, from the face of the wall at the ends of which it stands. The base of the antae is, in one of the two examples of the Acropolis, a little deeper than that of the column, having a small projecting moulding between the lower torus and the floor; and the lower torus itself is reeded. In the. other example there is no difference in the form and proportion of the antae and columnar bases, but both the tori are fluted horizontally, with beaded fillets between the flutes. The antae cap consists of a congeries of corbelling mouldings, nearly one-third of a diameter in height. It is divided into three nearly equal parts, the lowest of which is composed of a bead and an ovolo; the second of another bead and a cyma-reversa, all carved; and the third of a plain flat cavetto, with a narrow fillet and small crowning cyma-reversa, forming an abacus (fig. 11.) The necking is like that of the capital, and is enriched in the same manner. The cap or cornice thus formed breaks round the projection of the antae, and is continued along the wall under the entablature the whole length of the building, or till it is impeded by some other construction; and the base is continued in like manner. Attached columns have the voluted capital, but their base is that of the antae; and it is detailed round them and along the wall to which they belong, as with the antae. It must be remembered, however, that the attached columns in the triple temple are about one-ninth less in diameter than those which are insulated, though they are similar in other respects, and. have the same entablature.

The back of the triple temple, between the attached columna, presents one of the only two examples in Greek architecture of windows, the other being that of the temple of the Giants at Agrigentum. These are rather more than twice their width in height, and are narrower at the top than at the bottom. They rest on a broad, bold sill, which is equal in depth to two-sixths of the opening, and are surrounded externally by a congeries of mouldings, which, with a plain fascia, constitute an architrave. This architrave is one-fourth the opening in width; it diminishes with the window, and in the same proportion, and is returned above in two knees, which are made vertical to its extreme point at the base.

The Grecian Corinthian (Plate XII.)

The traditionary tale Vitruvius relates regarding the invention of the Corinthian capital (about Callimachus and the basket on the grave of the Corinthian virgin), is the only reason for the name it bears. His account of the origin of this third species of columnar composition is even more absurd than what he gives of the other orders. He says that it-was arranged “to represent the delicacy; of a young girl whose age renders her figure more pleasing and more susceptible of ornaments which may enhance her natural beauty.” With much more reason might the Doric be called the Corinthian order ; for, as previously stated, the oldest existing example of that style is at Corinth; whereas there iβ nothing, either in ruins or authentic records, to prove that the latter was ever known in that city. Columns with foliated capitals are not of very early date in Greece; earlier examples exist in Asia Minor, and foliage adorns the capitals of columns in some of the Pharaonic monuments of Egypt. In the Assyrian sculptures, however, the Corinthian capital is clearly shown. The interior of the temple of Apollo Didymaeus, at Miletus in Ionia, exhibits the earliest example of the acanthus leaf arranged round the drum of a capital in a single row, surmounted by the favourite honeysuckle; but that edifice was constructed about a century before Callimachus is understood to have lived. The only perfect columnar example in Greece itself of this species of foliated capital is of later date than, and is a great improvement on, that of Miletus; it is the beautiful little structure called the choragic monument of Lysicrates at Athens. (Plate XII. figs. 1,2,3.) Specimens of square or antse capitals enriched with foliage are lese uncommon in Greece than of circular or columnar capitals; but they are almost invariably found to have belonged to the interior of buildings, and not to have been used externally. In considering Greek architecture, it is necessary to bear in mind that it ceases almost immediately after the subjection of Greece to the Roman power; for though there are many edifices in that country in the style of columnar arrangement of which we are now speaking besides those referred to, they belong to Roman, not to Greek architecture. The earliest of them, perhaps, and certainly the least influenced by Roman taste, is the structure called the tower of the Winds, or of Andronicus Cyrrhestes, at Athens. The Agora, or Doric portico, as it is sometimes designated, in the same city, is a spurious example of Greek Doric, evidently executed under the Roman domination.

The importance which the Greeks attached to a graduated stylobate, and the necessity of giving it a relevant proportion in a columnar ordinance, are shown in the building above mentioned, which is the only example of this order of Grecian origin remaining to us. Unlike the Doric and Ionic in its application, this order is represented in a small circular structure, resting on a lofty square basement; and yet, like those orders, it has a stylobate in receding courses (sec Plate XII. fig. 3), and in plan, too, corresponding with the arrangement of the columna, and not with that of the substructure,—this furnishing further proof that the stylobate was considered a part of the columnar ordinance. The Corinthian column is ten diameters in height The base is composed of a torus and fillet; a scotia and another similar fillet, rather less than the former; and a second torus or reversed ovolo, on which rests a third fillet basing the apophyge of the shaft. The shaft diminishes with entasis to five-sixths of its diameter at the hypotrachelium, and, like that of the Ionic order, has twenty-four flutes and fillets. The flutes are semi-ellipses, so deep as nearly to approach semicircles, terminating at the head in leaves, to which the fillets are stalks. The fillets are rather more than one-fourth the width of the flutes. The hypotrachelium is a simple channel or groove immediately under the capital. The capital itself is rather more than 1⅜ diameters in height; its core is a perfect cylinder, in bulk rather less than the superior diameter of the shaft. This is banded by a row of water leaves, whose profile is a flat cavetto, one-sixth of the whole height, and another of leaves of the acanthus, with flowered buttons attaching them to the cylinder. The latter have the contour of a cyma-recta, and occupy one-third of the whole capital. Rather more than another third is occupied by calices and tendrils, which latter support a honeysuckle against the middle of the abacus. This member is in plan a square whose angles are cut off at 45°, and whose sides are deeply concaved. In profile it consists of a narrow fillet, an elliptical cavetto or reversed scotia, and another fillet surmounted by a small ovolo, or rather a moulding whose profile is the quadrant of an ellipse. In the entablature (which is 2⅞∙ diameters in height), the architrave is divided, like that of the Ionic order, into three equal fascias, which are not perpendicular, but incline inwards, so that their lower angles are all in the same vertical line; this impends the surface of the shaft about one-third of the height from the base. The frieze is one plain band, slightly inclining inwards like the fascias of the architraves, and slightly projected beyond them. The cornice consists of a deep congeries of bedmouldings, and a corona, with the accustomed small crownmouldings and fillet. As in the Ionic cornice, additional height is given to the bed-moulds by undercutting the planceer. The cornice is surmounted by a cut fascia supporting honeysuckle antefixae, which may indeed be taken as a part of the order, as the solitary example in question presents it.

Of Corinthian antae we have no examples, nor indeed have we of insulated columns; but as we find in the Ionic examples quoted that the attached columns are less in proportion to the entablature than those which are insulated, we may conclude that it would be the same with this,—thus reducing the entablature to two diameters, the ordin ary average of that part in Greek columnar architecture.

The Caryatides, or Caryatic Order (Plate XII.)

Besides the three species of columnar arrangement enumerated above, the Greeks employed another in which statues of women occupied the place of columns. The origin of this order is furnished by Vitruvius in a story which is as usual totally unsupported by history or analogy. Nevertheless it has fixed the nomenclature, such figures being called Caryatides, and the arrangement the Caryatic order. The use of representations of human and other figures with or instead of columns is, however, common in Egypt and India; and to the former the Greeks were doubtless indebted for the idea, though they appear to have restricted its application to human female figures. Mr Gwilt infers from varioùs facts connected with the worship of Diana Caryatis, “that the statues called Caryatides were originally applied to or used about the temples of Diana; and instead of representing captives or persons in a state of ignominy (according to the Vitruvian story), were in fact nothing more than the figures of the virgins who celebrated the worship of that goddess.”

Of these Caryatides there is but one existing example. It is the third portion of the triple temple in the Athenian Acropolis, and is a projection from the flank of the principal Ionic structure, formed by a stereobatic dado raised on the stylobate and antae-base mouldings, with a sur-base consisting of a carved bead and carved ovolo covered by a broad listel, with a narrow projecting fillet above it. On this rests a square plinth, supporting a draped female figure, on the head of which there is imposed a circular moulded block, with a deep rectangular abacus, two-thirds of whose face is vertical, and the other third is a cavetto fillet, and small cyma-reversa. The stereobate, including the moulded base of the temple, is about three-fourths the height of the statue pillar with its base and capital. The entablature is rather less than two-fifths of the same, but it consists of architrave and cornice alone, between which parts the height is nearly equally divided. Details will be understood by reference to Plate XII. figs. 4, 5, 6. This Caryatidean portico displays very clearly the arrangement of the ceiling, with its coffers or cassoons. Internally the architrave is plain two-thirds of its height'; of the remaining third rather more than one-half is a plain, slightly projected fascia; the other half is occupied by a carved bead and ovolo. In the absence of a frieze the ceiling rests on this, and is divided by carved beads into panels, which are deeply coffered, and diminished by three horizontal moulded fascias.

Of Grecian Mouldings and Ornaments.

Greek architecture is distinguished for nothing more than for the grace and beauty of its mouldings; and it may be remarked of them generally that they are eccentric, and not regular curves. (Plate XIII.) They must be drawn, for they cannot be described or struck; so that though they may be called circular, or elliptical, it is seldom that they are really so, and if they are, it is evidently the result of chance, and not of design. Hence all attempts to give rules for striking mouldings are worse than useless; the hand alone, directed by good taste, can adapt them to their purpose, and give them the spirit and feeling which render them effective and pleasing.

The leading outline of Greek moulding is the gracefully flowing cyma. This will, indeed, be found to enter into the composition of almost everything that diverges from a right line; and even combinations of mouldings are frequently made with this tendency. It is concave above and convex below, or the reverse; and though a long and but slightly fleeted line appears to connect two quickly-curving ends, it will always be found that the convexity and the concavity are in exactly the same curve, so that if the moulded surface were reversed, and the one made to assume the place, it would also have the appearance, of the other, and the effect would be the same. It is, in fact, the Hogarthian line of beauty; and it is not a little singular that Hogarth, in his well-known Analysis of Beauty, although he did not know, and indeed could not have known, the contours of Greek architectural mouldings, has given the principle of them, and, under his line of beauty, has described many of the finest Greek forms. The Roman and Italian mouldings were called Greek in his day, and he assumed them to be so; but they evidently do not agree with his theory, whereas, in principle, the now well-known Greek forms do most completely.

The cyma-recta is generally found to be more upright and less deeply fleeted than the cyma-reversa; it is almost always the profile of enrichments on flat surfaces, of foliage, of the covering moulding of pediments, of the undercut or hooked mouldings in antae caps, the overhanging not affecting the general principle; and it pervades, as we have said, fleeted architectural lines generally, whether horizontal or vertical. The cyma-reversa has all the variety of inflection that its opposite possesses, but the line connecting its two ends is, for the most part, more horizontal, and its curves are deeper. It pervades many architectural combinations, but is most singularly evinced in the composition of the Greek Doric capital, which is a perfect cyma-reversa, with the ends slightly but sharply fleeted, as it flows out of the shaft below, and turns in under the abacus above. This may not be obvious, from the annulets dividing the cyma into an ovolo and a cavetto, but the principle is clear. The cyma is the governing outline in the congeries of mouldings in bases also, as may be noticed in the Ionic and Corinthian examples quoted and referred to.

An ovolo is but the upper half of a cyma-reversa, even when it is used as a distinct moulding, and unconnected with the waving form. The name expresses its apparent rather than its real tendency; for its contour is not that of an egg in any section, though the ornament which is carved on it, when used as a running moulding, is formed like an egg; and from that the moulding was named.

The upper torus of a base forms, with the escape or apophyge of the shaft, a perfect cyma, and the scotia and lower torus do the same; so that the torus and scotia are referable to the same principle when in composition, and they are not found together except in the combination referred to.

The bead is an independent moulding, varying in contour; but it is generally the larger segment of a circle. It is used, however, sometimes to mask the waving form, and sometimes to separate it.

The cavetto, or simple hollow, is part of a cyma also, as has been shown; but it is also applied independently to obviate a sharp angle, or to take from the formality of a vertical line, as in the abaci of Ionic antae caps. Its form, nevertheless, is not the segment of a circle, for the upper part of a cavetto is the most fleeted, and it falls below almost into a straight line.

There is a hooked moulding common in Greek architecture, particularly in the Doric antae caps, which is technically called the hawk’s-beak. It is a combination of curves which cannot be described in words; but it has been already referred to in speaking of the cyma-recta, which is brought into its composition. This hawk’s beak is a completely Gothic moulding, and throws a very bold, clear shadow. It is used generally to the antae; and the fact that these were for the most part under the shadow of the peristyle, furnishes good reason for the employment of such a moulding.

The cyma-recta is never found carved, nor sunk within itself; but it sometimes has the honeysuckle, or some other ornament of the kind, wrought on it in relief, particularly when used as the covering moulding—the cymatium—or a pediment. The enrichment of the cyma-reversa consists of a contrasted repetition of its own contour meeting in a broad point below, and joining by a circular line above, making a sort of tongued or leafed ornament, whose surface is inflected horizontally also. Between the leaves a dart-formed tongue is wrought, extending from the circular flexure above to the bottom of the moulding, whose contour it takes in front alone. As this would not mitre or join well on the angles of the cyma, a honeysuckle is gracefully introduced in the manner shown in Plate XIII. This enrichment is not wrought in relief on the moulding, but is carved into it, so that the surfaces of the parts of the ornament alone retain the full outline of the cyma. The ovolo is enriched with what is called the egg and dart ornament. This will be best understood by reference to the plate. Its angles also are made with a honeysuckle, and the inflections are made in the moulding itself. The torus is sometimes enriched with the interlaced ornament called the guillochos; this, too, is cut into the moulding itself. We have no Greek example of an enriched scotia, and from its form and position, which, to be effective, must be below the eye, it hardly seems susceptible of ornament which could operate beneficially. The bead is carved in spheres or slightly prolate spheroids, with two thin rings or buttons, dilated at their axes, placed vertically between them. A cavetto is not enriched at all, nor is the hawk’s beak, except by painting, which does not appear to have been an uncommon mode of enriching mouldings among the Greeks; that is, the ornament was painted on the moulded surface instead of being carved into it. Fascias are also found enriched by painted running ornaments, such as the fret or meander, the honeysuckle, and the lotus. Sometimes plain colour was given to a member, to heighten the effect it was intended to produce. Ornaments were also painted and gilt on the coffered panels of ceilings.

The few examples which exist of sculptured ornament on straight surfaces exhibit varieties of nearly the same combinations as those last mentioned,—the honeysuckle, with the lotus, and sometimes a variety of itself, on scrolls, either throwing out tendrils, or plain. This is found on the necking of the Ionic columns of the Athenian Acropolis, and on those of their antae, continuing along under the congeries of mouldings, as previously described. The varieties of foliage used in the enrichments of Greek architecture are few, and will be found generally exemplified in the Corinthian capital of the choragic monument of Lysicratee, and in the rich acroteral pedestal or stem of the same edifice, than which we possess no more elaborate specimen of foliated enrichment of the Greek school. There exist many specimens of architectural ornament on vases and fragments, in marble and terra-cotta, in which human figures, both male and female, are composed, with a greater variety of foliage than is generally found in Greek architectural works; and many of the beautiful marble and bronze utensils discovered in Herculaneum and Pompeii have enrichments obviously of Greek origin, from which, as well as from the specimens of ornament on positive architectural monuments, we may judge of their productions generally, as well as acquire or imbibe something of the fine taste which originated them. It will be remarked at once that Greek ornamentation is quite conventional, and that the plain scroll forms its main feature. The leaf-work is clasped round it, and helps to fill up the surface, and pleasingly vary the outline, but the scroll is prominent throughout. Then there is a peculiarity in the mode of carving the ornamentation. The scroll is not rounded off, as in the Roman, like the branch of a tree, but stands squarely and sharply out from the surface, so as to throw a well-defined sharp shadow. So with the foliage, whose leaves also, in place of having the rounded section used by the Romans, are cut sharply either with a square or triangular section, giving again a strong contrast of light and shade.

It may be inferred from some existing edifices, particularly the choragic monuments, that the Doric columnar style was not used by the Greeks except for the temples of the gods and some of their accessories. But whether this arose—if the feeling really did exist—from the sanctity of its character, in consequence of that appropriation, or from the difficulty of moulding it to general purposes, cannot be determined. It is very certain, however, that the few structures which do exist of Greek origin, not of a religious character, are either Ionic or Corinthian, or a mixture of one of them with some of the features of the Doric; and in all Greece and the Grecian colonies, except Ionia, there are very few examples of religious edifices not of the Doric order, and none which are of the Corinthian.

Like the architecture of Egypt, that of Greece is known to us principally by means of its sacred monuments, and from them is deduced almost all we know of its principles. The Doric temples of the Greeks are uniform in plan, and differ only in arrangement and proportion, according to their size; for every part depends on the same modulus. It has been said that if the dimensions of a single column, and the proportion the entablature should bear to it, were given to two individuals acquainted with the style, with directions to compose a hexastyle peripteral temple, or one of any other description, they would produce designs exactly similar in size, arrangement, features, and general proportions, differing only, if at all, in the relative proportions of minor parts, and slightly, perhaps, in the contour of some of the mouldings. This can only be the case with the Doric, and it arises from the intercolumniation being determined by the arrangement of the frieze with triglyphs and metopes; the frieze bearing a certain proportion in the entablature to the diameter of the column, and so on, in such a manner that the most perfect harmony is preserved between all the parts. Thus (Plate IX. fig. 1) the column is so many of its diameters in height; it diminishes gradually from the base upwards, with a slightly convexed tendency or swelling downwards; and is superimposed by a capital proportioned to it, and coming within its height. The entablature is so many diameters high also, and is divided, according to slightly varying proportions, into three parts —architrave, frieze, and cornice. A triglyph bearing a certain proportion to the diameter of the column is drawn immediately over its centre; the metope is then set off equal to the height of the frieze; another triglyph is drawn, which hangs over the void; then a metope as before; and a second triglyph, the centre of which is the central line for another column; and so on to the number required, which, in a front, will be four, six, eight, or teη columns, as the case may be, the temple being tetrastyle, hexastyle, octastyle, or decastyle; and on the flanks twice the number of those on the front and one more, counting the columns at the angles both ways. Thus, if the rules be strictly followed, a hexastyle temple will have thirteen columns on each flank, an octastyle seventeen, and so on. It must be observed, however, that to ease the columns at the angles, they are not placed so that the triglyph over them shall impend their centre as the others, but are set in towards the next columns, so far that a line let fall from the outer edge of the triglyph will touch the circumferential line of the column at the base, or at its greatest diameter. It has been generally thought that the object in this disposition was to bring the triglyph to the extreme angle, to obviate the necessity of a half-metope there; and many imitators have puzzled themselves to no avail to effect it without contracting the intercolumniation or elongating the first metope; though it is perfectly obvious that the intention of the Greek architects was to ease the columns in those important situations of a part of their burden, and for no such purpose as Vitnιvius and his disciples have thought. Indeed, this has been a problem to the whole school, which their master proposed, and which they have settled only by putting a half-metope beyond the outer triglyph, thus preserving the intercolumniation equal» but rendering'the quoins more infirm, or perhaps less stable than the Greek architects judiciously thought they should be. Besides contracting the intercolumniation, the Greeks also made the comer columns a little larger than the rest, thus counteracting in every way the danger that might accrue to them, or to the structure through them, from their exposed and partly unconnected situation. The graduated pyramidal stylobate on which the structure rests also bears a certain proportion to the standard which is measure of all the rest; and so every part is determined by the capacity of the sustaining power. Though the Doric order thus possesses, as it were, a self-proportioning power, which will secure harmony in its composition under any circumstances, yet skill and taste in the architect are necessary to determine, in every instance, the number of diameters the column shall have in height, and to assign according to that the height of the entablature. According to Vitruvius the colonnades were spaced out according to one or other of the following arrangements of the inter-columniations :— [table]

But these rules, like many others of this author, seem to have been imaginary.

The temples are described, according to their external arrangement, as being either in antis (i.e., with two columns between two antae), prostyle (with columns in front), amphi-prostyle (with columns both in front and rear), peripteral (with a single row of columns at flanks as well as at ends), dipteral (with a double row of columns at flanks), or pseudo-dipteral (in which the inner range of columns in the peripteral is omitted). The columnar arrangement in antis is not common in Greek architecture, though there are examples of it, generally of the Doric order. The inner porticoes, or pronaoi, of peripteral temples are, for the most part, placed in antis, as may be seen by reference to the examples in which columns stand between the antae. The Ionic temples of Athens are the principal examples of the simple prostyle. They may be called apteral, if it be necessary to distinguish them from peripteral, as the latter are prostylar; but the former term alone is sufficient. Neither does Greek architecture present more than one example, and that is at Athens also, of an amphiprostyle, except in the same peripteral structures, which are also amphiprostylar. Almost all the Doric temples are peripteral, and being peripteral, they are, as a matter of course, amphiprostylar, as has been just remarked ; so that the former term alone is used in describing an edifice of that kind, with the numeral which expresses the number of columns in each of its prostyles. There are but two known examples of Greek antiquity of a pseudo-peripteral structure—the gigantic fane of Jupiter Olympius at Agrigentum, and the nine-columned edifice at Paestum. The former is not even prostyle, for the columns on its fronts are attached, as well as those on its flanks. The dipteral arrangement is found at Selinus, in an octastyle temple; and in some cases the porticoes of peripteral temples have a pseudo-dipteral projection, though no perfect example of the pseudo-dipteral exists.

The Doric order was never used by the Greeks in mere prostyles; consequently there is no Doric temple of the tetrastyle arrangement, for it is incompatible with the peri pteral, the tetrastyle examples which do exist being all Ionic. Athens itself, containing a Doric tetraprostyle, may seem to contradict this; but in speaking of Greek architecture, we exclude all the examples, even in Greece itself, which were executed under the Roman dominion, for they bear the Roman impress; and among these is the portico referred to. With very few exceptions, all the Doric temples of the Greeks are hexastyle. Their queen, however, the unmatched Parthenon, is octastyle; and the pseudo-peripteral fane of Jupiter Olympius at Agrigentum, just referred to, presents the singular arrangement, heptastyle. The misshapen monument called the Basilica, at Paestum, the Thersites of its style, has a front of nine columns, or an enneastyle arrangement. The temples of Jupiter Olympius at Athens, and of Apollo at Branchidae, had each a front of ten columns.

It may be here remarked in support of the opinion we have given as to the authority of Vitruvius, that, according to him, peripteral temples have on each flank twice the number of intercolumniations they have in front,— thus giving to a hexastyle eleven, to an octastyle fifteen columns, and so on,—whereas in the Greek temples this is never the case, for they always h ave more. The best examples have two, some have only one, but many have three, and in one instance there are four, more intercolumniations in flank than in front. The famous temple at Ephesus, recently disinterred by Mr Wood, has seven intercolumniations in front, and nineteen on the flanks. Again, he limits the internal hypaethral arrangement to those structures which are externally decastyle and dipteral, though an example, he says, existed in Greece of an octastyle hypae-thros, and that was a Roman structure. Now the Parthenon is an octastyle hypaethros; but all the other hypaethral temples, both in Greece and her colonies, are hexastyles, except, perhaps, the octastyle-dipteral at Selinus, and there is no evidence that the Greeks ever constructed a decastyledipteral temple, except that of Apollo Didymaeus at Branchidae.

A Greek temple, whose columnar arrangement is simply in antis, whether distyle or tetrastyle, consists of pronaos and naos or cella. A tetraprostyle may have behind it a pronaos and naos. An amphiprostyle has, in addition to the preceding, a posticum, but is not understood to have a second entrance. The porticoes of a peripteral temple are distinguished as the porticus and posticum, and the lateral ambulatories are incorrectly called peristyles. It may, indeed, be here suggested, that as the admixture of Latin with Greek terms in the description of a Grecian edifice cannot be approved of, it would, perhaps, be better to apply the term stoa to the colonnaded platform or ambitus altogether, and distinguish the various parts of it by the addition of English adjectives ; or the common term portico would be quite as well with front, back, and side, or lateral, prefixed, as the case may be. Within the back and front stoas or porticoes, then, a peripteral temple has similar arrangements in antis, which are relatively termed the pronaos and opisthodomus, with an entrance only from the former; unless there should exist, as there does in the Parthenon, a room or chamber within the opisthodomus, supposed to be the treasury, in which case a door opens into it from the latter. Besides these, a Greek temple consists only of a cell in those which are cleithral, and of a naos, which is divided into nave and aisles, to use modern ecclesiastical terms, in an hypaethral temple.

In comparing the Greek temple with the Egyptian, a marked difference at once appears. The cella is the nucleus of both. But whereas the Egyptian was almost hidden within a series of chambers for the priests, and surrounded by enormous enclosed courts, the Greek was made the one prominent object, and the subject of the highest efforts of art.

Nothing was allowed to interfere with it or to abate its predominance. The tympan was the place in which the highest efforts of the sculptor were placed, the purest example of it being at the Parthenon. At Aegina the figures were entirely detached. Above the pediment at the top, and at the sides, were some very beautiful ornaments—the acroteria. These were in so prominent a position, and so delicately carved, that very few remains of them are left to us. The roofs were covered with thin slabs, or tiles, of marble, and the ends of the ribs, which covered their joints, were ornamented with antefixae, forming a graceful finish to the flanks. These were mostly of marble, but at Aegina they were of terra-cotta. Further, in order to discharge the water from the gutters, were lions’ heads, the original of our gurgoyles. The gutters themselves were made on the top member of the cornice. It is singular that we have no accurate description of the interior of a temple, nor any information as to how it was ceiled or lighted. We know that the cella had often a row of columns round it internally, and that upon this row was a second, as at the temples of Ceres at Eleusis, Minerva at Tegea, Neptune at Paestum, and Jupiter at Aegina. At the temple of the Giants at Agrigentum a row of figures took the place of the upper columns. We may fairly suppose, then, that the first row supported a gallery much as in our Triforia. But as to the roof there is more dif-culty. The span would be too great for flat marble beams, and would have a very poor and depressing effect. To obviate this difficulty Mr Fawkener suggests that the ceilings were arched, and a medal which shows the temple of Juno at Samos certainly appears to favour this theory. But another difficulty remains, viz., as to the light, for there were no windows; and the only light, therefore, if no other access for it were made, would have been through the doorway itself, deeply buried behind a massive portico. Vitruvius alludes to this in his third book, where he describes a hypaethral temple as being “sine tecto et sub divo." But he states himself that this arrangement was rare, and if the cella was really in any case open to the sky, one can scarcely imagine how the delicate statues of ivory and gold could have been protected from the weather. At Bassae some remains of roof tiles have been found, the centre part of which were open, and might thus have formed small openings for light. But the difficulty as to the statues remains. Mr Fergusson’s solution of the problem is very ingenious, and so satisfactory that it seems to require only some reference to his arrangement in any of the old sculptures or writers to make it generally received. He supposes that the inner columns supported a sort of clerestory, formed by a channel on each side along the roof. This would give an excellent light, and the statues could easily be protected. This theory does not fulfil Vitruvius’s description “sine tecto, ” but he is generally so inaccurate in his references to Greek work that this objection does not seem to be very formidable.

According to the rules of Vitruvius, all temples should face east and west, and the door should be to the west; but in reality the doors in Ionia, Attica, and Sicily were to the east. The temple at Bassae faces north and south, but it has a side door also. The temple was usually approached by a flight of steps, of an uneven number, so that the worshipper might place his right foot on the first step, and again on the temple floor. The ceilings of the porticoes and colonnades were formed by great beams of marble, and the spaces of the intercolumns were thus limited. Th13 appears to be the reason for the closed colonnade of the temple of the Giants at Agrigentum, as the spaces between the columns, if open, as usual, would have been too wide to be spanned by a flat beam.

The only pure Greek architectural works besides temples that remain to us, and of which we have certain information, are propylaea, choragic monuments, and theatres. The propylaeum, or propylaea, as applied to the Acropolis of Athens, is the entrance or gateway through the wall of the peribolus. It consists of a Doric hexaprostyle portico internally, with a very singular arrangement of its columns, the central intercolumniation being ditriglyph. This was done, probably, to allow a certain procession to pass, which would have been incommoded by a narrower space. Within the portico there is a deep recess, similar to the pronaos in a temple, but without columns in antis ; a wall pierced with five doorways, corresponding to the intercolumnia-tions of the portico, close to the entrance; and beyond it is a vestibule, divided into three parts by two rows of three Ionic columns, and forming an outer portico, fronted externally by a hexaprostyle exactly similar to that on the outside. Right and left of it, and setting out about one intercolumniation of the portico from its end columns, at right angles, are two small triastyle porticoes in antis, with chambers behind them. These have been called temples, but most probably they were nothing more than porters’ lodges or guard-houses. The whole structure, though extremely elegant and possessing many beauties, is not a good architectural composition: the unequal intercolumniation detracts from its simplicity and harmony. The use of Ionic columns in a Doric ordinance is equally objectionable; and their elevation from the floor of the portico on insulated pedestals is even worse, though their intention is obvious; and without raising them, the ceiling might have been too low, or they must have been made taller. The uneven style of the small temples or lodges is not pleasing, even though they be taken as flank and not as front compositions; and, moreover, their entablature abuts indefinitely against the walls of the larger structure, both internally and externally, to the total destruction of the harmony of the general composition. Indeed, the unequal heights of the entablature of the greater ordinance involves a fault which would require more than all the beauties of detail and harmony of proportion to countervail, if it were not impossible to embrace them in one view.

The choragic monument of Lysicrates (or Lantern of Demosthenes), at Athens (Plate XII.), is a small structure, consisting of an elegant quadrangular basement or podium, which is more than two-fifths of the whole height, surmounted by a cyclostyle of six Corinthian columns, attached to, and projecting rather more than one-half from a wall which perfects the cylinder up to the top of their shafts, where it forms a stand for tripods the height of the capital. A characteristic entablature rests on the columns, and receives a tholus or dome, which is richly ornamented, and terminates in a foliated and heliced acroterium. To this Stuart has added dolphins as supporters, and has placed on the summit a tripod, which was the prize in the choragic festival; thus completing, perhaps, the most beautiful composition in its style ever executed. In Vitruvian language, the arrangement of this edifice would be called monopteral; but it is more correctly cyclostylar, or, perhaps, because of the wall or core, it may be termed a pseudo or attached cyclostyle. The basement of this monument is eminently bold and simple, admirably proportioned to the rest of the structure, and harmonising perfectly with it. The columnar ordinance is the only perfect specimen of the style in existence of pure Greek origin. It has never been surpassed, and is, perhaps, unequalled. The most exquisite harmony reigns throughout its composition; it is simple without being poor, and rich without being meretricious.

Totally different in style and arrangement, and far inferior in merit, is the choragic monument of Thrasyllus.

It bears, however, the impress of the Grecian mind. This composition is merely a front to a cave, consisting of three pilasters, proportioned and moulded like Doric antae, and supporting an entablature similar in style, but too shallow to harmonise with them. Above the entablature there is an attic or parapet, divided into three compartments horizontally. The two external form tablets, with a cornice or impost on them; and the central is composed of three receding courses, on the summit of which is seated a draped human figure, whether male or female, in its mutilated state, is not determinable. The entablature has laurel wreaths instead of triglyphs in the frieze, and it would appear as if the absence of the triglyph had deranged the whole composition. The two outer pilasters are of good proportion, and the architrave is well proportioned to them; but the frieze and cornice are both too narrow, and the spaces between the pilasters, equivalent to intercolumnia-tions, are too wide. The third pilaster, itself inharmonious, is absurdly narrow, and, standing immediately under the statue, evidently to support it, its meagreness is the more obvious and striking. In spite of all this, the general outline of the structure is simple and pleasing; the detail is elegant, and the execution spirited and effective. This little monument is, however, a proof that the Greeks were not at all times so excellent in architectural compositions as in the self-composing Doric temples, and in the choragic monument of Lysicrates; and to this evidence may be added that of the triple temple in the Acropolis of Athens, already described.

In concluding this notice as to temples, we must now allude to one example, very beautiful in itself, but an exception to all rules—the Erechtheum at Athens. It consists of an Ionic hexaprostyle in front (Plate XI. fig. 1), resting on a bold, continuous, and well-proportioned stylobate, and forming the entrance to a parallelogramic cella, but, from all that has yet been discovered, without a pronaos in antis. The back front consists of four columns, like those of the portico, attached in antis; and the flanks are broad and bold, crowned by the well-proportioned and chaste entablature, with the enriched congeries of mouldings and running ornament of the antae under it. In the absence of a pronaos to give depth to the portico, the composition was defective, but otherwise simple and harmonious. It was enlarged by the attachment of a tetraprostyle to one of its sides, Ionic certainly, like that in front, but different both in manner and in size; beautiful in itself, but a blot on the main building, with which it harmonises in no one particular, for the apex of its pediment only reaches to the cornice of the other. In a similar situation, against the other side, is attached a similar arrangement of Caryatides, a tetraprostyle of female figures raised on a lofty basement, and yet not reaching to the entablature of the main building —according in no one particular either with it or with the portico on the other side, and altogether forming one of the most heterogeneous compositions to be found in ancient art.

Tombs. —These, the grandest structures next to the temples in Egypt, present little worthy of notice in Greece proper; but in the colonies there are several of considerable importance. The grandest are in Caria and Lycia, to some of which, constructed much after the ancient outlines of the Lycian, Ac., reference has already been made. The most singular of the pure Greek tombs are cut in the face of the solid rock, not in the forms of the ancient rock-cut tombs, but much resembling those of the temple.

The rock-cut tombs, as, e.g., at Telmissus (Lycia), usually have a portico of columns in antis, with one or more chambers behind. In one example these are about 12 feet by 9 feet, and 6 feet high.

Most of the columns are Ionic, few being Doric. In one case, the whole tomb, which is 18 feet 6 inches deep, has been quite detached, the whole excavation being 26 feet deep from the face of the rock. Many of these tombs present curious examples of wooden details imitated in stone, e.g., the doors are often exactly like those of wood, the panels, nails, knockers, &c.,being copied in stone.

Of a totally different class is a tomb at Cnidus, in Caria, discovered by Mr C. T. Newton. It consists of a square, low basement resting on four steps, and carrying four engaged Doric columns, with a cornice over the whole, being about 31 feet square on the basement. Above the cornice are gradini, forming a sort of pyramid of steps, having at the summit a lion, now in the British Museum. “Inside was a beehiveshaped chamber, with vaulting similar to that of the treasury of Atreus at Mycene, and with eleven smaller cells radiating from its circumference” (Newton). Its supposed date is about 396 B. c.

More beautiful in detail is the tomb known as the Trophy, discovered by Sir C. Fellows, at Xanthus. It consists of a peristyle of fourteen Ionic columns, standing on a high basement about 33 feet by 22, which has, to all appearance, no access to it. In the centre, behind the columns, is a cella apparently solid also. The date usually given to this is about 540. But the edifice seems to be somewhat too refined in detail for this time, and another date assigned to it, viz., about 385, appears to be more likely. This would be about half-way, in point of time, between the Erechtheum and the temple at Priene.

More curious, though less elegant, is another tomb at Mylasa, in Caria, which has a high, square basement with a chamber in it. Over this, on each face, are two columns in antis, with entablature, the space between the columns being quite clear. Over the cornice are placed great stone beams, anglewise; on these, others, again, crosswise; so that the bearing is rapidly diminished, and a rough sort of dome formed, resembling those so often found in India. But of all Greek tombs the grandest was that of Mausolus, at Halicarnassus, in Caria, one of the seven wonders of the ancient world, which has given its name to all succeeding great tombs. Its date is about 352 b,c., Mausolus having died in 353. It was erect until the 10th century. Since then it has been so utterly ruined that there was doubt as to its actual site. This was indicated by Professor Donaldson; and in 1857, Mr Newton discovered the actual remains. “It consisted of a lofty basement, on which stood an oblong Ionic edifice surrounded by thirty-six Ionic columns, and surmounted by a pyramid of twenty-four steps. The whole structure, 140 feet in height, was crowned by a chariot group in white marble, on which, probably, stood Mausolus himself” (Newton). The size of the basement was 114 feet by 92. A considerable number of the fragments are now in the British Museum. The name of the architect was Pythius, and the sculpture, with which the edifice was richly adorned, was executed by four celebrated sculptors, of whom we may especially particularise Scopas, as he was also the architect of the celebrated temple of Tegea.

Theatres. —The Greek theatre deserves a short notice. It was entirely different from ours, having neither pit, boxes, nor roof, except the usual velarium, as a protection from the sun. Its plan was somewhat more than a semicircle, having seats cut out of the side of some hill convenient for the purpose. Round the top was a colonnade, and at the back of the stage was the scena. This and the colonnade combined in an artistic way, must have formed a very effective composition. At first the theatres were of wood; the first of stone, at Athens, having been built, it is said, about the middle of the 4th century. Vitruvius makes some very singular statements as to the acoustic details of the theatres, but they have not been verified, and are not, in fact, quite understood. The theatres at Argos and Ephesus were 450 and 600 feet in diameter respectively, whereas Covent Garden Theatre, London, including the corridors, is only 100 feet.

HotτsES, <fcc.—No remains exist of the domestic structures of the Greeks. It may be taken for granted that the houses were less extensive than those of the Romans, as they were a poorer and less luxurious people; but the exquisite beauty of form and decoration, which pervades every article of Greek origin, whether coin, medallion, vase, implement of war or husbandry, or even the meanest article of domestic or personal use, is evidence of the fine taste with which their mansions must have been furnished.

Fortifications. —We have large remains of fortifications in Lycia, though few in Greece proper. They are not so picturesque as the mediaeval, nor, we may say, as the Assyrian. They were massively built of masonry, with square towers at intervals, furnished sometimes with a pediment, sometimes with battlements. The doors and windows on the upper floor are still found at Alinda, in Caria. The Greek shield was often sculptured as hung on the walls. A bas-relief from Pinara, in Lycia, gives a complete sketch of the walls, with circular-topped battle-mente, a postern gate, and various openings, all squareheaded; and a door is shown panelled, like our doors.

In the construction of their edifices the Greeks seldom, if ever, had recourse to foreign materials—the stone used in their temples being almost invariably from the nearest convenient quarries which supplied it of sufficiently good quality. The structures of Athens are built of marble, from the quarries of Pentelicus, and those of Agrigentum, of a fossil conglomerate which the place itself furnished.

Résumé. —Taking now a rapid view of what we owe to the Greeks as architects, we may assume that the invention of columnar architecture is due to the Assyrians; but how far this had advanced before the Greeks began to practise it, we cannot as yet exactly determine. There is no doubt, however, that it owed to the Greeks the greater part of its beautiful and delicate details. Some of the finest examples of these are to be found at Athens in the Theseum, Parthenon, Propylaea, and Erechtheum, ranging in date from 469 to 409 b.c. Not only do we find there the most beautiful mouldings and other ornaments, but the most refined methods of obviating the minute defects in outline supposed to be caused by optical illusion. The lines of the shafts, for instance, in place of being perfectly straight, were slightly expanded between the base and necking, so as to form a very delicate curve (entasis). The apparent depression of the top of the cornice, supposed to be caused by the extra weight in the centre of the pediment, was obviated by curving the cornice so that the centre part was the highest. The steps were curved in a similar way. Then the whole of the columns of the peristyle sloped towards the centre. The architrave and frieze in the Parthenon followed the same slope of about 1 in 80, but its boldly overhanging cornice and antefixae sloped forwards about 1 in 100.

We owe also to the Greeks one new form in art—the pediment. It is not found in Egypt; some slight suggestions as to its use may, perhaps, be found in the sculptures of Assyria, but in Greece it forms the crowning feature of every temple; and simple as the invention may seem, it led the way to a succession of others, which resulted in the grand gables of our Gothic architecture.

The details of the Grecian temples were heightened by colour and gold. Of the former, Dr Faraday detected many traces on the sculptures of the British Museum; and clear indications of it have been found in many of the ruins both in Greece proper and in the colonies. In fact, colour, or tinting of some kind, seems to have been absolutely requisite in order to relieve the monotonous and dazzling effect of new white marble. A striking example of this occurred recently when the palace of the king was built at Athens. The newly-worked marble had much the appearance of a smooth stucco or brilliant whitewash. But this would serve (and doubtless did serve in ancient times) as an admirably delicate base for decorative work in colour and gold.

What the effect was of a Greek temple, in all its glory, we can no more judge than we can in the case of one of ancient Egypt. For there is not one that is not a mere wreck; and even the most ambitious of modern copies, the Walhalla, wants the exquisitely delicate material out of which the Parthenon was wrought, and the sculpture which no modern Phidias was living to supply. But in Greece proper there was but this one type, viz., that of the pedimented temple with its colonnade. There was no arch, as in Assyria, to span an opening too wide for a stone beam; no dome to vary the outline by its bold and graceful form; no curved outline, as at Mycenae, to vary that of the rectangle.

The form adopted by the Greeks was worked out in a manner which leaves all others of ancient art, wrought in the same likeness, far behind; and the details which adorned that form charm the eye with their exquisitely chaste beauty. But in our admiration of them we must not forget that numerous other forms, beautiful in themselves, and familiar in their beauty to the Assyrians and Pelasgi, as they are to us, were unknown to, or neglected by, the Greeks.

Etruscan Architecture.

Little of the history of Etruria is as yet known, for accounts of Roman historians are not to be relied on, and the Etruscan language is as yet unread. Our acquaintance with its architecture, too, is very meagre, for the comparatively few remains show us simply the forms used by the Etruscans in their tombs; and even these have been as yet imperfectly explored, owing to the nature of the climate, and the desolation of those parts of the country in which they are chiefly found. Little was, in fact, known of them at all until the careful descriptions of Sig. Canina and Mr Dennis appeared, from whose works the principal ascertained facts are derived. The sites of the Etruscan towns are nearly all on or near a line, curving slightly from the sea, extending from Fiesole, near Florence, through Arretium, Cortona, Volsinii, and Falerii, to Rome. The only sites of much importance near the sea were Cossa and Tar quinii. The towns were generally planted on the tops of high hills, as if for the purpose of defence. Much of the town-walling remains in various places, as at Fiesole, Cortona, Cossa, and Volterra, and furnishes grand examples both of the polygonal and of the squared masonry, which has been described as belonging to the early period of Greek architecture.

The tombs were of two classes, the first being nearly of the same external form as that described at ∙Tantalais, viz., with a massive stereobate, circular in plan, having one or more chambers in the centre of it, and above it a tumulus of earth. Of these, hundreds of specimens of various sizes remain. At Volci there was one 240 feet in diameter. The grandest of all is, perhaps, that at Cervetri, drawn by Canina, and known as the Regulini Galeassi. The chambers here, and in other instances, are ceiled with oversailing courses of stone, cut into an arched form as at Mycenae. A completely voussoired arch exists over a tomb chamber, known as the Grotto of Pythagoras, at Cortona, but the date of this is very doubtful. In these tombs have been found some of the beautiful specimens of jewellery which adorn the museums of Europe. The mouldings used are very few and simple, but of a section which is quite peculiar to Etruria. They occur in two places only, viz., as a base, and as a capping to the basement. In none of the tombs of the kind above described are found any of the paintings which form so characteristic a feature in the second and better known class of tombs, viz., those cut in the face of the rock in the vicinity of most of the Etruscan towns. The apparent entrances to these tombs are by doorways of a peculiar form, and often placed very high up the rock But these are false, and merely carved in it, the real entrance being often 40 to 50 feet below. This leads into one or more chambers, which are mostly square, but in some few instances are circular, as at Chiusi, where there is one 25 feet in diameter, supported by a pillar in the centre. Whatever their shape, they are cut out of the solid rock; and, apparently, bore some resemblance to the house which the occupant of the tomb had inhabited during life. None of the chambers are domed or vaulted, all the ceilings being cut in the shape of flat beams or sloping rafters supported by pillars,—another instance of the construction of built edifices being copied in rock-cut caves. One of these, at Cervetri, is given in D Agincourt’s work. There is another chamber at Tarquinii, 50 feet square, supported by four pillars, each 6 to 7 feet square.

The manner in which the chambers were fitted up depended on the mode of burial. Cremation was sometimes used, and then, as at Veii, Sutri, and Toscanella, we find niches for urns. But usually there was a bench cut in the rock round the sides of the chambers, and on them were ranged the sarcophagi, of which specimens are so well known in most of the museums of Europe. In some instances, which seem of a late date, the bodies were placed in recesses.

The paintings which decorated the chambers were very peculiar, being of the same character, and with figures of divinities, &c., of the same well-known attenuated forms as are found in the earlier vases. The colouring is as peculiar as the drawing, e.g., at Veii there is a horse depicted with a red neck, yellow mane and tail, one leg yellow spotted with red, and the rest of the horse black. At Tarquinii is another horse with blue mane and hoofs, white tail, and all the rest red. All these paintings were executed, much as were those of the Greeks and Egyptians, on a very thin coating of fine stucco over the rock. In the later tombs domestic scenes appear to have taken the place of the allegorical ones formerly used.

One of the best examples, though of very late (Roman) date, is a tomb at Cervetri. The chamber was supported on two pillars. In each side of it were recesses, 2 feet in height, each having a bed, with cushion for the head, tassels, &c., all sculptured and painted. The sides and pillars were decorated with painting and sculpture, representing the helmets, shields, swords, and other accoutrements of the officer whose tomb it was. But there were also depicted in the same way the personal ornaments of his wife, her mirrors, jewellery, &c. Her slippers are marked on the floor, and by the side of the recess near, is carved her husband’s walking-stick. Even the kitchen utensils appear in effigy, so as to give the whole fittings of the house of a Roman officer.

Another class of funeral monument is described to us by some writers, the most noted example being that of the great King Porsena, but the descriptions are too vague to allow of even this being restored with certainty. It is said to have had three ranges of pillars, the lowest one 150 feet high and 75 feet square, standing on a basement 300 feet square. There were five sets of these pillars, viz., one at each angle and one in the centre, and they are said to have been enriched with bronze ornamental work ’at the top of each division. This class of tomb was probably somewhat like one of late date, near Rome, which has been known by various names (the tomb of the Horatii and Curiatii, of Aruns, of Pompey, <fcc.), and if there were two ranges of pillars above, all tied in with metal rings at the point of junction, it would agree tolerably well with what we read of Porsena’s tomb.

Of Etruscan temples no remains exist, and the accounts of them are so conflicting that any restoration of them must be very uncertain.

Roman Architecture.

We have taken it for granted that the Greeks were ignorant or neglectful of the properties of the arch. If the great sewer at Rome, called the Cloaca Maxima, belongs to the time of Tarquinius Priscus, it must be conceded that the properties of the arch were known, and the arch constructed in that city. But it is contended that the Cloaca Maxima, as it now exists, is a work of much more recent date, and that it may have succeeded the sewer constructed by the first Tarquinius, who was, moreover, himself a Greek. It is, however, now certain that the construction of the arch was known to the Egyptians, and used by them at a very early date, although, for some reason which we do not quite understand, they neglected it in their greatest works. That it was known to and made great use of by the Assyrians is also certain. Whoever it was that invented it, and at whatever date, the Romans made extensive practical use of it, and by its means they succeeded in doing what their predecessors in civilisation had never effected. It enabled them to carry secure and permanent roads across wide and rapid rivers, and to make a comparatively fragile material, such as brick, more extensively useful than the finest marble was in the hands of the Greeks. To the Greeks, however, the Romans were indebted for their knowledge of the more polished forms of columnar architecture. Before the conquest of Greece the structures of Rome appear to have been rude and inelegant, and from that time the existing style of architecture either gave place to the superior merit and beauty of what the Romans found in that country, or was combined with it, though frequently the combination tended to destroy the beauty of both.

In the transference of Greek columnar architecture to Rome, a great change was effected independently of those combinations, for the Romans could not appreciate the simple grandeur and dignified beauty of the Doric, as it existed in Greece. They appear to have moulded it on what we suppose their own Tuscan to have been; and the result was the mean and characterless ordinance exemplified in the lowest story of the theatre of Marcellus at Rome, and in the temple at Cora, between 30 and 40 miles south of that city. Not less inferior to the Athenian examples of the Ionic order, than the Doric of Cora is to the Doric of Athens, are the mean and tasteless deteriorations of them in the Roman temples of Fortuna Virilis and Concord. It was different, however, with the foliated Corinthian, which became to the Romans what the Doric had been to the Greeks—their national style. But though they borrowed the style, they did not copy the Greek examples. In Rome the Corinthian order assumed a new and not less beautiful form and character, and was varied to a wonderful extent, but without losing its original and distinctive features. The temple of Vesta, at Tivoli, differs from that commonly, but erroneously, named the temple of Jupiter Stator, in Rome, as much as the latter does from the choragic monument of Lysicrates at Athens; all three are among the most beautiful examples of the Corinthian order in existence,—if indeed they are not pre-eminently so,— and yet they do not possess a single proportion in common. It must be confessed, moreover, that if the Romans had not good taste enough to admire the Doric and Ionic models of Greece, they had too much to be fond of their own; for they seldom used them. Both at home and abroad, in all their conquests and colonies, wherever they built, they employed the Corinthian order. Corinthian edifices were raised in Iberia and in Gaul, in Istria and in Greece, in Syria and in Egypt; and to the present day, Nismes, Pola, Athens, Palmyra, and the banks of the Nile, alike attest the fondness of the Romans for that peculiar style. We cannot agree with the generally received opinion, that Greek architects were employed by the Romans after the connection between the two countries took .place; for the difference between the Greek and Roman styles of architecture is not merely in the preference given to one over another peculiar mode of columnar arrangement and composition, but a different taste pervades even the details though the mouldings are the same; they differ more in spirit and character than do those of Greece and Egypt, which certainly would not have been the case if Roman architecture had been the work of Greek architects. Indeed, were it not for historical evidence, which cannot absolutely be refuted, an examination and comparison of the architectural monuments of the two countries would lead an architect to the conclusion, that the Corinthian order had its origin in Italy, and that the almost solitary perfect example of it in Greece was the result of an accidental communication with that country, modified by Greek taste; or that the foliated style was common to both, without either being indebted to the other for it. If, however, Greek architects were employed by the Romans, they must have made their taste and mode of design conform to those of their conquerors much more readily than we can imagine they would as the civilised slaves of barbarian masters; and it cannot be disputed that the Roman architecture is a style essentially distinct from the Greek. This is apparent from the fact that many of the minor works of sculpture in connection with architecture, such as candelabra, vases, and various articles of household furniture, discovered at the villa of Adrian, near Tivoli, and at Herculaneum and Pompeii, are fashioned and ornamented in the Greek style, while others are as decidedly Roman in those particulars,—rendering it evident that such things were either imported from Greece, or that Greek artists and artisans were employed in Italy, who retained their own national taste and modes of design. It is probable that both the architects and the artists, natives of Rome, modified their own less elegant productions by reference to Greek models; but that the Romans derived their architecture entirely from the Greeks, may certainly be disputed.

Much of the extent and magnificence of the architectural works of the Romans is attributable to their knowledge and use of the arch, which enabled them to utilise inferior materials. Almost all their structures were of brick— aqueducts, palaces, villas, baths, and temples. Of the present remains, only a few columns and their entablatures are of marble or granite, and two or three buildings are of Travertine stone,— all the rest are brick. The Colosseum, the mausoleum of Adrian, the tunnel sewer, the temple of Fortuna Virilis, and the ancient bridges on the Tiber, are of Travertine stone; the remaining columns of the more splendid temples, the internal columns, and their accessories, of the Pantheon, the exterior of the imperial arches, and the cenotaph columns of Trajan and of Antonine, are of marble; but the Imperial Mount of the Palatine, which holds the ruins of the palace of the Caesars, is one mass of brick; the Pantheon, except its portico and internal columns, &c., is of brick; the temples of Peace, of Venus and Rome, and of Minerva Medica, are of brick; and so, for the most part, were the walls of others, though they may have been faced with marble or freestone. The baths of Titus, of Caracalla, and Diocletian, are of brick; the city walls are of brick; so are the extensive remains of the splendid villa of Adrian, and those of the villa of Maecenas at Tivoli; the palaces of the Roman emperors and patricians at Baiae and in other parts of Italy; and so, it may be said, are the remains of Herculaneum and Pompeii, for the houses in these cities are generally built of alternate double courses of brick and courses of stone or lava. In most cases, at Rome and in the provinces, stucco formed the surface which received the decorations. From the above enumeration, it will appear how much more variously the Romans built than any of their predecessors. In Egypt we find no indications of edifices of real utility or convenience, nothing but temples and tombs,—and in Greece there is but a small addition to this list; but in Rome are found specimens of almost every variety of structure that men in civilised communities require.

The Roman Corinthian.

Like the Greek orders the Roman Corinthian may be said to consist of three parts,—stybolate, column, and entablature; but, unlike them, the stylobate is much loftier, and is not graduated, except for the purposes of access before a portico. Its usual height is not exactly determinable, in consequence of the ruined state of most of the best examples; but it may be taken at from two and a half to three diameters. In the triumphal arches the height of the stylobate sometimes amounts to four, and even to five diameters. It is variously arranged, moreover, having, in the shallower examples, simply a conecries of mouldings to form its base, with, perhaps, a narrow square member under it, a plain dado, and a covering cornice or coping, on the back of which the columns rest. In the loftier examples a single and sometimes a double plinth comes under the base mouldings; and a blocking course rests upon the coping, to receive the bases of the columns. This last is only necessary when the height of the stylobate is such as to take the columnar base above the human eye, when the coping cornice would intercept it if a blocking course did not intervene.

The column (Plate XIV.) consists of base, shaft, and capital, and varies in height from nine and a half to ten diameters. The base has, ordinarily, in addition to the diminishing congeries of mouldings which follows the circular form of the shafts, a square member or plinth, whose edges are vertical; with this the whole height of the base is about half diameter. The rest of this part of the column is variously composed, but it generally consists of two plain tori and a scotia, with fillets intervening, as in Greek examples of this order, but differently proportioned and projected, aβ the examples indicate. Sometimes the scotia is divided into two parts by two beads, with fillets, as in the Jupiter Stator example, in which also a bead is placed between the upper torus and the fillet of the apophyge. The spread of the base varies from a diameter and one-third to a diameter and four-ninths. In the best Roman examples, as well as in the Greek, the shaft diminishes with entasis; the average diminution is one-eighth of a diameter. The shaft was always fluted when the material of which it was composed did not oppose itself > for the Romans often used granites, and sometimes an onion-like marble, called therefore cipollino , for the shafts of columns; the former of which could not be easily wrought and polished in flutes, and the latter would scale away if it were cut into narrow fillets. Like the Greek Corinthian and Ionic orders, the Roman Corinthian has twenty-four fillets and flutes. The flutes are generally semicircles, and they terminate at both ends, for the most part with that contour. Dividing the space for a fillet and a flute into five parts, four are given to the latter, and one to the former. The hypotrachelium is a plain torus, about half the size of the upper torus of the base, or half the width of a flute, as these nearly correspond; it rests on a fillet above the cavetto at the head of the shaft.

The ordinary height of the capital is a diameter and one-eighth; but there is a very fine example, in which it barely exceeds a diameter, and another in which it is not quite so much. It is composed of two rows or bands of acanthus leaves, each row consisting of eight leaves ranged side by side, but not in contact; of helices and tendrils trussed with foliage; and an abacus, whose faces are moulded and variously enriched. The lower row of acanthus leaves is two-sevenths the whole height of the capital; the upper row is two-thirds the height of the lower above it, and its leaves rest on the hypotrachelium below, in the spaces left between the others. They are placed regularly, too, under the helices and tendrils above, which support the angles, and are under the middle of each side of the abacus. The construction and arrangement of the next compartment above must be gathered from the examples, for a competent idea cannot be conveyed in words. The abacus is one-seventh of the height of the capital; in plan it is a square whose angles are cut off, and whose sides are concaved in segments of a circle, under an angle at the centre of from 55° to 60°. Its vertical face is generally a flat cavetto, with a fillet and carved ovolo corbelling over at an angle of about l ’ 25°. The cavetto is sometimes enriched with trailing foliage, and a rosette or flower of some kind overhangs the tendrils from the middle of each side of the abacus.

Every example of this order differs so much from others in the form, proportion, and distribution of the various parts of its capital particularly, that it cannot be described in general terms like the Greek Doric and Ionic. The example referred to in the definition is that of the so-called Jupiter Stator, the most elegant, perhaps, of all the Roman specimens (Plate XIV. ex. 1).

The entablature varies in different examples from one diameter and seven-eighths to more than two diameters and a half in height. Perhaps the best proportioned are those of the portico of the Partheon (Plate XIV. ex. 4) and of the temple of Antoninus and Faustina (Plate XIV. ex. 3), the former being rather more than two diameters and a quarter, and the latter rather less than that ratio. The entablature of the Jupiter Stator example is more than two diameters and a half in height, of which the cornice alone occupies one-sixth more than a full diameter, leaving to the frieze and architrave somewhat less than one diameter and a half between them. In this latter particular it nearly agrees with the other two quoted examples, so that the great difference in the general height is in the cornice almost alone, the cornices of the others being about a sixth less, instead of as much more, than a diameter in height. The Roman Corinthian entablature may be taken, then, at two diameters and a quarter in height. Rather more than three-fifths of this is nearly equally divided between the architrave and frieze, the advantage, if any, being given to the former; the cornice, of course, takes the remaining two-fifths, or thereabouts. The architrave is divided into three unequal fasciae and a small congeries of mouldings, separating it from the frieze. The first fascia is one-fifth the whole height; one-third of what remains is given to the second, and the remainder is divided between the third fascia and the band of mouldings,—two-thirds to the former, and one to the latter. A bead, sometimes plain and sometimes carved, taken from the second fascia, which is itself enriched in the Jupiter Stator example, marks its projection over the first; and a small cyma-reversa, carved or plain as the bead may be, taken from the third fascia, marks its projection over the second. The band consists of a bead, a cyma-reversa, carved or plain according to the general character of the ordinance, and a fillet. In non-accordance with the practice of the Greeks, the face of the lowest or first fascia of the architrave, in the Roman Corinthian, impends the face of the column at the top of the shaft, cr at its smallest diameter; and every face inclines inwards from its lowest face up. The whole projection of the architrave, that of the covering fillet of the band, is nearly equal to the height of the first fascia. The frieze impends the lowest angle of the architrave. Its face is either perpendicular, or it slightly inclines inwards, like the fasciae of that part of the entablature: in some cases it is quite plain, and in others is enriched with a foliated composition, or with sculptures in low or half relief. The cornice consists of a deep bedmould, variously proportioned to the corona; but it may be taken generally, when it has modillions, at three-fifths, and when it has none, at one-half of the whole height. It is composed of a bead, an ovolo or cyma-reversa, and a fillet, a plain vertical member, sometimes dentilled, another bead, and a cyma-reversa, with fillet or ovolo, as the lower may not be; this is surmounted, when modillions are used, by another plain member, with a small carved cyma-reversa above it. On this the modillions are placed, and the cyma breaks round them. They are about as wide as the member from which they project, and are about two thicknesses apart. In form they are horizontal trusses or consoles, with a wavy profile, finishing at one end in a large, and at the other in a small volute; and under each there is generally placed a raffled or acanthus leaf. In proportioning the parts of this bed-mould in itself, one-third of its height may be given to the modillion member, and the other two-thirds divided nearly equally, but increasing upwards into three parts, one for the lowest mouldings, one for the plain or dentil member, and the third, and rather largest portion, for the mouldings under the modillion member. The mouldings of this part of the cornice are carved or left plain, according to the character of the ordinance; and its greatest projection, except the modillions themselves, that of the modillion member, is about equal to half its height. The upper part of the cornice —the corona, with its crownmouldings—consists of the vertical member called the corona, which is two-fifths the whole height;—this, in the examples of the temples of Jupiter Stator and Antoninus and Faustina, is enriched with vertical flutes;—a narrow fillet, an ovolo, and a wider fillet, occupy one-third of the rest, the other two-thirds being given to cyma-recta, with a covering fillet which crowns the whole. Its extreme projection is nearly equal to the whole height of the cornice

The ordinance of the temple of Vesta, or of the sibyl, at Tivoli (Plate XIV. ex. 2), whose entablature is the very low one mentioned, is not generally in accordance with .the scale we have given, and it must be referred to for its own peculiar proportions.

Pediments with the Roman Corinthian order are found to be steeper than they were made by the Greeks, varying in inclination from 18° to 25°; but they are formed by the cornice of the entablature in the same manner. Antefixae do not appear to have been used on flank cornices as in Greek ordinances, in which the cymatium is confined to pediments; but in Roman works it is continued over the horizontal or flank cornice, as we have described; and frequently it is enriched with lions’ heads, which were at the first introduced as waterspouts. The planceer or soffit of the corona is, in the Jupiter Stator example, coffered between the .modillions, and in every coffer there is a flower. The soffit of the entablature in this order is generally panelled and enriched with foliated or other ornament. The intercolumniation is not the same in any two examples. In the temple of Vesta, in Rome, it hardly exceeds a diameter and a quarter; in the Jupiter Stator example it is a fraction less than one diameter and a half, in that of Antoninus and Faustina, nearly a diameter and three quarters; in the portico at Assisi, rather more than that ratio; in the portico of the Pantheon, almost two diameters; and in the Tivoli example, a fraction more than that proportion.

The antae of the Roman Corinthian order are generally parallel; but pilasters are mostly diminished and fluted as the columns. Of two of the existing examples of antae, in one—that of the temple of Mars Ultor—they are plain, to fluted columns; and in the other—that of the Pantheon portico—they are fluted, to plain columns. The capitals and bases are transcripts of those of the columns, fitted to the square forms.

Ceilings of porticoes are formed, as in the Greek style, by the frieze returning in beams from the internal architrave to the wall or front of the structure, supporting coffers more or less enriched with foliage or flowers. This, however, could only have been effected when the projection was not more than one, or at the most two, intercolumnia-tions, if stone was used; and it is only in such that examples exist. Porticoes ordinarily must have had arched ceilings, as that of the Pantheon has, or the beams must have been of wood; in the latter case the compartments of the ceiling would probably be larger. How it was arranged in the former we cannot tell, as the arches only remain, and they may not be of the date of the rest of the portico.

The Roman Composite.

The ancient examples of what is called the Composite order (Plate XV. ex. 2) do not differ so much from the ordinary examples of thé Corinthian as the latter do among themselves, except in the peculiar conformation of the capital of the column. In other respects, indeed, its arrangement and general proportions are exactly those of the Corinthian. The Composite was used in triumphal arches, and, in the best ages of Roman architecture, in them alone. The difference in the capital consists in the enlargement of the volutes to nearly one-fourth the whole height of the capital, and in the connection of their stems horizontally under the abacus, giving the appearance of a distorted Ionic capital. The central tendrils of the Corin-thiän are omitted, and the drum of the capital is girded under the stem of the volutes by an ovolo and bead, as in the Ionic. Acanthus leaves, in two rows, fill up the whole height from the hypotrachelium to the bottom of the volutes, and are consequently higher than in the Corinthian capital: this difference is given to the upper row. Besides this Composite, however, the Romans made many others, the arrangements and proportions of the ordinances being generally those of the Corinthian order, and the capitals corresponding also in general form, though in themselves differently composed. In these' animals of different species, the human figure, armour, a variety of foliage, and other peculiarities are found. Shafts of columns also are sometimes corded or cabled instead of being fluted: those of tho internal ordinance of the Pantheon are cabled to one-third their height, and the flutes of the antae of that ordinance are flat, eccentric curves. There are fragments of others existing, in which the fillets between the flutes are beaded; some in which they are wider than usual, and grooved; others, again, whose whole surface is wrought with foliage in various ways; and it would be no less absurd to arrange all these in different orders, than to make a distorted and hybrid capital the ground-work of an order.

The Roman Ionic.

The only existing example of Ionic in Rome, in which the columns are insulated, is in the temple of Fortuna Virilis (Plate XV. ex. 3; Plate XVI. fig. 12), for the temple of Concord is too barbarous to deserve consideration. Its stylobate, like that of the Roman Corinthian, is lofty and not graduated, having a moulded base and cornice or surbase. In the column the base consists of a plinth, two tori, a scotia, and two fillets; the shaft has twenty fillets and flutes, and diminishes one-tenth of a diameter; the capital is two-fifths of a diameter in height; the volutes, however, dip a little lower, being themselves about that depth without the abacus; the corbelling for the volutes is formed by a bead and large ovolo,—the latter being carved. A straight band connects the generating lines of the volutes, whose ends are bolstered and enriched with foliage; and a square abacus, moulded on the edges, covers the-whole. In the entablature the architrave is unequally divided into three fasciae and a band consisting of a cyma-reversa and fillet; the lowest angle impends the upper face of the shaft of the column. The frieze is in the same vertical line, and is covered with a fillet which receives the cornice; it is also enriched with a composition of figures and foliage. The cornice consists of a bed-mould, two-fifths of its height, and a corona with crown-mouldings. The cymatium is enriched with acanthus leaves and lions’ heads, and the mouldings of the bed-mould and architrave band are carved. The soffit of the corona is hollowed out in a wide groove, whose internal angles are rounded off in a cavetto, but without ornament of any kind, forming indeed a mere throating. Like the angular capitals of the Greek·

Ionic, the external volute of this is turned out and repeated on the flank: either that or the abuse of it in the Composite capital gave rise to distortions of this order, in which all the volutes of the capital are angular, and consequently all its four faces are alike. In. other respects, however, it does not differ generally from the ordinary Roman examples of Ionic, The temple of Fortuna Virilis is pseudo-peripteral, and consequently has neither antae nor pilasters, nor do ancient examples exist of either.

The Roman Dome.

The Roman Doric is even a ruder imitation of the Grecian original than the mean and tasteless deterioration of the voluted Ionic is of the graceful Athenian examples. The specimen of it which is considered preferable to the others is that of the theatre of Marcellus, in Rome (Plate XV. ex. 4). The column is nearly 8 diameters in height: it consists of shaft and capital only. The shaft is quite plain, except fillets above and below, with escape and cavetto; and it diminishes one-fifth of its diameter. The arrangement of the capital, composed of a torus, the necking, and three deep fillets, with a semitorus, surmounted by the abacus, is shown in Plate XV. ex. 4. The corona and crown-mouldings of the cornice being destroyed, the whole height of the entablature cannot be correctly ascertained; but 'from analogy it may be taken, with the bed-mould, part of which exists, at about two-thirds of a diameter, making, with the architrave and frieze, an entablature nearly 2 diameters high. Of this the architrave is exactly half a diameter. Three-tenths of its depth are unequally occupied by the taenia, regula, and guttae, the last of which are six in number, and truncated semicones in form. The rest of the surface of the architrave is plain and vertical, impending a point rather within the superior diameter of the column. A fascia, one-eighth of its own height, bands the frieze above the triglyphs; the rest of its surface is plain vertically, but horizontally it is divided into triglyphs, half a diameter in width, and placed over the centres of the. columns. The space between the triglyphs is equal to the height of the frieze without its plat-band or fascia, making in effect perfectly square metopes. All that can be traced of the cornice is a small cyma-reversa, immediately over the frieze, and a square member with dentils on it. In the example, the cornice is completed from that of the Doric of the Colosseum.

The temple at Cora presents a singular specimen of the Doric order, evidently the result of an examination of some Greek examples, but moulded to the Roman proportions and to Roman taste. The columns are enormously tall, but the shafts are partly fluted and partly chamfered for fluting, like the Greek. The capital is ridiculously shallow, but the abacus is plain, and the echinus of a somewhat Hellenic, form. The entablature is very little more than a diameter and one-third in height, and the architrave of it is shallower even than the capital; but the frieze and cornice are tolerably well proportioned, though the triglyphs in the former are meagre, narrow slips, and the latter is covered by a deep widely-projecting cavetto, that would be injurious to even a better composition. Instead of regular mutules with guttae, the whole of the planceer of the cornice is studded with the latter; but, like the Greek, the triglyph over the angular column extends to the angle of the architrave, which does not appear to have been the practice of the Romans; yet the reason for this does not appear to have been understood, for the external intercolumniations are the same as the others.

As far as we have the means of judging, the Romans made the antae of their Doric similar to the columns, only that they were, of course, square instead of round; though, indeed, an attached column appears to have been generally preferred.

It is, however, to be remembered, that these two orders, the Ionic and Doric of the Roman school, ought hardly to be considered as belonging to the architecture of the Romans. They are merely coarse and vulgar adaptations of the Greek originals, of which we now possess records of the finest examples. Yet their meanness and tastelessness, when compared with the Grecian models, more strikingly evince the superiority of the latter, and show to what extent the architects of the Italian school must have been blinded by their system, when they fancied such wretched examples to be beautiful.

Roman Mouldings and Ornament (Plate XIII.)

The mouldings used in Roman architectural works are the same as the Grecian in general form, but they vaιy materially from them in contour. The Roman cyma-recta is projected much more than the Greek, with a deeper flexure. The ovolo is represented in the Roman style by a moulding whose outline is nearly the convex quadrant of a circle, or a quarter round, and sometimes it is nearly that of the quadrant of an ellipse. The Roman torus is either a semicircle or a semi-ellipse; and the bead is a torus, except in its application, and in being smaller, and generally projected rather more than half the figure whose form it bears. The cavetto, in Roman architecture, is nearly a regular curve, being sometimes the concave quadrant of a circle, or the reverse of an ovolo, and sometimes a smaller segment. A Roman scotia is more deeply cut, and is consequently less delicate than the same member in a Greek congeries: its form frequently approaches that of a concave semi-ellipse.

The enrichments of Roman mouldings are, for the most part, similar to those of the Greek, but lese delicate and graceful both in design and drawing. Those of the cyma and ovolo are particularly referred to, but the Romans used others besides. Raffled leaveβ form a favourite enrichment in the architecture of the Romans; indeed these are hardly less frequent in their works than the honeysuckle is in those of the Greeks. Mouldings were enriched with them; and a raffled leaf masks the angles of carved cymas and ovolos in the former, as a honeysuckle does in the latter. Nevertheless, the honeysuckle and lotus are both found in Roman enrichments, particularly the latter, and perhaps even more than in Greek. It is not uncommon to find examples of Roman architecture completely overdone with ornament,—every moulding carved, and every straight surface, whether vertical or horizontal, sculptured with foliage or with historical or characteristic subjects in relief.

Particular Roman Structures. Temples. —Whatever forms were adopted from the Greeks by the Romans were rapidly altered by the latter. The temples, for example, were, no doubt, constructed, in the main, after the Greek model. But we find three-quarter columns used in the flanks, as at the temple of Fortuna Virilis at Rome and at Nismes, in place of the open peristyle or the plain flat wall. These three-quarter columns were, it is true, used at the rear of the Erechtheum and at the temple of the Giants at Agrigentum. But these were quite exceptions. Then, in the portico of the Pantheon (Plate XVI. fig. 4) the Romans availed themselves of the properties of the arch to effect an immense change in the internal design and appearance.

From the forest of columns, as at the Parthenon, all placed at equal distances, or nearly so, the Romans boldly removed four rows (two in centre and one at. each side, as at the Pantheon, Plate XVI. fig. 5), arched over the space thus left, and so obtained a picturesque effect quite unknown to the Greeks. Then the ends were rounded off into apses, and the same was done at the temple of Venus and Rome. In each of the above cases the exterior still conformed almost entirely to the outlines of the Greeks. But we now come to the circular edifices, as the temple of Minerva Medica, 110 feet in diameter, and the Pantheon, 139. As to the age of these and their purpose there is some doubt; but there can be none as to the temples of Vesta at Tivoli and Rome, which have an external peristyle of columns, and thus present an entirely new form. Whether these temples were finished with domes or not is doubtful. In any case the exterior would probably have shown merely a sloping roof, as has been common enough in Italy down to late times.

Theatres. —The best remaining specimens of Roman theatres are those of Pompeii and Herculaneum. Like those of the Greeks, they rest on the side of a hill, but instead of being hewn out of the hill they are built on it. Others in a more or less ruined state remain in Italy, F rance, Sicily, <fcc,, e.g., at Rome, Verona, Pola, Taormina, and Arles. At first they were of wood, and one by Aemilius Scaurus, 58 B.C., is said to have held 80,000 spectators. That they were copied mainly from the Greeks there can be no doubt. In fact, one built by Pompey is expressly stated to have been copied from another at Mytilene, and their general form is very similar to that of the Greek theatre. But the Roman theatre received a greater degree of architectural decoration than the Greek. Of this the theatre of Marcellus, in Rome, is an example; for though otherwise destroyed, its external wall remains and presents columnar ordinances, with intervening arches in stories, according to the practice of the Roman school.

Amphitheatres. —These are altogether Roman in general design. The first is said to have been built by Julius Caesar, and others were afterwards built by Caligula and Nero. The first of stone is said to have been the Colosseum, built by Vespasian and Titus, and so called from the Colossus of Nero which stood near. It was injured and then restored under Severus and Decius, in whose time it is probable that the upper row was added. As to the awning, we know that the main portion at least of the audience was protected from the fierce rays of the sun by a strong velarium. This was supported on the outside by heavy masts, which passed through holes still existing in the top cornice, and stepped down on to the corbels, which show so conspicuously in the top order. Recent excavations have disclosed the original arena, about 20 feet below the present level of the ground. Evidence has also been obtained that the arena was sometimes a movable platform. To obtain an approximate idea of the size of this enormous structure, we must remember that the Albert Hall (the largest diameter of which is 276 feet) could have been placed in the arena alone of the Colosseum, the exterior of which measures 622 feet by 528 (Plate XVI. fig. 1). Other amphitheatres of great size were constructed in the various towns of the empire. Amongst them we may mention that at. Verona, 500 feet by 404, and Nismes (still used for public shows), 434 by 340. Extensive remains of another, 376 feet by 220, have been discovered recently at El-Djemm, in Tunis. (See Amphitheatre, vol. i. pp. 774-776.)

Tombs. —-Some very grand .examples of tombs of circular forms remain, as well as many others of great beauty. It must be remembered that with the Romans both burial and cremation were used. The columbaria (vaults lined with small recesses for the urns, which contained the ashes of the dead) present the most ordinary specimens of architectural forms adapted to cremation. The sarcophagus, of which that of the Scipios is the best known example, presente the ordinary form used in connection with burial.

But when the family of the deceased was rich or distinguished, the ashes or the sarcophagi were enclosed in buildings of the most magnificent kind. The tomb of Cecilia Metella, so well known to all by Byron’s beautiful lines in Childe Harold, commencing—

“There is a stem round toweι∙ of other days,” is a bold tower 90 feet in diameter and 62 feet high, so solidly built as to contain only a chamber 19 feet in diameter. Much grander was the mausoleum of Augustus, which has perished. Of the mausoleum of Hadrian the skeleton only remains. But it shows that the base was 170 feet square, supporting a circular edifice 115 feet in diameter. It would seem that this mass, now formed into the castle of St Angelo, and showing the naked brickwork, had, in its glory, two ranges of marble columns and probably a domed roof. From its position on the banks of the Tiber, near the bridge, it must have formed one of the grandest architectural .compositions of the Romans. Forums. —At first these great buildings were used for merchants, and were open spaces with porticoes, shops, counting-houses, &c., all round. The best example existing is, perhaps, that of the Forum of Pompeii. In later times these erections expanded into grand architectural ranges of porticoes, with statues, &c. Leading out of them, in various positions, were temples, law courts, theatres, Ac. It was in Trajan’s Forum that his famous column was erected.

The Aqueducts show little of the skill of the architect, but they are very picturesque as they stretch along the Campagna and other places. Across a valley, at Tarragona, one rises to a height of 100 feet, and another, the Pont du Gard, at Nismes, to 180. But they do not reach the level of true architectural beauty, and derive their chief value from their immense length and size. (See Aqueduct, pp. 219-221 of the present volume.)

The Triumphal Arch is peculiarly Roman, and it is in this form that the arch appears to have been most boldly used as an external feature. The arch is, in fact, the form to which all other parts of the structure are mere decorative adjuncts. The principal examples are the arches of Titus. Severus, Janus, and Constantine at Rome, and that of Trajan at Ancona.

Dwellings. —The still extensive remains of the villa of Hadrian, near Tivoli, bespeak its original magnificence. Everything appears to have been directed to internal splendour and effect alone; and, indeed, all collateral evidence tends to the conclusion, that the exterior of Roman palaces and mansions was not heeded, being merely plain brick walls. This is the case at Pompeii, and the ruins of mansions in various parts of Italy, from that of Sallust on the Benacus or Lago di Garda, to those of other Roman nobles on the shores of the Bay of Baiae, present no indications whatever that their exteriors were subjected to architectural decoration. The palace of Diocletian at Spalatro, and the splendid remains of Baalbec and Palmyra, some of which, perhaps, belonged to secular structures, offer evidence to the contrary of this, if they are correctly restored in the works which treat of them. Notwithstanding the extent of the structure and its general magnificence, however, the mouldings and ornaments in the interior of the villa of Hadrian, though in themselves classical and elegant, are small, and have a general air of littleness, especially when compared with the apartments to which they belong,—not that the apartments are generally large, but they are for the most part lofty. The ceilings appear to have been formed by vaulting; there are no indications of windows, and none of stairs of any magnitude—so that the rooms must have been nearly, if not quite, open at one end to admit light and air; and the probability is that there were seldom apartments above the ground floor, though it is likely enough that terraces formed on the vaulted roofs were used for the purposes of recreation and pleasure. Of the floors, which were of .mosaic, several are preserved entire in the museum of the Vatican; where also are deposited many fine specimens of ornamental sculpture in vases and candelabra, besides busts, statues, and groups in bronze, marble, porphyry, and granite, of various styles, remains of the noble collection Hadrian made during his progress through his extensive dominions, which have been found among the ruins of the villa.

In Pompeii we may see the domestic as well as public architecture of ancient Rome, although it must be remembered that Pompeii was a Greek colony, and that it was destroyed, as early as 79 a.d. We have, therefore, probably to expect more Greek character than would be met with elsewhere.

The streets of Pompeü are very narrow, their average width being not more than 12 or 15 feet; frequently they are not more than 8 feet wide, and very few in any part exceed 20. The principal excavated street in the city, that leading from the Forum to the gate towards Herculaneum, and the street of the tombs, is, at the widest, 23 feet 6 inches, including two footways, each 5 feet wide. The streets are all paved with lava, and almost all have side pavement3 or footways, which, however, are for the most part so narrow, that, with few exceptions, two persons cannot pass on them. That the cars or carriages of the inhabitants could not pass each other in most of the streets, is proved by the wheel-ruts which have been worn on the stones, and the recesses made here and there for the purpose of passing. They are lined on both sides with small cells,, which served for shops of various kinds; and they are strikingly like the ordinary shops in towns in the south of Italy and in Sicily at the present time (Plate XVII. fig. 1). They resemble these, too, in this respect, that there appear in very few cases to be accommodations in connection with the shops for the occupiers and their families, who must have lived elsewhere, as modern Italian shopkeepers very commonly do. They present no architectural decoration whatever; the fronts are merely plain stuccoed brick wall3 z with a large square opening in each, part of which is the door, and part the window, for lighting the place and showing the goods.

Whenever-a private house or gentleman’s mansion was situated in a good place for business (like the ground floor of many modern Italian noblemen’s palaces), the street-front, or fronts, were entirely occupied with shops, a comparatively narrow entrance to the house being preserved in a convenient part between some two of them (Plate XVII. fig. 3). The door to this is sometimes quite plain, but at times is decorated with pilasters. When the site permitted such an arrangement, the entrance door being open, a passerby could look completely through the house to the garden, or, in the absence of a garden, to the extreme boundarywall, on which was painted a landscape or other picture. An arrangement, it may be observed, not unlike this, is common in some of the Italian cities at the present day; but the mansions being now built in stories, and the upper stories alone being occupied by the families, a merely pleasing effect is produced; whilst in the former, persons crossing from one apartment to another were exposed to view, and domestic privacy thus completely invaded, to produce a pretty picture. Inside the entrance passage, which may be from 10 to 12 feet in depth, there is a space, the atrium, generally square, or nearly s∏ on which different rooms open, that vary in size from 10 feet square to 10 feet by 12, or even 12 feet square; they have doorways only, and were probably used as sleeping-chambers by the male servants of the family. In the centre of this court there is a sunk basin or reservoir for receiving the rain, called the impluvium, rendering it likely that this was roofed over, with a well-hole to admit light and air, and allow the rain to drop from the roof into the reservoir. Connected with this outer court was the kitchen and its accessories. If the site allowed the second court to be placed beyond the first in the same direction from the entrance, the communication was by a wide opening not unlike folding doors between rooms in modern houses, generally with a space intervening, which was variously occupied; or a mere passage led from one to the other. The second or inner court is generally much larger than the first, and is for the most part a parallelogram, but variously proportioned. It forms a tetrastoön, being open in the middle and arranged with a peristyle of columns, colonnading a covered walk all round. On this the best and most finished apartments open; but they are of such various sizes, and are so variously arranged, that it is not easy to determine more than that they included the refectory, the library, and sleeping-rooms. Some of them, indeed, are such as must have been useless except for the last purpose; these, perhaps, were the apartments of the female branches of a family, at least in most cases. Some houses, however, have a nest of small cells in an inner corner or secluded recess, which may have been the gynaeceum; but that is far from being common. Exhedrae or recesses, open in front to the atrium, are common, and are often painted with more care and elegance than any other part of the house; but generally the walls are everywhere painted—in the more common places flat, with a slight degree of ornament, perhaps, and in the best rooms, with arabesques and pictures in compartments. The architectural decorations are mostly painted; the ornaments are not unfrequently elegant, but the architecture itself of the mansions is bad in almost every sense. The rooms being windowless, would, when covered, be necessarily dark; the doors are arranged without any regard to uniformity, either in size or situation. The street-fronts of those houses which, not being in a good business situation, were not occupied with shops, were not merely unadorned, but were actually deformed by loop-holes, to light some passage or inner closet which had no door on one of the courts. (Plate XVII. fig. 8.) The columns of the second courts are generally in the worst style possible: those which have foliated capitals, and may be considered compositions of the Corinthian order, are the best; but the imitations of Doric and Ionic are both mean and ugly. From the uses to which they were put, and the wideness of their intercolumniations, together with the fact that none of them have been found in Pompeii, it is probable that the entablatures were of wood, and were consequently burnt at thé time of the destruction of the city, and broken up by the inhabitants, almost all of whom certainly escaped, and who, it is very evident, returned, when the fiery shower and the conflagration had ceased, to remove whatever they could find of their property undestroyed; for it must be remembered that the roofs and ceilings all over the city are entirely gone, and the uncovered and broken walls remain, from 8 to 10 feet only in height. Everything, indeed, clearly demonstrates that great exertions were used to recover whatever was valuable; and it is very probable, moreover, that the place was constantly resorted to by treasure-seekers for perhaps centuries after the calamity occurred. It may also be remarked that the loftier edifices, which would have been unburied by the ashes, had been thrown down by an earthquake about sixteen years before the volcanic shower fell, and, therefore, were the more easily covered. Other showers must have fallen since that which destroyed the city, to produce the complete filling up of every part and the general level throughout. Hence we are still uninformed as to the structure and disposition of the roofs and ceilings of the houses of the ancients. The doors, too, of whatever materials they were composed, are entirely gone: there remain, however, here and there indications—and even charred fragments—of wooden door-posts, but they belong to outer or street doors, leaving it probable that a matting of some kind, suspended from the lintel, formed the usual doors to rooms. It is, in fact, supposed that curtains answered the purposes of doors to the interiors. In these particulars, unfortunately, Herculaneum affords but little assistance, as the mode of its destruction was similar to that of Pompeii, though, upon the whole, Herculaneum is more likely to furnish information on these particulars than its sister in misfortune. Although it has been ascertained that the Romans understood the manufacture of glass, it must not be supposed that they were accustomed to apply it as freely as we do to exclude the weather and transmit light. It was, however, soιħetimes used; one wooden frame with four small squares of glass has been found; another brass frame with the glass movable; and one piece of glass of considerable size was found in one of the walls of a bath. The floors of the houses of Pompeii and Herculaneum are all of mosaic work, coarser and simpler in the less important parts, and finer and more ornate in the more finished apartments: the ornaments are borders, dots, frets, labyrinths, flowers, and sometimes figures. In this, too, the superior advantages the moderns enjoy are evident. The ancients did not understand how to construct w ooden floors, or, at least, they did not apply timber to that use. A few rude and narrow staircases are found in Pompeii, which, it is very probable, were to afford access to the terraces or flat roofs, for they are not common, and no portion of an upper story remains in any part. Sufficient remains have, however, been found to show that the upper stories often overhung the lower front, as in mediaeval houses; the fronts being made of woodwork, supported on a prolongation of the floor joists. In one part of the city the houses on one side of the street are on a declivity: there a commodious flight of stairs is fouud to lead from the atrium in front to another lower court and rooms, not under the houses but behind them; for we do not find an under-ground story in the Pompeian houses. On the shores of the Bay of Baiae, and at Cicero’s Formian Villa on the Gulf of Gaeta, however, there are crypts or arched chambers under the level of the mansions, the sites requiring substructions; but it may be questioned whether even these were used as parts of the house, and as we use cellars, for they present no indications of stairs, and have no regular means of intercommunication.

Numerous remains of Roman houses are found in all the colonies, and notices of many in England will be found in the Archoeoloyia, and other archaeological publications. They are not of sufficient importance to be quoted here, but they serve to show that the Romans carried with them into other lands the same habits, and even practised the same mode of construction which they adopted at home. One very remarkable exception exists, viz., in the Hauran in Syria. The edifices there were first, we believe, noticed by Humboldt. They have siuce been described in detail by Mr Cyril Graham and others, and have been admirably illustrated by Count Vogue. The country was conquered by the Romans at the end of the 1st century A.D., and the houses, <tc., seem to range in date from that time, or, perhaps, earlier, to the end of the 4th. They are contained within stone walls, forming small towns, and so numerous that sixty of these walled cities have been counted, all now desolate, but in many cases remaining almost perfect even to the doors, shutters, and paving of streets. The remains are chiefly of houses whose walls are of basalt. The rooms are 12 to 20 or 25 feet square, with strong, arched ribs thrown across, supporting a ceiling of thick slabs of basalt. Some of these are as much as 18 by 12 feet, and 6 inches thick. The doors and shutters are of the same material, often panelled as though of wood. A specimen of these, and also some of the carvings, are in the British Museum.

Basilicas. —We have left these to the last, as they are more intimately connected than any other ancient architectural forms with those of the Christians. They seem to have been at first much the same class of building as our Royal Exchange, both as regards use and plan; open in the centre, with porticoes round. Then all was roofed over, and a sort of triforium or gallery formed over the porticoes. At one end was a recess, often circular and parted off from the rest by a screen of columns. This, with the space in front of it, formed the Tribunal. In Trajan’s, there seems to have been an apse at each end. Remains are found at Pompeii and Herculaneum, Treves, <fcc. A complete exception to the ordinary form is found in tho Basilica of Maxentius (formerly known as the temple of Peace) at Rome.

Résumé.— Roman architecture, as we know it, dates only from about the Christian era, and the rapidity with which it spread from that time is something marvellous. Through nearly the whole extent of the Roman empire, through Italy, Asia Minor, Sicily, Britain, France, Syria, Africa,—with one great exception, Egypt,—all was Roman in mouldings, ornaments, details, the very style of carving and the construction. No matter what the country or the architect, all seem to have lost their nationality when the Roman came, and to have adopted implicitly his system of design and decoration. It has been seen that he copied the orders and much of the leading forms of his buildings from the Greeks. But he speedily added others. The apse and the circle on plan were his; so were the dome and the arch in elevation; and thus he enlarged at once the whole range of the architect’s powers, and whilst utterly disregarding the delicate refinements of the Greeks, secured a freedom of design which resulted at length in our Pointed architecture.

But great as the advance was, it seems to have been arrested just when opportunities were offered, on the grandest scale, for bringing about the noblest results. The Roman architect seems to have been unable to reach the highest effort of art, viz., to bring the whole of any grand edifice into one splendid mass, to concentrate the detailed parts into one grand whole. But in reflecting on what the Roman did not do, we must not forget that we owe to him some of the grandest forms to which we too are now accustomed.

We now come to a complete change in the structures which we have to describe. Henceforth we shall find no Forum, no public bath, theatre, temple, or house. All these forms disappear, and for nearly 700 years, until the time when the Norman castle arose, well-nigh every building of architectural merit was in some way or other ecclesiastical. But with our Christian faith there arose forms of beauty utterly unknown to the Pagan, which culminated in the glories of Lincoln and Canterbury.

Pointed Architecture.

In those countries which received the Christian religion from Rome, but which did not contain such mines of architectural material in temples, amphitheatres, and palaces, as Italy did, and, indeed, in the remoter parts of Italy itself, which did not contain them as Rome did, churches were constructed in imitation of those of the metropolis of the Christian world. These being the work of a semi-barbarous and unpolished people, were of necessity comparatively rude, and from them arose the Gothic architecture of the Middle Ages,—not from any previously existing style of architecture among the northern nations who overran Italy and subverted the Roman power, the rude Celtic monuments being the only specimens of architecture they possessed. The transitional style of architecture referred to will be found in what are called the Saxon and Norman buildings of England, and to a greater or less extent in all parts of Europe in which the Romans had been masters, and particularly in those which adhered to the Roman communion in the great division of the churches. The general forms and modes of arrangement peculiar to Roman architecture may be traced throughout; in some specimens they are more and in others less obvious, but the leading features are the same. This is more evident in Italy than elsewhere. In the early Roman basilicas and churches, some of which are of the age of Constantine, and which were constructed in the Roman style, the first divergencies occur · in those which are later they are still greater, and distance of time and place appears still to have increased them, till what may be called a new style was formed, having peculiarities of its own, but even more clearly deducible from its origin than Roman is from Greek or Greek from Egyptian. The variation in the development from the parent stock is great, but in all cases there is more or less evidence of the descent. It must be noted, however, that there was one important modification of Roman art, and this was the Roman art modified by contact with the East, and known commonly as Byzantine. Its influence was felt first and most strongly in St Mark’s, Venice, a building which is entirely Byzantine in style as opposed to Romanesque. From Venice it was copied in Périgueux in the church of St Front, and this copy influenced the style of a vast number of buildings in the south-west of France. St Mark’s, again, had a great influence on the Lombard works of Northern Italy, and these were the originals from which Germany, by way of the valley of the Rhine, derived all its mediaeval buildings. To the greater part of France and to England the stream of art was much more purely Romanesque, being the result of knowledge of genuine Roman art, with little, if any, influence from the East, In Spain we see the direct influence of the Romans, the direct influence of the Arab, and the indirect Byzantine influence of the south-west of France, all materially affecting the development of the national architecture. As might be expected, this style was not the same in all the countries which practised it; it was derived, in them all, from the same source, as we have shown, but was materially influenced by the habits, manners, and state of civilisation of the various nations, and much, too, by their means of communication with Rome. This, in strictness, may be called Gothic architecture, as it was partly induced by the Gothic invasions of Italy, and was invariably practised by the nations to whom that term may with propriety be applied. It arose in the 4th century, and was subverted in the 12th by the invention or introduction of the pointed arch, which marks a new era, and was destined to give birth to a new style in architecture.

l Where, when, and with whom the pointed form originated has been more discussed and disputed than the discovery of the properties of the arch itself. Some havo contended that it was suggested by the intersections of semicircular arches, as they were employed in Ornamenting the fronts of edifices in the preceding style; some, that groined arches of the same form gave the idea; others have referred it to the interlacing of the branches of trees when planted in parallel rows,—to an imitation of wickerwork,—to a figure used on conventual seals,—to the principle of the pyramid,—to Noah’s ark,—to chance. Such a mass of conflicting opinions, almost all supported by some show of reason, and more or less by evidence, may be called a proof of the impossibility of determining the question. There is one striking fact, however, which has been overlooked by many of the theorists in the discussion of the question; it is, that the pointed arch made its appearance almost at the same moment of time in all the civilised countries of Europe. This is proved by the controversies of those who claim its invention for their respective nations; for none of them can produce genuine specimens of it before a certain period, to which they can all reach. Now, if it had been invented in any of the European nations, that one would certainly have been able to show specimens of it of a date considerably anterior to some of the others; for though it might by chance have been soon communicated to any one of them, the improbability is great that it would, immediately have reached them all, and have been at once adopted by all, .to the subversion of their previously practised forms of construction. The infrequent and imperfect modes of communication between the different countries of Europe at the period referred to, furnish another reason why it is not probable that a discovery of the kind should travel rapidly from one to another. Considering these things, and particularly the fact of the almost simultaneous introduction of the pointed arch to the various nations of Europe, as it appears by their monuments immediately after the first Crusade, in which they all bore a part, connected with existing evidence that it was commonly used in the East at and anterior to that period, the most rational and satisfactory theory seems to be that a knowledge of it was acquired by the Crusaders in the Holy Land, and brought home to their respective countries by them. In Europe there are found rude approaches to the pointed form in some of the earlier. Gothic structures; but we believe it may be safely asserted that nothing can be indicated of a date beyond that of the first Crusade, approaching the simple but perfect lancet arch, which, it is not denied, came into use immediately after that period; whereas tolerably well-authenticated examples of it are found in the East, of sufficient antiquity to induce the opinion that it was at that time imported thence. It is, moreover, indisputable that the Saracenic or Mahometan nations, who were never known in those times to adopt any European custom or invention of any kind, do use, and have used, the pointed arch. It was very extensively employed in various parts of Asia, and nowhere in more sumptuous edifices or with greater effect than in the structures erected by the Mahometan conquerors of India. With what nation of the East, and in what manner, the pointed arch originated, are problems equally difficult to solve. We have not been able to discover that the properties of the arch were known to the Egyptians or to the Greeks, and there is no evidence to show that they were known to the Persians or to the Indians of ancient times; but structures are found in the countries of those nations in which chambers are domed, and apertures covered with a pointed arch, produced, however, by gathering or corbelling over, and not by arched structure. It is not improbable, therefore, that, such things existing, when the properties of the arch bo-came known, that form would be repeated upon it, and the result would be the lancet arch,—the prototype, the germ of the style. The pointed arch, on its introduction into Europe, was not accompanied by any of its ordinary accessories in after-time,—its light clustered pillars, its mullions, foliations or featherings, and graceful tracery. These developments resulted from its adoption; so that whether the arch itself was invented in Europe or imported from the East, to the European nations must be assigned the credit of developing the beautiful style of architecture whose distinguishing feature it is.

Before proceeding further with this subject, it is necessary to determine by what name this style is to be designated. There have been only too many arguments and discussions on the name which is most appropriate to the style. By common consent the word Gothic is used all over Europe to designate it, and it now hardly matters whether or not there was originally good reason for the use of such a term. One of the first in England to use the term was Sir Henry Wotton. It was continued by Evelyn, who applied it more directly; and the authority of Sir Christopher Wren finally .settled its application. But they used the term as one of reproach for what they thought a savage and uncivilised sort of art, though it was in vain that, by the use of a bad name, they attempted to deny the merit of that which was after all the only nationally developed style of their own country as well as of the whole of Northern Europe. In the last century, through the influence and enthusiasm of Horace Walpole, and afterwards of John Carter, an eminent artist and architect, a better taste was formed, and this led to the appreciation of that which is, indeed, the English national style. Many attempts were made to explode the totally irrelevant appellation of “Gothic” which had been applied to the style, but without effect. Some writers have called it Italian, others German, others Norman or French, others British, and many have contended for the exclusive term English. To this last the Society of Antiquaries lent its influence, but with equal inefficiency, for the term Gothic still prevails. Mr Britton, than whom perhaps no man possessed a greater right to affix an appellation to the pointed arch style, from the splendid services he has done it in the publication of his Cathedral and Architectural Antiquities, wished to introduce a term which is not at all unlikely to succeed, as it is equally appropriate and independent of national feeling and hypothetic origin. He called it Christian architecture, and in this he was followed by the younger Pugin and many others. This, as a generic term, would admit each nation possessing specimens of it to distinguish its own species or style; and as the varieties of Hellenic architecture are known by the names of the tribes or nations who are presumed to have originated them,—Dorian, Ionian, and Corinthian,—so might Christian architecture be English or British, German, French, <fcc., for each has its peculiarities. These species would again individually admit of classification, according to the changes each underwent in the course -of its career. One objection, however, has been taken to Mr Britton’s distinctive appellation. It is, that “Christian” applies as well to what may also properly be called the Gothic style—that which arose on the extinction of Roman architecture, and was subverted by the introduction of the pointed arch, and which, indeed, owed its diffusion and progress, if not its origin, to the Christian religion. We are therefore still left to seek a suitable appellation; and in the absence of a better, are inclined to use the term Pointed, which is not only distinctive, but descriptive; it has, too, the merit of being general, so that it may mark the genus, while the national species and their varieties maybe distinguished by their peculiarities as before.

The pointed arch was a graft on the Romanesque, Lombard, and Byzantine architecture of Europe, just as tho circular arch of the Romans had been on the columnar ordinances of the Greeks; but with a widely different result. The amalgamation in the latter case destroyed tho beauty of both the stock and the scion; while in the former t. ’ e stock lent itself to the modifying influence of its parasitical nursling, gradually gave up its heavy, dull, and cheerless forms, and was eventually lost in its beautiful offspring, as the unlovely caterpillar is in the gay and graceful butterfly.

We all know that architecture has had its origin in religious feelings and observances—that its noblest monuments among the pagan nations of antiquity were temples to the gods— -whilst the rude nations of the north in tho Middle Ages devoted their energies, after their conversion to Christianity, to the construction of suitable edifices for the worship of the Almighty; and we find, again, that the most extensive and most splendid structures raised by the same people, when the light of learning had begun to shine upon them, and a new and more beautiful style of architecture had been developed, were dedicated to tho same purpose. In addition, however, many, hardly les3 magnificent, and not less beautiful, were raised for the purposes of education, and became the nurseries of scienco and literature. Kings and nobles also employed architecture in the composition, arrangement, and decoration of their palaces and castles; and though for domestic purposes its aid was not so largely required, it was equally used. The remains which have come down to us from the earlier portion of the Middle Ages are comparatively small, but there is ample evidence to show that the style was universal in its application, and so full of life and vigour that every implement, every piece of furniture, and every detail of dress or ornament, was governed then, just as in the best period of classic art, by the rules of art which were observed in the largest and stateliest of the public buildings of the time.

When the practice of building houses in stories commenced cannot be correctly ascertained, though it was usual among the Romans, as we know by the example of Pompeii, and it appears to have been usual during the Middle Ages. We frequently, indeed, find an apparent equivalent for the term story used by the ancient writers, both sacred and profane; but it must be remarked that none of the ancient remains, whether of public or private Structures, afford evidence that it was a common practice even among the Romans to build more than one story above the ground floor; and it was less likely to be common among the Eastern nations, with whom the practice is not very general, even at the present day. Indeed, with-put considerable proficiency in the art of construction, it is hardly practicable to erect buildings in stories with such slight materials as were used by the Romans in some of their domestic edifices. We find, however, in tho oldest existing works of the Middle Ages, and particularly in some of the secular structures of Venice, a degree of intelligence evinced in this respect far surpassing anything found in ancient remains. Possibly the skill was principally acquired in that city from the necessity of making artificial foundations, which consequently required a superstructure not unnecessarily cumbrous; and again, to make slight walls sufficiently strong, they must be skilfully bonded in themselves, and bound together, which could only be done by means of a material possessing considerable length and great fibrous tenacity—whence arose framed floors of timber. These, by their strength, their obvious utility and convenience, added to the want of space which existed in a thriving and populous community on a very restricted spot of dry land, superinduced, in the second place, the building of additional stories, which would soon be imitated in other places. But in whatever manner the improvement took place, the fact that it was made is certain; and we find it applied in all the works of the European nations, both ecclesiastical and civil, from the 9th and 10th centuries downwards. The combination of masonry and carpentry in building tended greatly to the advancement of both; for, it being required at times to make them act independently of each other, additional science and art were necessary, as the proportions must be retained that were given to similar works in which they co-operated. To this is to be traced the skill displayed in the vaulted roofs and ceilings, in the towers and lofty spires, of some of our Pointed cathedrals for the one, and such splendid examples of construction as the roof of Westminster Hall for the other. On this point Sir William Chambers, who was certainly no depreciator of the merits of the Romans in architecture, says; “In the constructive part of architecture the ancients do not seem to have been great proficients” (Gwilt’s Chambers’s Civ. Arch., p. 128); then having referred many of what he calls the “deformities observable in Grecian buildings” to want of skill in construction, he continues, “neither were the Romans much more skilful; the precepts of Vitruvius and Pliny on that subject are imperfect, sometimes erroneous, and the strength or duration of their structures is more owing to the quantity and goodness of their materials than to any great art in putting them together. It is not, therefore, from any of the ancient works that much information can be obtained in that branch of the art. To those usually called Gothic architects we are indebted for the first considerable improvement in construction. There is a lightness in their works, an art and boldness in their execution, to which the ancients never arrived, and which the moderns comprehend and imitate with difficulty. England contains many magnificent specimens of this species of architecture, equally admirable for the art with which they are built, the taste and ingenuity with which they are composed.” To this Mr Gwilt, in his edition of Sir William’s work, adds, with much truth, in a note, “There is more constructive skill shown in Salisbury, and others of our cathedrals, than in all the works of the ancients put together.”

Pointed architecture took root and grew with almost equal vigour, though under different conditions, in almost every part of Europe. But the honour of having developed the style to the very highest perfection must undoubtedly be adjudged to France, or rather to the small portion of the country, including Paris, which formed the old He de France. In Germany there was much less natural development. For a long period after the Lombard style had been perfected on the Rhine no variation of moment was adopted, until German architects attempted at Cologne to outvie and rival the magnificence of Amiens. In Spain the architects of some of the finest buildings were Frenchmen, and the style can hardly be said to have been developed there at all. In England, on the contrary, though our earliest Pointed buildings were undoubtedly to a great extent French in their origin, the developments of the art were soon entirely national, and were but little modified even by the influence of the foreign religious orders, which (as at Fountains Abbey) had so much power over many of our ecclesiastical foundations. From England the style was carried by Englishmen to Scotland,—a poor country, with no style of its own, and no cultivation such as is necessary to produce an order of architects, and to Ireland, where the English architects followed the footsteps of the invading armies; and finally, if we may trust the evidence of the stones themselves, to the coast of Norway, where the cathedral of Trondhjem is as unmistakably English in much of its style and detail as any English cathedral. In England the development of the style is plainly marked, and its advances are easily traceable. We find in various portions of the same edifice, according to the period of its construction, exemplifications of the-style, from the ingrafting of the simple lancet arch on the Norman piers in the time of Henry II., to the highly enriched groinings and ramified traceries of the age of Henry VII.; but the changes are so gradual, and are so finely blended, that the one in advance appears naturally to result from that which comes before it. Although the nations of the Continent never borrowed from us, but were themselves originators, it is very clear that after the first we did not borrow; for our structures bear the strongest possible marks of originality, as the gradual advances can be traced from one feature to another in a way which is quite peculiar to this country. This, however, will be explained more in detail further on.

The Pointed Architecture of Europe generally.

There are so many local and national varieties of this style that it is quite impossible to dismiss it with au account of its features in one district or country only. To do this would be to give an entirely wrong and inadequate conception of the subject. It must be treated generally under the heads of the several countries in which it has flourished most—as England, France, Germany, and Spain. It must certainly not be forgotten in talking of Italy. And in most of these countries it might properly be subdivided according to the local varieties caused either by changes in the political geography, or by physical conditions which so largely affect the details and variations of style in architecture. For the origin of all these developments of the style we must go back to Rome. It is not only that in the Roman states we see the origin of Romanesque architecture gradually developed out of the Roman buildings. The same process was going on at the same time all over Europe wherever the Roman empire extended. We have only to look at the Roman occupation of the south of France, as evidenced by the still magnificent remains of theatres and tombs at Arles, of the amphitheatre at Nismes, of the theatre at Orange, or the aqueduct of Pont de Gard; or at the similar works on the coast of Spain, at Tarragona, or in its very centre at Segovia; or at the basilica, gateway, and theatre at Treves; or in our own country at the remains of Roman buildings in various directions, of which Silchester is surpassed in interest by none;—we have only to look at all these in order to see that, erected as they were in countries which at the time were little better than barbarous, they must of necessity have prepared men all over Europe for the same sort of development. The Romans had shown them the use of the arch, the column, and the vault; the conversion to Christianity gave them a great want to satisfy; and finally, the revulsion of feeling when the supposed mystical year of our Lord 1000, with all its apprehended accompanying dangers, had passed in safety, gave such an impetus to buildings for religious purposes as the world had never before seen. It was a time for development, therefore, and nearly everywhere the development proceeded from the same premisses. Roman art, pure and simple, was the general foundation of all Romanesque building, and it was only slightly modified in certain districts by the introduction of the Byzantine influence from Constantinople to Venice, and thence in some degree to some other cities and towns, or, as in Pisan buildings, and in those of the south of Italy and south of Spain, by the Greek and Arab influence which was so great down to the end of the 13th century. An examination of .the earliest European churches—such, for instance, as San Clemente and San Lorenzo at Rome—will show how entirely they were constructed on Roman models. From them we go in Italy to Ravenna or Toscanella, to San Miniato at Florence, to the cathedral of Torcello, to San Zenone, Verona, and San Michele, Pavia, and see how gradually but surely the plan and details were being developed into what soon became a new style; and from these examples we may follow the stream of art from the south to the centre of France, and thence to this country and Germany. Or looking at other developments in Italy, we may in the same way trace a succession of circular buildings, in which the connection and sequence is clear, leading us as it does from the Pantheon, and other circular Roman temples, through the old cathedral of Brescia and the grand church of San Vitale, Ravenna, to the cathedral at Aachen, and so to our own circular churches, and to many of those which, like the Marien Kirche, Treves, though not really circular in appearance, are yet so planned as to fall properly within the same class.

The course of progress of European art was to a great extent first of all geographical and political. For, in addition to the influence exercised by conquest or the political connection of one district with another, it is remarkable how much particular styles are limited by geographical divisions and boundaries, by the courses of rivers, the occurrence of convenient building materials, and other such secondary causes. And with so many causes for variations of style in existence, it will be quite necessary, in order to give any intelligible account of the whole course of Gothic architecture, even in the shortest compass, to treat separately each of the great national divisions. We will take England first, only premising that, following strict order, we ought to have begun with Italy, were it not that, in spite of the origin of all northern art having to be looked for there, as soon as it came to be a question of development, almost all the life and vigour of architecture in the Middle Ages is to be seen north and not south of the Alps; and whatever was borrowed, in the first instance, from Italy was paid back again with interest afterwards. And in taking England first, we have the advantage of speaking of a national art, of which every educated Englishman knows some of the examples, so as to be more able to follow the course of our argument than would be the case were all the examples of its application foreign and unknown to him.

English Gothic Architecture.

The history of the development of Gothic architecture is, perhaps, more easily read on the buildings themselves here than it is in any other part of Europe. The Roman buildings in England were never of very great importance, and were not always standing as evidences of the existence of an. older style, which might be looked back and up to with respect and admiration, even where they did not harmonise with popular customs. Such art, nevertheless, as did exist in this country before the 11th century, was, no doubt, derived from Roman examples existing in the country, and copied in a rude and unskilful fashion by native workmen. The existing Roman remains show that there was quite enough architectural and decorative art introduced into the country by the Romans to have formed a school of masons, sculptors, and builders, if the civilisation of the people had been sufficient to make them desire it. Such a school can hardly be said to have been formed if we look at the few and comparatively rude remains of buildings certainly erected before the Norman Conquest. In such work as the beautiful archway recently discovered in Britford church, Wilts, where carving of stone-work is joined with brick or tile and stone in a very elegant fashion, we see the immediate effect of cultured Roman influence and example. At a later date, in such fine works as the steeple of Earl’s Parton, Northants, we see only the rude grandeur of comparatively uncivilised workmen cognizant only at a distance of good Roman work. In upwards of a hundred churches, dispersed in various parts of England, fragments more or less complete of these early buildings, erected before the Norman Conquest, still remain. They are numerous enough to enable us to classify their features in a general way, and they agree in certain definite points of difference from the architecture which prevailed after the Norman Conquest. It is probable that a considerable proportion of these buildings were erected after the year 1000, when we recollect the influence which the expected end of the world had in discouraging building shortly before that date, and how enormous the zeal for building was as soon as it was safely passed. The leading features of the buildings erected before the Conquest are as follows :—(a.) Quoins at angles alternately long and short, the difference being so marked as to be seen on the most casual inspection; (δ.) Arrangement of wall faces into panels by means of vertical strips or pilasters of stone; (c.) Arches built not only in semicircular form, but frequently (and especially for arcading) with straight sides; (d.) Rude balusters, generally bulging outwards in the centre, used to divide openings of more than one di vison (as, e.g., belfry windows); (e.) Introduction of rudely moulded, chamfered, or plain square abaci at the springings of arches; (∕.) Towers, in several cases of some importance, adorned with arcading, formed by pilasters and round or straight sided arches. These features are all represented in illuminated MSS. of the same period, and are not seen in works executed after about the date of the Conquest. It is this fact that makes the year 1066 a convenient year for dealing with as the assumed commencement of a new epoch. But in fixing this date, we must remember that, though the Conquest of William would account satisfactorily for the changed style of building which is universally seen after this time, there can be no doubt that Edward the Confessor’s Norman education led naturally to the introduction of many Norman features into English work. The considerable remains of that king’s foundation at Westminster Abbey afford good evidence of the fact, that the so-called Saxon style had been abandoned by the workmen employed by· him, and that the way was being prepared for the adoption of all the Norman architectural features even before the imposition of the Norman rule.

The succeeding periods of English architecture have been generally divided upon similar systems, the main dispute among antiquaries and architects being as to the nomenclature of the various styles which followed each other in a regular course of development, rather than as to the exact period of change. Between the complete styles there is always a period of transition, during which the features of the styles were not so well marked, and during which the progress of the art was by no means uniformly rapid in all parts of the country. The following chronological table gives the main divisions :— [table]

Even after this period many buildings were erected in a debased imitation of Gothic, but their features do not admit of their being çlassified with the same precision as those which obtained from about the year 1066 to 1546. For that period of just 500 years so regular was the development, that it is not too much to say that a well-informed architect or antiquary ought always-to be able to give, within ten or at most twenty years, the date of any, however small a portion of mediaeval architecture, with almost absolute certainty of being correct when his judgment can be tested by documentary evidence. With this preface we will now describe, in as concise a manner as possible, the features of the various divisions given in the foregoing table.

The characteristics of the Norman stylé are, no doubt, generally known. The works executed during this period were on so colossal a scale, and so many of them are still perfect, that every opportunity is afforded for studying them in all parts of England. It may be observed, too, that there is less variety in the character of the style in different dioceses or counties than there is in the case of subsequent works. The earlier works, as, e.g., Walkelyn’s transepts at Winchester Cathedral, are comparatively simple and rude. The arches are unmoulded, the capitals are of the simplest form of cushion capital; and grand and solemn as the work is, it cannot, for refinement and beauty of detail, be compared to the later Norman work in which, instead of minute directions being given to the workmen, they were encouraged to develop their own taste and ingenuity in the decorative sculpture with which they so elaborately covered their architectural mouldings But still, the principles of construction, and of the decoration of it, were identical throughout the whole period. The ground-plan of most Norman churches was cruciform, with a central tower, the east end being very frequently apsidal. The aisles were divided from the naves by columns of vast size, sometimes circular, sometimes octagonal, and sometimes simply clustered. The arches were for the most part semicircular, save towards the end of the period when the pointed arch was often used where much strength was required, though the round arch was still used everywhere for ornament. The windows in small buildings were mere narrow slits in the wall, probably not meant to receive glazing, and opening out with a wide splay on the inside; in larger buildings they were much more important features, being of large size and adorned with columns, with capitals and bases both inside and outside. The treatment of mouldings was accurate and scientific. As large arches are naturally constructed with a series of orders or layers of stones, the masons wrought each of these with a separate moulding, so as to define them well, and provided capitals whose upper surface was ingeniously planned, even where it fitted a circular column below, so as to fit exactly the several orders of the arch. This is one only out of many features which prove how skilful the Norman architects were. All their best works are in no sense haphazard works of art, but carefully ordered and arranged with almost classic attention to regularity. The masonry is at the same time unusually beautiful and well executed. There is probably not a finer piece of masonry in England than the late Norman central tower of Winchester Cathedral,—the stones being all uniformly wrought, close jointed, and regularly coursed. The doorways are the great glory of many of these buildings. Sometimes the mouldings are continuous round jamb and arch (as in the well-known examples at Malmesbury Abbey and at Iffley), but more usually they are adorned with a series of columns, sometimes carved or diapered, and carrying on their capitals a grand succession of enriched arch mouldings. These doorways do not occur only in large and important churches, but are to be seen also in out-of-the-way country churches in all parts, even the most remote, of England. The walls were often arcaded with single or intersecting arches, treated in the most elaborate manner. They were usually of so great a thickness that no buttresses were required, even where, as in the aisles of large churches, stone vaulted roofs rested against them. The Norman buttress, wherever introduced, is consequently only a slight development of a pilaster, used for the purpose of defining the divisions or panels of an elevation, and not introduced for the sake of giving support to the wall. The walls are frequently enriched with moulded or carved string-cornices, and with a cornice supported on corbels under the eaves of the roof, and in the best works are entirely of wrought stone, and built in regular courses. The roofs which surmounted the walls were usually of steep pitch, showing the whole of the cross framing of the timbers used in them; and sometimes, as in the case of Peterborough Cathedral, boarded on the under side so as to form a flat or slightly canted ceiling, which was then decorated with colour. At Adel, near Leeds, are remains of a richly-moulded Norman roof, in which every pair of rafters seems to have been furnished with a tie-beam. But it need hardly be said that not many wooden roofs of this period exist; and the stone roofs which, as time wore on, were more and more often erected, were not only more permanent in their character, but, no doubt, played the most important part in the gradual development of the style and the introduction of the pointed arch. The succession of vaults was the same here and on the Continent. First of all the plain barrel vault, then one formed by the intersection of two such vaults at right angles; and finally, this vault with well-defined arches between the bays, and mouldings or ribs under the angles of the intersecting vaults. It was impossible for men to go on long forming such vaults as these without realising, not only that a pointed arch might be built, but, at the same time, that its form enabled a builder to overcome many practical difficulties in the formation of vaults, which could only be got over otherwise, and then badly, by the expedient of stilting the round arch. The Norman vaults were seldom applied to any but the aisles of churches at no great height from the ground. They were very heavy, and exerted more thrust on the wall than the later Gothic vaults, and the Norman masons shrank consequently from venturing to put them on their lofty clerestories.

It was in the next period—that of the transition to Pointed—that the science of vaulting received a great impetus, whilst the whole architectural construction at the same time tended to assume more graceful and elegant lines. In so general a view of the case as this, it is impossible to do more here than point to salient examples which illustrate generally the progress of the art. Just as the cathedrals of-Peterborough, Durham, Norwich, and Ely illustrate, on the grandest scale, the features of the best Norman art in England, the eastern part of Canterbury illustrates the whole period of the transition from that to Pointed, and is consequently one of the most valuable buildings that we have for the purpose of study, as well as one of almost unrivalled beauty and magnificence. Professor Willis has made this church classical ground to the archaeologist who, under his guidance, and with the advantage of the description of the work written by the monk Gervase, who saw it in process of building, examines its many curious evidences of gradual development. Gervase himself describes the changed mode of workmanship and design, as he chronicles the difference between the new work and that older Romanesque choir which had before his time been called “the glorious choir of Conrad.” He s a ys,—“The pillars of the old and new work are alike in form and thickness, but different in length; for the new pillars were elongated by almost twelve feet. In the old capitals the work was plain, in the new ones exquisite in sculpture. There the arches and everything else was plain or sculptured with an axe and not with a chisel, but here almost throughout is appropriate sculpture. No marble columns were there, but here are innumerable ones. There, in the circuit around the choir, the vaults were plain, but here they are arch-ribbed and have key-stones.” “There was a ceiling of wood decorated with excellent painting, but here is a vault beautifully constructed of stone and light tufa. There was a single triforium, but here are two in the choir, and a third in the aisle of the church,” &c. This great work was begun under a French architect, William of Sens, in the year 1175; he was killed by injuries received in a fall from tho scaffolding in 1179,∙ and was succeeded by his assistant, William the Englishman; and to these two men is due the credit of the design as we now see it. One of the most noteworthy points in its history is the obvious and simple mode of accounting for the French character and state of much of the work, which it presents; and looking at it, no one can be surprised at the enormous development which immediately took place throughout the country. The change from heavy piers, with carving rather elaborate than beautiful, to delicate columns carrying on exquisite capitals lofty and graceful pointed arches and vaults, was so great that it was impossible not to prefer it to the stately but comparatively rude work which it supplanted; and so the tide of change having set in, further improvements were soon desired. Mouldings became much more delicate and subtle in their contour. Groining was then more tastefully planned and disposed, windows and doorways were made far more graceful, whilst the system of construction was largely improved upon. Instead of thick, massive walls without buttresses, the walls were reduced in thickness, and the material saved was transferred to the buttress, where it could most effectually fulfil its office of supporting the vaults and walls above. From buttresses conceived in this view the transition to flying buttresses was easy; then to stiffen these, pinnacles were added. And in the same way one lancet window led the way to groups of lancets; and these in their turn, by combinations with pierced circular windows, to completely developed traceries.

The First Pointed, Lancet, or Early English style to which the transitional work thus led up, may fairly be considered to be a purely English variety of Gothic. It is more consistently graceful and delicate in its details, as well as in its general character, than any foreign work of the same period. There was no longer any observable foreign influence brought to bear as there had been at Canterbury. Intelligent artists all over the country were rapid in seizing the best features of executed works, and carrying them farther with as little delay as possible. There were various centres from which distinct local varieties of style were sent out. If we compare York (transepts), Lincoln, and Salisbury Cathedrals, we shall find that, though there are certain general similarities of treatment, the distinct mark of the one presiding individual architect or artist is found in each. Compared to the architect of York Minster, the one who built Salisbury was altogether inferior. This feature of local varieties in style, the result of the influence of individuals, is from this period one of the most noteworthy features in English art; and generally one man influenced the work in his own diocese or district, and no further. Throughout the period before us—1189 to 1272—the developments were all in the same direction as during the previous time of transition. The tendency was always to greater lightness and elegance; skilful combinations were much thought of; and, towards the end of the period, thero was even too great a display sometimes of tho cleverness of the artist. But with work so really beautiful as it all was, and so uniformly good in the smallest nearly as much as in the largest building, it is ungracious, if not conceited, to affect to criticise the spirit in which the artist worked. The use of delicate shafts of polished marble (obtained in great part from the Isle of Purbeck) for doorways, windows, and arcades, is one of the distinguishing features of the style at this time. Generally they are treated with great beauty, but there were structural inconveniences about them which soon began to be felt. The columns were of necessity set out of their. natural bed, and so began very soon to decay. It was necessary also to combine them together in groups, and to trust to the capitals, bands, and bases holding them together; and such construction not only looks dangerously slight, but is so. A radical defect also in engaged marble shafts is that, though they seem to be intended to do all the work and carry all the weight, they do in point of fact, wherever it can be contrived, carry no weight at all; and it was, no doubt, when and as this was discovered, that the mediaeval builders gradually lost their liking for them, and returned to safer, if less brilliant, construction in stone, with piers formed with mouldings instead of shafts detached from the wall.

The characteristic elegance of the general architectural design was carried out in all the details. The mouldings were delicately rounded and alternated with hollows so drawn as to give here delicate and there most forcible effects of light and shade. Thus the dark line produced by marble in a pier was continued by means of a dark shadow in the arch; and without considerable knowledge of the science of moulding, it is impossible to do justice to this part of the English Early Pointed work, which has never been surpassed, if, indeed, it has ever been equalled at any period elsewhere. The groined roofs were still simple in design, but a ridge rib was often added to the necessary transverse and diagonal ribs of the previous period. This gave a certain hardness of line to the vault; it was the first step to the more elaborate and later systems of vaulting, and was soon followed by the introduction of other ribs on the surface of the vaulting cells. Few works are more admirable than some of the towers and spires of this period, but space will not allow of mention even of many of its best features. Probably the greatest excellence ever attained in English art was reached in this period by the architects of the great Yorkshire abbeys. No buildings in Europe surpass them in purity of general design, excellence of construction, beauty of detail, or suitability for their purposes. And it is a misfortune of the gravest kind for future generations, that their ruined condition forbids the possibility of our descendants appreciating as we can these consummate works of the most golden period of English art.

The transition from the simplest Early Pointed to a more advanced style can be seen as well in Westminster Abbey as anywhere. Here traceries began to take the place of simple lancet openings, and led to that system of window tracery which was, in fact, the distinguishing feature of the succeeding style. When the invention of tracery was complete, everything in Gothic architecture rapidly changed. The art of masonry and stone-cutting was rapidly developed. Moulded stones, from being made continuous round the intricate combinations of window traceries, came naturally to be used much more largely than before in place of simple bearing shafts. So columns came to be formed of clusters of mouldings; and, in the case of groined buildings, each moulding of the shaft was developed into more mouldings above the capital, or even frequently carried on to the vault without any capital at all. Traceries were first of all commenced by merely piercing geometrical patterns or circles through th? thickness of the walls. Then these patterns were combined under one enclosing arch; and then, when this sort of tracery had reached perfection, it was found possible to vary it indefinitely by making use of double curves (or ogee lines); and then, when these had been used for a short time, flowing lines, wandering gracefully over the space to be filled, and sometimes drawn by hand, supplanted the more formal outlines of the earlier work. The difference was great between an opening which was made (as the earlier examples were) with a sole view to the opening for glass, and one which was the accidental result only of the pretty lines and curves made by regarding the monial of the window, and not the light, as the thing to be considered. The tendency of the modification was to make men think lines of more importance than masses; and’, whether consciously or not, this was just what happened: not only window traceries but mouldings, carvings, and every other feature, were entirely changed in character. The soft gradations of the early mouldings were given up for combinations of more hardly defined and thinner lines of light and shade, and, in harmony with this change, a crisp and sharp imitation of natural foliage was devised, which supplanted the rich and round forms of the earlier sculpture. The whole practice of art was becoming more scholarly, perhaps, but at the same time it was more -conscious, and the cleverness of the architect was almost as often suggested as the noble character of his work. Merton College chapel, Oxford, the nave of York Minster, the choir of Selby, the whole of Exeter Cathedral, are a few among the many examples of this period of which this country can boast, and it will be seen that the change in character which is evident between the earliest and latest Middle Pointed works is enough to justify those who would again subdivide the nomenclature. The difficulty is that, where progress was so constant, it will be necessary, in order to be exact, to subdivide each century five or more times in order to be really definite.

Towards the end of Edward the Third’s reign, the last great change was made. The first example of this is seen in the western end of the nave of Winchester, followed soon after by William of Wykeham’s magnificent (if somewhat cold) reconstruction of the rest of the nave. It may fairly be held that the moving cause for the change w as a sense of disgust at the vagaries into which the votaries of curvilinear window traceries had been led. There was something weak and effeminate about their work, and Edyngton and Wykeham, when they built the nave of Winchester, were evidently endeavouring to return to a simpler and more dignified style of building. The first thing they found to amend was the exuberant tracery which was ruining architecture. They did not return to earlier forms, but they corrected this exuberance by introducing vigorous, straight, vertical, and horizontal lines. These, combined with subarcuation, gave their work at first a vigour which had latterly been wanting; and no one can look at Wykeham’s great work without feeling that he succeeded in his effort to impress a sense of vigour and manliness on thé whole of it. Unfortunately, the love of display and of the exhibition of skill which was so strong before was in no degree lessened, and the change in style did nothing permanently to check it. The fondness for straight in place of flowing lines was more and more developed. Doorways and arches were enclosed within well-defined square outlines, walls were divided by panelling into rectangular divisions; vertical lines were emphasised by the addition of pinnacles, and buttresses used more for ornament than strength, whilst horizontal lines were multiplied in string-courses, parapets, and transomes to windows. Groined roofs, which in the 14th century had been enriched by the multiplication of surface ribs, were now most elaborately enriched by cross ribs subdividing the simple spaces naturally produced by the intersection of necessary ribs into qmall panels; these, again, were filled in with tracery, and finally, the key-stones were formed into pendants, and the branching ribs so radiated as to produce the really beautiful and very English variety of groining called fan-tracery. The amount of skill shown in the construction of these vaults was very great, and most of them have proved their authors’ science by the perfect way in which they have endured to the present time. In other respects the architects of the 15th century were very successful. Few things can be seen more beautiful than the steeples of Gloucester Cathedral, or of St Mary’s, Taunton. The open timber roofs, as for instance that of St Peter, Mancroft, Norwich, are superb. And, finally, they left us a large number of enormous parish churches all over the country, full of interesting furniture and decoration, and also a store of interesting examples of domestic architecture which are still the ornaments, and are associated with all the most interesting historical localities, of the country.

After the middle of the 16th century the practice of Gothic architecture practically died out, though traces of its influence, especially in rural districts, were hardly lost until the end of the 17th century. Good, sound, solid, and simple forms, well constructed by men who respected themselves and their work, and did not build only for the passing hour, were still popular and general, so that the vernacular architecture to a late period was often good and never absolutely uninteresting. But it presents none of. the characteristics of a school, and cannot be treated of here.

The history of the development of Gothic architecture in England has been gone into at rather greater length than will be desirable in the case of other national developments. And this for two reasons: the examples which illustrate it are more generally known; and as the developments in other countries north of the Alps went through very nearly the same course of change at the same time, much has been said which need not be repeated in treating of them.

A few words will suffice for the necessary notice of the progress of Gothic architecture in Scotland and Ireland. In point of fact, most of what was done in the best period— that is, during the 13th and 14th centuries—was done by English artists, and is in no way more distinct in character than their work was in different dioceses or counties. The Gothic of Lincolnshire, of the eastern counties, of Kent and, Sussex, of Somersetshire and South Wales, of Devon and Cornwall, and of Yorkshire, were distinct varieties of style full of local peculiarities. In the case of Scotland, the best buildings which remain did not grow up in the same way by the efforts of local architects, but appear to have been the work of architects brought for the purpose from England, north of the Humber. There is a broad distinction between English art north and south of the Humber; and though it is easy to point to evidences of similarity between Scotch buildings and those north of the Humber, it is not possible to show the same connection with any buildings to the south of it. The evidences of general similarity are to be seen everywhere; it will suffice to mention one or two examples of particular similarity. The beautiful 13th century transept of Hexham Abbey church has some of its most marked features repeated in the also very beautiful transept of Pluscardine Abbey near Elgin. The architect of Lanercost in Cumberland was certainly responsible also for Dryburgh Abbey, either as actual architect, or as having inspired the architect. The buildings generally have, on both sides of the border, the same details, the same general disposition of plan, the same traceries; and there is nothing to indicate that those to the north of the border are not English. In truth, until the end of the 14th century the two styles are identical. Then Scotch art became more national, because it separated itself from English, and, borrowing some of its inspiration from abroad, developed in a certainly picturesque and interesting line. Melrose Abbey is one of the most national, as it certainly is one of the most charming, of Scotch buildings; but its influence does not seem to have been extensive, and it must be classed as a variety of the latest English Middle Pointed, executed by Scotchmen who knew something of English work, and as much of French (if not of Iberian) art, but who were determined to leave the mark of their own hands and minds on their buildings. The other most remarkable late ecclesiastical building is the famous chapel at Rosslyn; but the art of this is in no sense whatever Scotch, and we must look again, probably, to Portugal as the country of whose art it is an example. Scotland has been unfortunate, in that ecclesiastical changes have involved the disuse and ruin of so many of her ecclesiastical buildings. But still enough remains to make the country a most interesting field of study in regard especially to the art of the 13th century. Glasgow, St Andrews, Kirkwall, Dunblane, and Elgin Cathedrals, and the Abbeys of Pluscardine, Sweetheart, Kelso, Dryburgh, Jedburgh, Holyrood, Dundrennan, and Melrose, afford a series as beautiful as any that can be named elsewhere, though most of them are on a moderate scale in their dimensions.

The domestic remains in Scotland are far more numerous, and full of picturesque beauty and magnificence. They are a distinctly national class of buildings of great solidity, and a great deal was sacrificed by their builders to the genius of the picturesque. They can only be classed with the latest Gothic buildings of other countries, but the mode of design shown in them lasted much later than the late Gothic style did in England. The vast height to which their walls were carried, the picturesque use made of circular towers, the freedom with which buildings were planned at various angles of contact to each other, and the general simplicity of the ordinary face of the walling, are all distinct features in them, and make them more worthy of admiration than most works of the corresponding period in England.

In Ireland the progress of Gothic was very similar to that which we have seen in Scotland: but here may be seen art carried in the train of an invading army to the advantage of the country conquered, just as in England a similar benefit had been conferred by the Normans. Strongbow’s invasion may be‘said to have beeii the introduction to Ireland of Gothic art. He went from South Wales to the south of Ireland. The art in his time in South Wales was to a great extent the development of the monks of Glastonbury. Their influence is visible plainly not only over their own district, but equally at Llandaff and at St David’s. It was a very English influence. The Norman art of Canterbury hardly reached or touched them in a very direct way; and their art was taken directly and unmodified to Ireland. Among the buildings erected by the English in Ireland, Kilkenny Cathedral and the two 13th century cathedrals of Dublin— Christ Church and St Patrick’s—are the most remarkable, but there are many others. Their style is most plainly that of the Englishmen who followed Strongbow, with no concession to, or consideration of, previous Irish forms of art. That these forms deserved respect cannot be doubted by those who have examined the existing remains. Cormac’s chapel, which still·stands uninjured by the side of the ruined English cathedral on the rock of Cashel, is one of the most interesting relics left. It is a much decorated Romanesque chapel, of two stages in height, groined in stone, and covered with an ingeniously and admirably constructed, lofty stone roof. For ever is a long time, but few buildings have ever been built which seem more likely to defy eternally the ordinary wear and tear of time than this. It is still perfect; and where beautiful design and perfect construction are combined as they are here, the highest excellence of which architecture is capable has been achieved. The round towers of Ireland are well-known and remarkable erections, but they can hardly be said to have any architectural character. I n a mastery of the finer kind of decorative work few workmen have ever equalled the Irish; none have surpassed them. Their ornaments in metal-work and in illuminated MSS. are truly exquisite and marvellous in their ingenuity. But in masonry, the only works in which the same mastery is shown are the beautiful memorial or churchyard crosses which are so well known and so characteristic.

Gothic Architecture in France.

The remarks which have already been made as to the variation in style visible in various parts of the same country, apply with more force, perhaps, in what we now call France than to any other part of Europe. For the purposes of complete study it would be necessary to keep entirely distinct from each other in the mind the following important divisions :— (1.) Provence and Auvergne; (2.) Aquitaine; (3.) Burgundy; (4.) Anjou and Poitou; (5.) Brittany; (6.)*Noπnandy; (7.) the lie de France and Picardy; (8.) Champagne; and, finally, (9.) the eastern border-land (neither quite German nor quite French in its character), the meeting-point of the two very different developments of French and German art. Speaking generally, it' is safe to say that Gothic architecture was never brought to its highest perfection in any portion of the south of France. Aquitaine, Auvergne, and Provence were too wedded to classic traditions to excel in an art which seems to have required for its perfection no sort of looking back to such a past. Hence there is no Gothic work in the south for which it is possible to feel the same admiration and enthusiasm as must be felt by every artist in presence of the great works of the north. In Anjou this is less the case; but even there the art is extremely inferior to that which is seen in Normandy and the He de France. Brittany may be dismissed from consideration, as being, like our own Cornwall, so provincial and so cut off from neighbours, that its art could not fail to be very local, and without much influence outside its own borders. The interest felt by the student of the history of the art need not, however, be less in the south than in the north. The Romanesque churches of Aquitaine and the south had immense influence. The church of St Front at Périgueux was built by a Venetian colony, in imitation (as far as its plan and section) of St Mark’s at Venice. Its plan, a simple Greek cross, covered with four cupolas, is as essentially Venetian and Byzantine as it was possible to be; and the Venetian church was essentially Byzantine as opposed to Romanesque. This Byzantine or Venetian example spread far and wide over the great province of Aquitaine, and beyond its limits. A long series of churches might be named in all of which the domical character of the roofing is remarkable; and it need hardly be said that such a system of roofing cannot be adopted without a great influence on the form of the ground-plan. Sometimes these domes were treated, as at Loches, like great cones; and nearly always one of the objects of their constructors was to finish them with masonry, inside and out, in what might be held to be an indestructible manner. At the same time that these churches were rising, we see that in the valley of the Rhone churches were being built, strictly Romanesque in style, founded on the Roman traditions developed from the basilica, and without any evidence whatever of Byzantine influence. Ere long each of these two schools reacted on the other, and the result is seen in the extraordinarily interesting churches of the Puy de Dome and of Auvergne, where the Romanesque plan is adopted, with the addition of domical vaults at the crossings, and domically roofed chapels round the domical apses. But in these examples the plan is not that of the Greek, but distinctly that of the Latin cr0s3. The architects of Aquitaine, again, influenced those of Poitou and Anjou. The church at Fontevrault, for instance, has a nave covered with a series of domes, but is of the long form of the Latin cross; and the churches of the Gothic period along the banks of the Loire, as at Saumur and elsewhere, have domical vaults entirely unlike the Gothic vaults which were being constructed at the same time to the north of them. So, too, the cathedral at Angers, where the domes are carried on pointed arches, and date from the 13th century. And it is not a little strange, considering the connection which existed between this part of France and England for so considerable a period, that absolutely no architectural influence should be traceable of one upon the other. In plan, in detail, and, above all, in systems of vaulting, the English and the Angevine schools are as distinct and as unlike each other as they well could be. The mode of roofing adopted by the Romanesque architects of France was generally quite different from the Byzantine plans just referred to. Their .favourite mode was to cover the nave with a waggon vault, and to support this by a quadrant vault over the aisles, which gave, in fact, a continuous flying buttress along the whole length of the vault. These vaults were covered with flat stone roofs; there was no timber in their construction, and they have generally been preserved perfect to the present day. In all these churches the distinguishing feature is the plan of the eastern arm of the cross, a circular-ended apse with an aisle round it, and small apsidal chapels at intervals projecting beyond the aisle. What the exact origin of this beautiful termination was it is difficult to say certainly. But it is obvious that such a plan at that of the temple of Minerva Medica at Rome—a decagon surrounded by apsidal recesses—led naturally to that of the Christian church of San Vitale, Ravenna, and this to the almost similarly planned termination of the great abbey church at Cluny in Burguηdy. But in whatever way these early chevets (as the French term them) grew up, there is no doubt that they contained the germ of the magnificent cheυets of the complete Gothic churches of the north of France. A point to be noticed, in comparing these buildings with those in England, is the much greater frequency of stone vaults all over France from the first. The wooden roof to the nave, so common in England, was very rare in France; and the variety of early stone roofs was much greater there than here. As has been seen, the earliest forms were the waggon vault and the dome; the formér constructed on aisled churches, the latter upon aisleless buildings. One of the earliest examples of a quadripartite vault (ι.e., one formed by the intersection of two barrel vaults at right angles to each other), is that over the nave of the grand abbey of Vézelay in Burgundy. This was erected in the middle of the 12th century; it was a hazardous experiment, and though it still stands, .the wonder of all who see it for its magnificent size and architectural character, its construction was not satisfactory, and the thrust of its vault3 had to be met by the erection of rude flying buttresses soon after its foundation. But the covering of so vast a building with such a vault was an achievement sure to be imitated, and it is easy to see how the influence of such an example could be felt all over the country at the time that the pointed arch was coming into use, with all its convenient aids for the construction of such vast vaults. At Vézelay there is no triforium; the space against which the roof of the aisles abuts is a plain wall, and the example of many Romanesque churches, in which the double aisles of Roman buildings (β.g., St Agnese) were imitated, soon suggested the introduction of the triforium gallery between the arcades and the clerestory; whilst the necessity for light in northern climates developed of necessity the lofty clerestory. Here, therefore, the French architects found themselves in possession of all the elements of design, out of which they developed their magnificent Gothic works. There were difficulties, however, with their ground-plans, which were hardly ever, quite surmounted; but as English architects were wedded to the square east end, Frenchmen were devoted to the apsidal. And it was in the planning of the apse, with its surrounding aisles and chapels, that all their ingenuity and science were displayed. A simple apse is easy enough of construction, but directly it ' is surrounded by an aisle or aisles, with chapels again beyond them, the difficulties are great. The bays of the circular aisle, instead of being’square, are very much wider on one side than the other, and it is most difficult to fit the vaulting to the unequal space. In order to get over this various plans were tried. At Notre Dame, Paris, the vaulting bays were all triangular on plan, so that the points of support might be twice as many on the outside line of the circle as on the inside. But this was rather an unsightly contrivance, and was not often repeated, though at Bourges there is something of the same sort. . At Le Mans the aisle vaulting bays are alternately triangular and square; and this is, perhaps, the best arrangement of all, as the latter are true and square, and none of the lines of the vault are twisted or distorted in the slightest degree. The arrangement of the chapels round the apse was equally varied. Usually they are too crowded in effect; and, perhaps, the most beautiful plan is that of Rouen Cathedral, where there are only three chapels with unoccupied bays between, affording much greater relief and variety of lighting than the commoner plan which provided a chapel to every bay.

Space will not admit of carrying this point farther, but it has been necessary to say thus much, because the. planning and design of the cheνet is the great glory of the French mediaeval school. When the same thing was attempted, as by us at Westminster, or by the Germans at Cologne, it was evidently a copy, and usually an inferior copy, of French work. No English works led up to Westminster Abbey, and no German works to the cathedral at Cologne. When once the Gothic style was well established, the zeal with which the work of building was pursued in France was almost incredibly great. A series of churches exists there within short distances of each other, so superb in all their features, that it is impossible to contest their superiority to any corresponding group of buildings. The old Domaine Royale is that in which French art is seen in its perfection. Notre Dame, Paris, is a monument second to nothing in the world; but for completeness in all its parts it would be better to cite the cathedral of Chartres, a short description of which must suffice as an explanation of what French art at its zenith was. The plan has a nave with aisles, transepts with aisles on each side, a choir with two aisles all round it, and chapels beyond them. There are two immense steeples at the west end, two towers to each transept, and two towers at the junction of the choir with its apse. The doorways are triple at the west end, whilst to each transept is a vast triple porch in front of the three doorways. The whole of these doorways are covered with sculpture, much of it refined, spirited, and interesting in the highest degree. You enter and find the interior surpassing even the exterior. The order of the c<51umns and arches, and of all the details, is so noble and simple that no fault can be found with it. The whole is admirably executed; and, finally, every window throughout its vast interior is full of the richest glass coeval with the fabric. This is a French cathedral at its best, but Amiens and Bourges, and Rheims and Laon, and Caen, Troyes, Le Mans, and a host of other churches, might be named only inferior to this. As compared with English churches of the same class, there are striking differences. The French architects aimed at greater height, greater size, but much less effect of length. Their roofs were so lofty that it was almost impossible for them to build steeples which should have the sort of effect that ours have. The turret on Amiens Cathedral is nearly as lofty as Salisbury spire, but is only a turret; and so throughout. Few French churches afford the exquisite complete views of the exterior which English churches do; but, on the other hand, their interiors are more majestic, and man feels himself smaller and more insignificant in them than in ours. The palm must certainly be given to them above all others.

* Later French architecture ran a very similar course to that which has been already described in England. The 13th century was that in which it was seen at its best. In the 14th the same sort of change took place as elsewhere; the art was beautiful, but it wa3 too much an evidence of skilfulness and adroitness. It was harder and colder also than English work of the same age; and when it fell, it did so before the inroads of a taste for what has been called Flamboyant architecture,—a gay and meretricious style which trusted to ornament for all its effect, and, in spite of many beauties, had none of the sturdy magnificence of much of our English Perpendicular style.

There is no country richer in examples of architecture than France. It has been seen how infinitely varied they are in the different provinces; but the student who wishes to understand what it was possible for a country to do in the way of creating monuments of its grandeur, would find in almost every part of the country, at every turn and in great profusion, works of the rarest interest and beauty. The 19th century may be the consummation of all, but the evidences of its existence to posterity will not be one-tenth in number of those which such a reign as that of Philip Augustus has left us, whilst none of them will come up to the high standard which in his time was invariably reached.

Gothic Architecture in Germany.

It is impossible to say so much in praise of the German examples of Pointed architecture as has been said of both French and English. The history of the development of the art is very different, but in many respects very curious. We have first certain absolutely Roman works, such as those at Treves; then others, of which the convent at Lorsch is a conspicuous example, which are in the truest sense Romanesque, i.e., works directly founded on the Roman buildings of the country. Then comes a great group of churches, of which those in Cologne and the Rhineland are the best known examples, which are evidently founded on the Lombard churches of the north of Italy. The earlier of these churches date from the beginning of the 12th century, and the same style is continued on with but little serious alteration down to the end of the 13th century, when the strange spectacle is seen of a style which is completely Romanesque in its general character being suddenly supplanted by a style which in no way grew out of it, but which was rather an imitation of a foreign style, and which is distinguished by the perfect and complete form which it at once assumed. This style, the complete Gothic of Germany, in its turn retained its sway much longer than the corresponding styles elsewhere, and was finally supplanted by a very national German style, answering in point of date to our own late Third Pointed and to French Flamboyant. The question naturally arises, whether these styles, which are so wanting in evidence of natural growth, are to be looked at as sudden German inventions, or whether they are not illustrations of the conservative character of a people not fond of change, resisting it as long as possible, and at last, when obliged to take it at all, compelled to accept it in the most decided form. In illustration of what has been said, the following dates will be useful :—St Gereon, Cologne, was begun in 1200, and vaulted in 1227; St Cunibert, also in Cologne, was building from 1205 to 1248; Naumburg Cathedral has a nave of 1200; Limburg is but little later; Gelnhausen was begun in 1250, and Munster-Maifeld about the same time. All these churches are of such a character, that if we were to see them in France we should, no doubt, put them down as works of the end of the 12th century, and should look for another class to fill up the gap between that time and the commencement of the cathedral at Cologne in 1270. In short, transitional works are as rare in Germany as they are common in England and France. There is comparatively little evidence of natural growth, and a very practical refutation, therefore, of the claim which has been advanced by some German writers on behalf of their country, for the honour of being the real mother and inventor of northern Gothic.

The ground-plans of German Gothic churches have a character of their own. The apsidal termination of the east end is usual, though not quite universal; but it is to be noted that German apses are very rarely surrounded by aisles and chapels. Cologne Cathedral, which is the grandest exception to the rule, was notoriously inspired by, and in a way copied from, Amiens, and St Godehard at Hildesheim, Magdeburg Cathedral, and the Marien-Kirche, Lübeck, are inferior to French examples of the same ages. The German churches were either simply apsidal, or parallel triapsidal, or transverse triapsidal; and the main difference between early and late examples is that the former were circular, the latter polygonal in outline. Another feature peculiar to Germany is that of double choirs, t'.e., churches with apses both at the east and west ends. Examples of thir are seen in Laach, Bamberg, Naumburg; in St Sebaldus Nuremberg; and in Augsburg Cathedral. Even when the ground-plan shows a disposition of aisles and chapels like the French chevet y the design is treated very differently, the whole being generally covered in by one vast roof, instead of a series of roofs, and the aisles being of the same height as the choir. This class of building is very striking internally, owing to the vast height of the piers and arches; there is no triforium or clerestory, and the windows are extravagantly lengthened out. Still the examples of this kind of design—St Stephen, Vienna; Münster; the Wiesen-Kirche, Soest; St Laurence, Nuremberg; and Munich Cathedral, among a host of others—are very grand. The details of the earlier churches are evidently borrowed from the north of Italy. The walls are arcaded, and almost always finished under the eaves with open galleries, which were the beautiful substitutes of the Lombard architects for the classic cornice. The steeples of the same period are very peculiar. They are either square or octangular in plan, arcaded or pierced with windows regularly all over their face, and roofed with gables, or with spires rising out of the gables. The early groining was very simple, but always more or less domical in section. The windows were plain and rude, and the mouldings very simple and unskilful. In the interior the most marked feature of these churches is the great height of the triforium, which is still generally in use as a gallery, and is groined in the same way as the aisle. On the exterior the peculiarity of the plan and the large number of generally rather small, though lofty, steeples of picturesque outline are the most striking peculiarities.

The German Complete Gothic is essentially national in its complete character. It has a similarity to English and French Middle Pointed, but no more than this. It has many and obvious defects. From the first there is conspicuous in it that love of lines, and that de⅞ire to play with geometrical figures, which in time degenerated into work more full of conceit and triviality than that of any school of mediaeval artists. These conceits are worked out most elaborately in the traceries of windows and panelling. The finest early examples are in the cathedral at Minden; a little later, perhaps, the best series is in the cloister of Constance Cathedral; and of the latest description the examples are innumerable. But it is worth observing that they rarely at any time have any ogee lines. They are severely geometrical and regular in their form, and quite unlike our own late Middle Pointed, or the French Flamboyant. In sculpture the Germans did not shine. They, like the English, did not introduce it with profusion, though they were very prone to the representations of effigies of the deceased as monuments.

In one or two respects, however, Germany is still possessed of a wealth of mediaeval examples, such as is hardly to be paralleled in Europe. The vast collection of brick buildings, for instance, is unequalled. If a line be drawn <lue east and west, and passing through. Berlin, the whole of the plain lying to the north, and extending from Russia to Holland, is destitute of stone, and the mediaeval architects, who always availed themselves of the material which was most natural in the district, built all over this vast extent of country almost entirely in brick. The examples of-their works in this humble material are not at all confined to ecclesiastical works; houses, castles, town-halls, town walls, and gateways, are so plentiful and so invariably picturesque and striking in their character, that it is impossible to pass a harsh verdict on the architects who left behind them such extraordinary examples of their skill and fertility of resource. Then, again, in regard to the furniture which before the period of the Renaissance of art and the Reformation of religion filled the ancient buildings, the Germans have more than any other people been happily conservative. There are still churches in Germany in which it may be said that nothing has been changed since Luther’s day except the use of the buildings. St Katharine’s at Lübeck is turned into a museum, but is full of its old furniture. The choir of Halberstadt is unused, but everything, even to the hangings on the walls, remains as of old. In Nuremberg all the altars are preserved, and decked with altar-cloths and’candles, though they are never used; and when so much toleration as to these externals has been shown, and so little desire for change exists, it may well be imagined that the opportunities for the study of the works of German Gothic architects in their completeness are unusually plentiful. During the last few years a vast number of books have been published on the subject of their national antiquities by German writers, and the amount of detailed information on the subject, which may be obtained by those who care for the study, is unbounded.

Gothic Architecture in Spain.

That which strikes the architectural student most forcibly in Spain is the concurrent existence of two schools of art during the best part of the Gothic period. The Moors invaded Spain in 711 a.d., and were not finally expelled from Granada until 1492 a.d. During the whole of this period they were engaged, with more or less success, in contests for superiority with the Christian natives. In those portions of the country which they held longest, and with the firmest hand, they enforced their own customs and taste in art almost to the exclusion of all Gothic work. Where their rule was not permanent their artistic influence was still felt, and even beyond what were ever the boundaries of their dominion, there are still to be seen in Gothic buildings some traces of acquaintance with Arabic art not seen elsewhere in Europe, with the exception, perhaps, of the southern part of the Italian peninsula, and there differing much in its development, The mosque of Cordova in the 9th c ntury, the Alcazar and Giralda at Seville in the 13th, the Court of Lions in the Alhambra in the 14th, several houses in Toledo in the 15th century, are examples of what the Moors were building during the period of the Middle Ages in which the best Gothic buildings were being erected. Some portions of Spain were never conquered by the Moors. These were the greater part of Aragon, Navarre, tho Asturias, Biscay, and the northern portion of Galicia. Toledo was retaken by the Christians in 1085 a.d.,

Tarragona in 1089, Saragossa in 1118, Lérida in 1149, Valencia in 1239, and Seville in 1248. In the districts occupied by the Moors Gothic architecture had no natural growth, whilst even in those which were not held by them the arts of war were of necessity so much more thought of than those of peace, that the services of foreign architects were made use of to an extent unequalled in any other part of Europe.

Of early Christian buildings, erected probably from the 8th to the 11th centuries, there is every reason to believe that some remains still exist. The most interesting of these is Sta Maria de Naranco, near Oviedo, a building whose details are founded on Roman, but ' whose plan has all that adaptation to special requirements which is so distinct a mark of mediaeval work. The buildings which come next in point of date to these are all evidently derived from, or erected by the architects of those which were at the time being built in the south of France. These churches are uniform in plan, with central lanterns and three eastern apses. The nave has usually a waggon or barrel vault, supported by quadrant vaults in the aisles, and the steeples are frequently polygonal in plan. If these churches are compared with examples like that of the cathedral at Carcassonne on the other side of the Pyrenees, their identity in style will at once be seen. A still more remarkable evidence of similarity has been pointed out between the church of St Semin, Toulouse, and the cathedral of Santiago. The plan, proportions, and general design of the two churches are identical. Here we see a noble groundplan, consisting of nave with aisles, transepts, central lantern, and chevet, consisting of an apsidal choir, with a surrounding aisle and chapels opening into it at intervals. This example is the more remarkable, inasmuch as the early Spanish architects very rarely built a regular cheνet, and almost always preferred the simpler plan of apsidal chapels on either side of the choir. And its magnificent scale and perfect preservation to the present day combine to make it one of the most interesting architectural relics in the country.

Among the more remarkable buildings of the 12th and the beginning of the 13th century are San Isidoro, Leon; San Vicente, Avila; several churches in Segovia; and the old cathedral at Lérida. They are much more uniform in character than are the churches of the same period in the various provinces of France, and the developments in style, where they are seen at all, seldom have much appearance of being natural local developments. This, indeed, is the most marked feature of Spanish architecture in all periods of its history. In such a country it might have been expected that many interesting local developments would have been seen; but of these there are but one or two that deserve notice. One of them is illustrated admirably in the cnurch of St Millan, Segovia, where beyond the aisles of the nave are open cloisters or aisles arcaded on the outside, and opening by doors into the aisles of the nave. It would be difficult to devise a more charming arrangement for buildings in a hot country, whilst at the same time the architectural effect is in the highest degree beautiful. The universality of the central tower and lantern has been already mentioned. This was often polygonal, and its use led to the erection of some lanterns or domes of almost unique beauty and interest. The old cathedral at Salamanca, the church at Toro, and the cathedral of Zamora, all deserve most careful study on this score. Their lanterns are almost too lofty in proportion to be properly called domes, and yet their treatment inside and outside suggests a very beautiful form of raised dome. They are carried on pointed arches, and are circular in plan internally, and octagonal on the exterior, the angles of the octagon being filled with large turrets, which add much to the beauty of the design, and greatly also to its strength. Between the supporting arches and the vault there are, at Salamanca, two tiers of arcades continued all round the lantern, the lower one pierced with four, and the upper with twelve lights, and the vault or dome is decorated with ribs radiating from the centre. On the exterior the effect is rather that of a low steeple covered with a stone roof with spherical sides than of a dome, but the design is so novel and so suggestive, that it is well worth detailed description. Nothing can be more happy than the way in which the light is admitted, whilst it is also to be noted that the whole work is of stone, and that there is nothing in the design but what is essentially permanent and monumental in construction. The only other Spanish development is the introduction, to a very moderate extent, of features derived from the practice of the Moorish architects. This is, however, much less seen than might have been expected, and is usually confined to some small feature of detail, such, e.g., as the carving of a boss, or the filling in of small tracery in circular windows, where it would in no way clash with the generally Christian character of the art.

The debateable period of transition which is usually so interesting is very sterile in Spain. A good model once adopted from the French was adhered to with but little modification, and it was not till the 13th century style was well established in France and England that any introduction of its features is seen here; and then, again, it is the work of foreign architects imported for the work and occasion, bringing with them a fully developed style to which nothing whatever in Spain itself led up by a natural or evident development. The three great Spanish churches of this period are the cathedrals of Toledo, Leon, and Burgos. Those of Siguënza, Lérida, and Tarragona, fine as they are, illustrate the art of the 12th rather than of the 13th century, but these three great churches are perfect Early Pointed works, and most complete in all their parts. The cathedral of Toledo is one of the most nobly designed churches in Europe. In dimensions it is surpassed only by the cathedrals of Milan and Seville, whilst in beauty of plan it leaves both those great churches far behind. The chevet, in which two broad aisles are carried round the apse with chapels alternately square and apsidal opening out of them, is perhaps the most perfect of all the schemes we know. It is as if the French chevets, all of which were more or less tentative in their plan, had culminated in this grand work to which they had led the way. The architectural detail of this great church is generally on a par with the beauty and grandeur of its plan, but is perhaps surpassed by the somewhat later church at Leon. Here we have a church built by architects, whose sole idea was the erection of a building with as few and small points of support as possible, and with the largest possible amount of window opening. It was the work of men whose art had been formed in a country where as much sun and light as possible were necessary, and is quite unsuited for such a country as Spain. Nevertheless it is a building of rare beauty and delicacy of design. Burgos, better known than either of the others, is inferior in scale and interest, and its character has been much altered by added works more or less Rococo in character, so that it is only by analysis and investigation that the 13th century church is still seen under and behind the more modern excrescences.

The next period is again marked by work which seems to be that of foreigners. The fully developed Middle Pointed or Geometrical Gothic is indeed very uniform all over Europe. Here, however, its efforts were neither grand in scale nor interesting. Some of the church furniture, as, e.g., the choir screens at Toledo, and some of the cloisters, are among the best features. The work is all correct, tame, and academical, and has none of the dignity, power, and interest which marked the earlier Spanish buildings. Towards the end of the 14th century the work of Spanish architects becomes infinitely more interesting. The country was free from trouble with the Moors; it was rich and prosperous, and certainly its buildings at this period were so numerous, so grand, and so original, that they cannot be too much praised. Moreover, they were carefully designed to suit the requirements of the climate, and also with a sole view to the accommodation conveniently of enormous congregations, all within sight of the preacher or the altar. This last development seems to have been very much the work of a great architect of Majorca, Jayme Fabre by name. The grandest works of his school are still to bo seen in Catalonia. Their churches are so vast in their dimensions that the largest French and English buildings seem to be small by comparison, and being invariably covered with stone vaults, they cannot be compared to the great wooden-roofed churches of the preaching orders in Italy and elsewhere, in which the only approach is made to their magnificent dimensions. The cathedral of Gerona is the most remarkable example. Here the choir is planned like the French chevet with an aisle and chapels round it, and opens with three lofty arches into the east wall of a nave which measures no less than 73 feet in the clear, and is covered with a stone vaulted ceiling. In Barcelona there are several churches of very similar description; at Manresa another, but with aisles to its nave; and at Palma in Majorca one of the same plan as the last, but of even much larger dimensions. Perhaps there is no effort of any local school of architects more worthy of study and respect than this Catalonian work of the 14th and 15th centuries. Such a happy combination of noble design and proportions with entirely practical objects places its author among the very greatest architects of any time. It is one thing to develop patiently step by step from the work of one’s fathers in art, quite another to strike out an entirely new form by a new combination of the old elements. In comparison with the works just mentioned the other great Spanish churches of the 15th century are uninteresting. But still their scale is grand, and though their detail is over-elaborated and not beautiful, it is impossible to deny the superb effect of the interior of such churches as those of Seville, Segovia, and Salamanca (new cathedral). They are very similar in their character, their columns are formed by the prolongation of the reedy mouldings of the arches, their window traceries are poorly designed, and their roofs are covered with a complex multitude of lieme ribs. Yet the scale is fine, the admission of light, generally high up and in sparing quantity, is artistic, and much of the furniture is either picturesque or interesting. The tout ensemble is generally very striking, even where the architectural purist is apt to grumble at the shortcomings of most of the detail. *

The remarks which have been made so far have been confined to the fabrics of the churches of Spain. It would be easy to add largely to them by reference to the furniture which still so often adorns them, unaltered even if uncared for; to the monuments of the mighty dead, in which Spain is a worthy rival of our own country; to the sculpture which frequently adorns the doorways and screens; and to the cloisters, chapter houses, and other dependent buildings, which add so much charm in every way to them. Besides this, there are very numerous castles, often planned on the grandest scale, and some, if not very many, interesting remains of domestic houses and palaces; and most of these, being to some extent flavoured by the neighbourhood of Moorish architects, have more character of their own than has been accorded to the churches. Finally, there are considerable tracts of country in which brick was the only material used; and it is curious that this is almost always more or less Moorish in the character of its detail The Moors were great brickmakers. Their elaborate reticulated enrichments were easily executed in it, and the example set by them was, of course, more likely to be followed by Spaniards than that of the nearest French brick building district in the region of Toulouse. The brick towers are often very picturesque; several are to be seen at Toledo, others at Saragossa, and, perhaps the most graceful of all, in the old city of Tarazona in Aragon, where the proportions are extremely lofty, the face of the walls everywhere adorned with sunk panels, arcading, or ornamental brickwork, and at the base there is a bold battered slope which gives a great air of strength and stability to the whole. On the whole, it must be concluded that the mediaeval architecture of Spain is of less interest than that of most other countries, because its development was hardly over a national one. The architects were imported at one time from France, at another from the Low Countries, and they brought with them all their own local fashions, and carried them into execution in the strictest manner; and it was not till the end of the 14th century, and even then only in Catalonia, that any buildings which could be called really Spanish in their character was erected.

Gothic Architecture in Italy.

The history of the development of Gothic architecture in Italy brings out, more clearly than anywhere else, of course, the gradual transition from simple Roman work to Romanesque and Byzantine, and thence, finally, to Gothic. But the first portion of the history is, perhaps, the most important, since, owing to various causes, the Gothic architecture of Italy never achieved the same brilliant effects which marked its career in other parts of Europe. Something there was in the climate, something in the constant knowledge of grand works of classic times, and finally, something in the Eastern influence which was so marked in Venice, and in the Greek as well as Moorish or Arab influence which equally affected the whole southern half of the peninsula.

There can be no doubt whatever that the first buildings used for Christian worship in Italy were in no way whatever more suited for its functions than they were for the Pagan rites which had preceded them. The form of architecture used was the Roman art of the day; and to a considerable extent Roman buildings, and particularly basilicas, were converted, from the time of Constantine, into Christian churches. The early Christian policy was not unfrequently one which softened off the transition from the old worship to the new. And when the bishop took his seat in the centre of the apse, with his clergy on either side, and the Christian altar was placed in front of the apse, very much in the position of that which had been used for the Pagan sacrifice, the whole change required to convert the basilica into the church had been made. The basilica was usually a long nave with one or more aisles on either side. These aisles were frequently double in height, a second row or order of columns being placed above the first. At one end was a tribune sometimes square, but usually apsidal in plan, round which a series of steps led to seats formed against the wall. The central seat was that of the principal officer, the others those of his assessors, and the altar stood in front of the tribune. The central nave was either open to the sky, or covered with a wooden roof or with a vaulted ceiling. The basilica at Pompeii, still so perfect as to be quite intelligible, has a single aisle on each side, and a square-ended tribune, and was probably not covered over the centre. This, however, like all the early buildings in Pompeii, is rather Greek than Roman in its character. If we compart such buildings as this and the basilica of Trajan at Rome with the earliest existing churches built on the basilican type, we shall see how very slight the difference was for some hundreds of years. There is still the long unbroken nave with an apsidal head. Over the aisles are sometimes, as in St Agnese and St Lorenzo in Rome, second aisles or galleries opening to the nave. And the principal alteration or adaptation is one entirely of church furniture and screens, ambons and altars under baldachins, which, as if with a scrupulous regard to the old basilican arrangement, are planned independently altogether of the structure, being emphatically nothing but furniture. If we examine San Clemente in its present condition, we shall find a choir having no constructional peculiarities, but formed entirely by low screens built on the floor of the church, with a passage-way between them and the columns, and with ambons or pulpits projecting from their sides. In front of the church was an enclosed court-yard or atrium, from which access was gained to the church. The arrangements of San Clemente are probably not so old as they were once supposed to be. One, if not two, older churches exist beneath it; but, nevertheless, there is every reason for believing that the arrangements now visible are those at latest of the 9th century. The ancient basilica of St Peter was on the same sort of plan, with the addition of a cross nave or transept between the nave and its aisles and the apse, an arrangement which is still to be seen in the famous church of St Paul, without the walls, and in the basilica at Aquileia. At St Paul’s the altar stands on the west side of the transept, the bishop’s seat is separated from it by the transept, and the whole arrangement is unmeaning and unsatisfactory, but it is probably not old. The number of early churches on the basilican plan is very great, and they are of all sizes. The charming church of Sta Maria in Cosmedin, Rome, is a quite small building, but graceful in its general proportions, and interesting to the architect, like most of the early Roman churches, for the beautiful inlaid work, the Opus Alexandrinum, of its screens, pavements, and pulpits. Out of Rome, also, there are many examples of the same type, but space does not permit the mention here of any but those of Ravenna. The two most remarkable of these are St Apollinare in Classe, two or three miles out of the city, a forlorn and deserted building, and St Apollinare Nuovo, within the walls, a church whose mosaic decorations, being nearly perfect, give an admirable impression of the sumptuous character which the early church knew how to give and loved to give to its temples. Here, however, none of those old ritual arrangements remain, which give so much interest to the basilicas of Rome, Torcello, Toscanella, and Aquileia. The decoration of St Apollinare Nuovo is mainly on the space of wall between the arches opening to the aisles and the clerestory. It is a mosaic picture of an almost endless procession of white-clad saints on a golden ground. - Few things in the whole realm of Christian art are more beautiful or more touching. The other St Apollinare, in Classe, has lost almost all its old decorations, and is merely painted in bad taste and in modern times. The Roman love of circular recesses or circular plans was very great. In the baths of Caracalla, for instanc e, we have them at every turn. The Pantheon is a vast circular building, with recesses in its walls (now used as chapels) alternately square and apsidal in plan; and in the temple of Minerva Medica these apsidal projections round the building are even more distinctly marked. This last example paved the way for the similarly planned church of San Vitale at Ravenna, which even now, overlaid as it is with meretricious decoration, affords us most interesting evidence of the way in which the constructional arrangements of Pagan Rome were copied and utilised by the Christians. But, usually, there was little to admire in the way in which this was done. The architect built up his church with fragments of classic columns, unequal in size or height, married to the wrong capitals and bases, and altogether as rudely put together as was possible. And so little development was there that, in the nave of the basilica of Aquileia, we have this done absolutely in the same way so late as the 14th century, the only difference being that in it the classic columns carry pointed arches and a clerestory of Gothic windows.

From these simple imitations of Roman buildings let us go to the 12th century church of St Ambrogio at Milan, and we shall see how much had by that time been done in the way of modification. The whole building is, of course, round arched. It has a western atrium or courtyard, and it has a nave and aisles, with an eastern apse to its nave. At first sight no alteration seems to have been made, but on further examination it will be found that the columns are alternately piers and clusters (at St Agnese every third column was made into a pier), that the arch orders have a proper connection with the plans of the columns, and that the church is vaulted. Let us now go back for an instant to the introduction of Byzantine plan and details in the church of St Mark at Venice. Here we have brought back again to Italy the product of the developed skill of the succession of artists, who, after constructing the mighty vaults of the Roman buildings, had removed to Constantinople with the empire, and had there grafted their knowledge on the art and practice of the East. It was there that they began to build domes, erected not on circular, but on square bases, the angles being supported on what are technically called pendentives. So fond of this construction were they that their buildings became almost always combinations of domes, instead of the simple nave, ended with a semi-dome, of the Roman architects of the day. This Byzantine style was developed with a skill and delicacy to which the decaying art of Rome was at the time quite a stranger, and it is less wonderful that so beautiful a church as St Mark should have had some influence, than that it should have had so little. But it is to the example of this and other Eastern churches, no doubt, that we owe the raised central lantern or dome which became a feature of so many churches from this time forward. A parallel may well be drawn here between two well-known and typical examples. These are the churches of San Zenone, A erona, and of San Michele, Pavia. In the former we still see the great simple and uniform plan of the wooden roofed basilican church, adorned with much that is Byzantine in feeling and character, but still emphatically a Romanesque building. In San Michele, on the contrary, we see a building which, if it owed something to Rome (as it did), owed at least as much to the East Its plan was the distinctly cruciform plan, with a central lantern, not the Roman makeshift of a long nave with an Eastern transept, whilst, its whole space being covered with vaulted roofs, instead of the Roman wooden ceiling to the nave, marks it as belonging to a different class. Besides this, the whole building is subdivided and constructed in so scientific a way as to show that its architect was in the path of a development leading far away from simple Roman theories of construction and plan. Here one of the most observable features is the fine open gallery under the external eaves of the roof, a device repeated constantly in the Lombard buildings, and transferred from them, with much else, to the valley of the Rhine, where it is the great feature of most of the 11th and 12 th centuιy churche3, and of some even of the 13th century.

It is impossible here to make any lengthened reference to the buildings of Italy south of Rome. It must suffice to say that Rome herself seems to have had no influence on them during this early period. Their designs and decorations are full of a character which speaks of contact at times with Greece, at other times with the southern coast of the Mediterranean. Their walls are arcaded, and then adorned with square and circular panels, the details of which afford ample evidences of their origin. The arcades are sometimes, as at Foggia, of horse-shoe shape, and the extremely elaborate carving of foliage with which they are adorned is quite Byzantine in character. A comparison of the west fronts of Foggia or Troja, with the arcading of the church at Ani, in Armenia, will show much more similarity than with any Roman work; whilst the front of Sta Maria, Ancona, is planned in just the same fashion as that of the cathedral at Zara in Dalmatia. The one great North Italian church in which there was an attempt· to fuse these two fashions of design is the cathedral at Pisa, where all the walls are arcaded and panelled, the mouldings mainly copied from the ancient forms, and the whole trust of the architect put, very much as it was in the South Italian and Byzantine works, in covering the walls with decoration. But these churches did nothing by way of paving the way for Italian Gothic, and need not therefore be further referred to.

Italy is poorer than any other country in examples of the transition from round arched to pointed arched buildings. The use of the pointed arch was accepted at last as a necessity, and cannot be said ever to have been welcomed. The first buildings in which it is seen worked out fully in detail are those of Nicola Pisano, and but few examples exist of good Gothic work earlier than his time. The elaborately arcaded and sculptured west front of Ferrara Cathedral is a screen to an early building. The cathedral and other churchee at Genoa are certainly exquisite works, but they appear to owe their internal design rather to the influence of (perhaps) Sicilian taste than North Italian, and the exquisite beauty of the west front owes a good deal, at any rate, to French influence, softened, refined, and decorated by the extreme taste of an Italian architect. The feature which most marks all Italian Gothic is the indifference to the true use of the pointed arch. Everywhere arches were constructed which could not have stood for a day had they not been held together by iron rods. There was none of that sense of the unities of art which made a northerner so jealous to maintain the proper relations of all parts of his structure. In Nicola Pisano’s works the arch mould rarely fits the capital on which it rests. The proportions of buttresses to the apparent work to be done by them are bad and clumsy. The window traceries look like bad copies of some northern tracery, only once seen in a hurry by an indifferent workman. There is no life, or development, or progress in the work. If we look at the ground-plans of Italian Gothic churches, we shall find nothing whatever to delight us. The columns are widely spaced, so as to diminish the number of vaulting bays, and to make the proportions of the oblong aisle vaulting bay very ungainly. Clustered shafts are almost unknown, the columns being plain cylinders with poorly sculptured capitals. There are no triforium galleries, and the clerestory is generally very insignificant. In short, a comparison of the best Gothic works in Italy with the most moderate French or English work would show at once how vast its inferiority must be allowed to be. Still there were beauties which ought not to be forgotten or passed over. Such were the beautiful cloisters, whose arcades are carried on delicate coupled shafts. Of these the first examples are in Rome, but they are to be seen all over Italy. Such, again, were the porches and monuments, of which some of the best are in Verona, of almost unsurpassed elegance; such the campaniles, both those of Rome, divided by a number of string-courses into a number of stages, and those of the North, where there are hardly any horizontal divisions, and the whole effort is to give an unbroken vertical effect; or that unequalled campanile, the glory of Florence, of Giotto, of art, the tower of the cathedral at Florence, where one sees in ordered proportion, accurately adjusted, line upon line, and stage upon stage, perhaps the most carefully wrought out work in all Europe. The Italian architects were before all others devoted to the display of colour in their works. St Mark’s had led the way in this, but, throughout the peninsula, the bountiful plenty of nature in the provision of materials was only seconded by the zeal of the artist, and on this point a few notes may be added at the conclusion of this summary. They were also distinguished for their use of brick. Just as in parts of Germany, France, Spain, and England, there were large districts in which no stone could be had without the greatest labour and trouble; and here the reality and readiness which always marked the mediaeval workman led to his at once availing himself of the natural material, and making a feature of his brickwork. This is a subject which, however, cannot well be treated save at the same time as other developments of brick building in other districts similarly situated. ’ In conclusion, it must be said that the Gothic of Italy has no such grand works to show as more northern countries have. The buildings were seldom thoroughly beautiful as complete works of architecture. Allowance has to be made at every tum for some incompleteness or awkwardness of plan, design, or construction. There is no attempt to emulate the beauties of the best French plans. Milan Cathedral, magnificent as its scale and material make it, is clumsy and awkward both in plan and section, though its vast size makes it impressive internally. San Francesco, Assisi, is only a moderately good early German Gothic church, converted into splendour by its painted decorations. At Orvieto a splendid west front is put, without any proper adjustment, against a church whose merit is mainly that it is large and in parts beautifully coloured. The later Pisan buildings are far finer, the altered baptistery especially being a magnificent work, though words can hardly describe the architectural defects of such work as that of the Campo Santo, where, again, it is the painter, not the architect, who has worked such wonders. The finest Gothic interiors are of the class of which the Frari at Venice and Sta Anastasia at Verona are examples. They are simple vaulted cruciform churches, with aisles and chapels on the east side of the transepts. But even in these the designs of the various parts in detail are poor and meagre, and only redeemed from failure by the picturesque monuments built against their walls, by the work of the painter, and by their furniture. In fine, Gothic art was never really understood in Italy, and, consequently, never reached to perfection.

If the architecture of Italy never fell away so much from the more classic style of imperial Rome as that of the northern nations did, neither did the Italian ever possess that more than equivalent, whose splendid course we have been describing. Whilst the Pointed style was almost exclusively known and practised in Northern Europe, the Italians were but slowly improving in their Gothic style; and the improvement was more evinced in their secular than in their ecclesiastical structures. Florence, Bologna, Vicenza, Udine, Genoa, and, above all, Venice, contain palaces and mansions of the 12th, 13th, 14th, and 15th centuries, which for simplicity, utility, and beauty far excel most of those in the same and other places of the three following centuries. The contemporary churches do not exhibit the same degree of improvement in style that is conspicuous in these domestic works, for there are no works in Europe more worthy of study and admiration than the Ducal Palace at Venice, and some of the older works of the same class, and even of earlier date. The town-halls of Perugia, Piacenza, and Siena, and many houses in these cities, and at Corneto, Amalfi, Asti, Orvieto, and Lucca, the fountains of Perugia and Viterbo, and the monuments at Bologna, Verona, and Arezzo, may be named as evidence of the interest which the national art affords to the architectural student even in Italy, as late as the end of the 14th century; but after this it gradually gave way to, though in some instances its influence may be traced even when it had been overborne by, the new style.

Modern Italian School of Architecture.

The opening of the Italian school of architecture on the resuscitated dogmas of Vitruvius was coincident with the gradual decay of the Pointed style. Fortunately, however, its effects were a full century in reaching England, and during that period many most elegant structures were erected, and many of those of earlier date which had been commenced before or during the wars of the Roses, and left unfinished, were completed. The first indication we have of the presence of the Cinquecentist in England, is in the tomb of Henry VII., which was executed by Tor-regiano, an Italian artist, who, it would appear, was obliged to have some respect to the style of the edifice in which his work was to rest; but his preconceived ideas of propriety and beauty were too strong to allow him to omit the characteristics of his school, and the result is a strange mixture of the two. From that time the Pointed style rapidly deteriorated, being overbome by the taste of the Renaissance. On the Continent the latter was already predominant, for, during the whole of the 15 th century, the current had been setting from Italy over every part of Europe which received its religion from Rome, and this country was only the last to be overwhelmed by it.

The first step taken towards the revolution of architecture was by Filippo Brunelleschi, a Florentine architect, who was employed to finish the cathedral of his native city early in the 15th century; a work which had been commenced more than a century before on the design of Arnolfo, a Florentine also, but which still required the cupola when its completion was intrusted to Brunelleschi. The edifice is in the Italian Gothic style, which his affectation of superior taste and talent induced him to attempt to supersede, so as to bring the world back to the classic style of ancient Rome. The construction of the cupola gained him great reputation and the confidence of the public, which he employed to advance his favourite scheme. To use the words of an Italian writer on the subject, “On the example of so wise and skilled a man, other architects afterwards devoted themselves to free architecture from the monstrosities introduced by barbarism and excessive licence, and to restore it to its primitive simplicity and dignity.” But to what did they have recourse to effect this? Did they examine and study the remains of antiquity in Greece and Rome, in Italy and elsewhere? No! they referred to the writings of an obscure Latin author, who professed to give the principles and practice of architecture among the Greeks and Romans, but paid no more attention to the existing architectural works of those nations than if they had never been, although one could hardly walk the streets of any of the old cities in the south of Italy without seeing Roman edifices, whilst Rome and its vicinity was, as it still is, full of them. All the use, however, that these self-called “restorers” of architecture made of the works of the ancients, was to use them as Lay-figures, or framework, to model on, according to the proportions and directions given by Vitruvius; and the effect was formality and mannerism in those who adhered to the dogmas of the school, and wild grotesqueness in those who allowed themselves to wander from them, whilst simplicity, and its consequence good taste, were effectually banished from the works of them alL

It may be necessary to remark here that the works of Vitruvius are of value mainly as records of the architectural practice and the opinions and acquirements of an architect of a distant age. His fables about the origin of building, the invention of the orders, and the arrangements which grew out of certain modes of construction, prove his total ignorance not only of the architectural works of the more ancient Eastern nations, but of those of Greece itself, which he professes to describe. His classical taste, in consequence of his knowledge of antiquity, 13 vaunted by Perrault, one of his commentators, and given by him as a reason why Vitruvius was not much employed by the whimsical Romans, who loved variety, to which he would not administer. But the extent to which his knowledge of antiquity, that is, of the works of the Greeks, extended, may be readily determined by comparing the designs of Greek structures, made by Perrault and 0ther3, according to the directions of Vitruvius, with the Greek structures themselves as they exist even at the present time. Not a single example of Greek architecture will bear out any of the rules which Vitn1viu3 lays down, professedly on its authority; and not an existing edifice, or fragment of an edifice, is in form or proportion in perfect accordance with any law of that author, nor indeed are they generally in harmony with the principles he enunciates.

The adoption of the Vitruvian laws by the Italian architects of the 15th century led to the formation of the so-called “Five Orders.’’ In speaking of the course of Greek and Roman architecture, mention has been made of the Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian styles. Vitruvius describes, in addition to these, another, which he calls Tuscan—possibly a style of columnar arrangement peculiar to Italy, and most likely of Etrurian origin; but, in the absence of delineations, the Cinquecentists could only apply the proportions he laid down for it to what appeared to approximate them in the ancient remains; and hence arose a fourth, or “the Tuscan Order.” It is, however, a mere modification of the Roman debasement of the Doric, and may be considered, in its present foιm, as of purely modem Italian origin. The same “Revivers,” on looking among the ruins of ancient Rome for the forms of their Vitruvian orders, found specimens of a foliated ordinance, which the bad taste of the Romans had compounded of the foliated and voluted styles of the Greeks. This was seized upon as a fifth style, subjected to certain rules and proportions, and called “the Composite Order.” The very poor Roman specimens of Doric and Ionic fitted themselves without much difficulty to the Vitruvian laws; but the examples Rome afforded of the Corinthian were less tractable, and being as various in detail as they are generally beautiful, they were all passed over, and their places supplied by a mere changeling—an epitome of the Vitruvian theory. Thus we have the “Five Orders” of the Italo-Vitruvian school, viz. :— first, the Tuscan, of which there is no recognised example of antiquity, but which owes its form to the descriptions of Vitruvius and the fancies of the revivers; second, the Doric, a poor and tasteless arrangement of the general features of the style on a Roman model; third, the Ionic, which is almost as great a debasement of the Grecian originals, and was produced in the same manner as the last-mentioned; fourth, the Corinthian, a something totally unlike the ancient examples of both Greece and Rome in beauty and spirit; and, fifth, the Composite, an inelegant variety of the Corinthian, or a hybrid mixture of the horned or angular-ionic volutes, with a deep necking of the foliage of the preceding order. The first to publish this system was Leon Battista Alberti, a pupil of Brunelleschi. He has been followed by many others, the most distinguished of whom are Palladio, "Vignola, Scamozzi, Serlio, and De Lorme, architects, and Barbaro, a Venetian prelate, and an esteemed translator of, and commentator on, Vitruvius. None of these, it must be understood, agreed with any other of them, but each took his own view of the meaning of their common preceptor; and yet none of their productions evince the slightest approach to the elegance of form and beauty of proportion which distinguish the classic models of the columnar architecture of antiquity. Palladio and Serlio were the first to publish delineations and admeasurements of the Roman architectural remains in Italy; but the total absence of verisimilitude to the originals, and, in many cases, the absolute misrepresentations, in both works, prove how incompetent the authors were to appreciate their merits; and the exaggeration of their defects proves with equal clearness the general bad taste of the school in which they are masters. The worst qualities of the Roman school of architecture were embraced and perpetuated by the Cinquecento artists. The inharmonious and unpleasing combinations which arose out of the collocation of arches with columnar ordinances became the characteristics of the Italian; unequal intercolumnia-tions, broken entablatures and stylobates, enter alike into the productions of the best and of the worst of the Cinquecento architects. The style of this school is marked, too, by the constant attachment of columns and their accessories to the fronts or elevations of buildings; by the infrequency of their use in insulated (their natural) positions to form porticoes and colonnades; by the thinness or want of breadth in the smaller members of their entablatures, and the bad proportions of the larger parts, into which they are divided; by the general want of that degree of enrichment which fluting imparts to columns; by the too great projection of pilasters, and the inconsistent practice of diminishing, and sometimes fluting them; by the use of circular and twisted pediments, and the habit 01 making breaks in them to suit the broken ordinance they may crown; and by various other inconsistencies and deformities, which will be rendered more evident when we come to treat of the style in detail. The merit of the Italian school consists in the adaptation and collocation of the prolate hemispheroidal cupola, which appears to have grown out of its opposite in the Roman works during the Gothic ages, as we find it in the early cathedrals; though it is highly probable that the idea was brought from the East, in the forms exhibited by the cupolas of St Mark’s at Venice, and of Pisa Cathedral· A very imposing style of palatial architecture also was practised by many of the Italian architects. It consists of the use of a grand crowning cornice, running in one unbroken line, unsuπnounted by an attic or anything of the kind, superimposing a broad, lofty, and generally well-proportioned front, made into graceful compartments, but not storied, by massive blocking courses or otherwise. Not unfrequently, however, the faults of the school interfere to injure a composition of this kind; for, to produce variety in the decorations of the windows, some of them have been made like doors, with distyle arrangements of columns, surmounted by alternations of circular and angular pediments, and sometimes with all the vagaries which deform the front of an Italian church. It is indeed the ecclesiastical architecture of the school in which its faults are most rife and its merits most rare. An Italian Renaissance church possesses nothing of the stern simplicity and imposing grandeur of an Egyptian sacred structure—nothing of the harmonious beauty and classic dignity of a Grecian fane—nothing of the ornate and attractive elegance of a Roman temple—and nothing truly of the glittering grace and captivating harmony of a Pointed cathedral. No other style of architecture presents so great a contrast, in any two species of its productions, as the Italian does, in one of its ordinary church fronts, with the front of a nobleman’s mansion or palazzo, in the manner already referred to; and in no city of Italy is the contrast so strong, by the egregiousness of the examples it contains of both, as Rome. The stately portico is hardly known in Italian architecture; and in the rare cases in which insulated columns are found, they are for the most part so meagre in themselves, and so widely set, according to the Vitruvian laws, that the effect produced by them is poor and wretched in the extreme. This applies most particularly to Italy itself: in some other countries, and especially in this, those architects who have been of the Italian school have generally preferred the proportions and arrangements which they found in the Roman examples of antiquity, to those laid down by their Italian masters. Still, Italian church architecture of this period availed itself largely of the cupola,— certainly its redeeming feature; and the architects of Italy must have full credit for the use they have made of it, both internally and externally. Perhaps no two edifices display more, and in a greater degree, both the merits and defects of the school which produced them, than the Farnese palace and the basilica of St Peter in Rome. The principal front of the former edifice is noble in its proportions, but frittered in its details. It has an immense crowning cornice, whose general effect is certainly grand; but the mouldings are too much projected, and its vertical parts want the breadth which the blocking courses possess. The lowest of its three tiers of windows is characterised by extreme simplicity and good taste in almost every particular; but the other two are crowded with sins against both those qualities, in the dressings of the windows. The cortile and back front, though veιy differently arranged from the front and from each other, are filled with contrarieties, and the same may be said of the structure throughout. The front of St Peter’s is not more distinguished by its magnitude than by its littleness and deformity. It contains the materials of a noble octaprostyle, and consists of an attached tetrastyle. It is divided into three unequal stories, within the height of the columns, whose entablature is surmounted by a windowed attic. In length it is frittered into a multitude of compartments, between which not the slightest harmony is maintained, while tawdriness and poverty are the distinguishing characteristics of its detail. A total absence of everything which produces grandeur and beauty in architecture, marks, indeed, the whole of the exterior of the edifice, except the cupola, than which, if its bad connection with the building out of which it grows is overlooked, architecture seldom produced a more magnificent object. Internally, the structure is open to similar praise and similar dispraise. Gorgeousness in matter and meanness in manner characterise the interior of St Peter’s, except the sublime concave which is formed by its redeeming feature without. It must be said also that, probably, no building was ever erected in which the eye is so successfully deceived as to the actual dimensions. Its architect raised enormous walls, arches, and vaults, but gave every one the impression that they were on a very moderate scale. The tawdry and inappropriate sculptured decorations of the Renaissance school can nowhere be criticised with more advantage than in St Peter’s. It is not too much to say that, throughout the interior, there is scarcely an ornament which is not offensive; whilst not one of them has the slightest natural connection with, or use in, a sacred building. Perhaps sculpture never reached so profound a bathos as in the hideous cherubs which are stuck, like petrified acrobats, against all the piers of St Peter’s; and when we hear of such a building being treated as a model for our guidance in the completion of St Paul’s, we are driven devoutly to hope that St Paul’s may never in that sense be completed at all. Few people ever seem to trouble themselves to look at any part of St Peter’s except the entrance front and the dome. If they would examine the rest of the exterior they would find it to be a building without one other redeeming feature, or a single grace of outline or detail, and so absolutely unscientific in its constructional arrangements as to be beneath contempt as a complete work of architecture.

The Cinquecento architects of Italy were extreme mannerists; but besides the manner of the school, each had his own peculiarities; so that there exists in their works what may almost be called monotonous variety. Brunelleschi’s designs are distinguished by a degree of simplicity and comparative good taste, which causes regret that he had not referred more to the remains of antiquity in Italy, and sought out those of Greece, and attended less to the dogmas of Vitruvius; for then his works would have been more elegant and the school he founded would have done him much more honour. The works of Bramante possess a more classical character than those of any other architect of the school. Bramante’s design for St Peter’s was preferred by Pope Julius IL to a great many others by the most celebrated men of the time. He it was who suggested the cupola; but, unfortunately, after his death men of lese taste and ability were allowed to alter the design, and the edifice is very different from what it would have been had Bramante been adhered to. This we judge from his w0rk3 generally, and not from any positive knowledge of the design, which indeed does not exist. The elder Sangallo was far inferior to his contemporary and rival Bramante, and his works are full of the faults of the school. Michel Angelo Buonarroti was a man of great genius, but of coarse taste in architecture; and to him may be attributed many of the coarser qualities of the Italian style. His principal works are the buildings of the Capitol and the College della Sapienza in Rome, and the Laurentian Library at Florence; and these are all distinguished for their singular want of architectural beauty and propriety in every particular. Raffaelle, too, had a very bad style in architecture, and so indeed had almost all the painters after Giotto, who professed to be architects also. They generally carried to extremes all the faults of the school. Sansovino and Sanmicheli were men of considerable talent; their works display more originality and less servility than those of most of their contemporaries. Peruzzi was less employed than many who had not half his merit; his productions are with reason considered among the most classical of the Italian school. Vignola had a more correct taste than perhaps any other Italian architect of the 16th century; his works are indeed distinguishable by their superiority in harmony of composition and in general beauty of detail. Palladio very much affected the study of the antique, but his works do not indicate any appreciation of its beauties. He appears to have been very well qualified by nature for an architect, but spoiled by education. He did not look at the remains of antiquity with his own eyes, but with those of Vitruvius and Alberti, and he seems to have been too much influenced by the admired works of some of his predecessors. Palladio made greater use of insulated columns than the Italian architects generally, but his ordinances are deficient in every quality that produces beauty; his porticoes may be Vitruvian, but they certainly are not classic; and all his works show that he studied the Colosseum, the theatre of Marcellus, and the triumphal arches, more than the columns of Jupiter Stator and Mars Ultor, the temple of Antoninus and Faustina, the Pantheon, the portico at Assisi, and the other classic models, which he drew, but clearly did not appreciate. His columns upon columns, his attached and clustered columns, his stilted post-like columns, his broken entablatures, his numberless pilasters, straggling and unequal intercolumniations, inappropriate and inelegant ornaments, circular pediments, and the like, are blemishes too numerous and too great to be passed over because of occasional elegance of proportion and beauty of detail. Scamozzi did not improve on the style of his master, which, however, he very much affected. Indeed, the term Palladian was long used as synonymous with beautiful and excellent architecture, so that it cannot be wondered at that Palladio’s pupils and successors should have imitated him; nor is it surprising that they did not surpass, or even equal him, for they were taught to look to his works as the ηe plus ultra of excellence. Giacomo della Porta, a contemporary of Palladio, followed Michel Angelo in several of his works, and imbibed much of his manner, on which ho certainly improved; but still his own is far from being good. Della Porta was much employed in Rome; and it fell to him, in conjunction with Domenico Fontana, to put the cupola on St Peter’s. Fontana’s style of architecture is not particularly distinguished for its good or bad qualities: he obtained more reputation as an engineer than as an architect, having been engaged in removing and setting up most of the obelisks which give so much interest to the architectural scenery of Rome. The Lunghi, father, son, and grandson, the Rainaldi, Maderno, Borromini, Bernini, Carlo Fontana, Fuga, Van vitelli, and many others in the course of the 17th and 18th centuries, carried the peculiarities of the Italian school to the greatest extremes. Of those enumerated, Bernini was perhaps the least offensive, and Borromini the most extravagant; but throughout that period, except in extreme cases, individual manner is less distinguishable, and that of the school more strongly marked.

It may be gathered from the preceding remarks, that the secular architecture of the Italian school is generally preferable to the ecclesiastical, and that the architects of the 15th and 16th centuries were generally superior to those who followed them. In Italy tho school has not yet ceased to exist, nor indeed has its style ceased to be studied. Designs are still made by the students of the various academies in the manner of the Cinquecento, and on the models with which the country abounds. The precepts of Vitruvius are yet inculcated, and the men whose names have just been mentioned are looked up to as masters of architecture in the country which contains the Roman Pantheon and the Greek temple of Neptune at Paestum, and has access to the more exquisite works of Greece herself.

As has been already stated, Italian architecture, though professedly a revival of the classical styles of Greece and Rome, was formed without reference to the existing specimens of either, but on the dogmas of an obscure Roman author, and the glosses of the “revivers” on his text. Vitruvius described four classes or orders of columnar composition; and on the principles which governed him in subjecting to fixed laws all the varieties with which he appears to have been acquainted, they formed a fifth, of a medley of two of his, thus completing the Italian orders of architecture. Tho school which was founded on the Vitruvian theories has systematised everything to an absurd extent, and laid down laws for collocating and proportioning all the matter it furnishes for architectural composition and decoration. It teaches that columns are modelled from the human figure; that the Tuscan column is like a sturdy labourer—a rustic; the Doric is somewhat trimmer though equally masculine—a gentleman, perhaps; the Ionic is a sedate matron; tho Corinthian a lascivious courtesan; and the Composite an amalgam of the last two! In a composition which admits any two or more of them, the rustic must take the lowest place; on his head stands the stately Doric, who in his turn bears the comely matron, on whose head is placed the wanton, and the wanton again Î3 made to support the lady of doubtful character! Without commenting on this, wo proceed at once to point out the general features of the Italian style, premising only, that according to the practice of the school everything is confined to an exclusive use and appropriation; such columns may be fluted, and such must not; such a moulding may be used here, but not there; and so on. The proportions and arrangements of an order, of any part of one, or of anything that may come within an architectural composition, are fixed and unchangeable, whatever may be the purpose or situation for which it is required; whether, for instance, an order be attached or insulated, the column must have exactly the same number of modules and minutes in height. It is true that the masters of the school are not agreed among themselves as to those things in which they are not' bound by Vitruvius; but every one not the less contends for the principle, each, of course, prescribing his own doctrine as orthodox and final on these unsettled points.

Mouldings are considered by these authorities as constituent parts of an order, and are limited to eight in number, strangely enough including the fillet. They are the cyma-recta, the cyma-reversa (or ogive or ogee), tho ovolo, the torus, the astragal or bead, the cavetto, the scotia, and the fillet. They are gathered from the Roman remains, but reduced to regular lines or curves, which unlike all good artistic work may be drawn with a rule or struck with a pair of compasses. By their arrangement according to certain proportions, with flat surfaces, modil-lions, and dentils, a profile is formed; no two conjoined mouldings may be enriched, but their ornaments, as well as the modillions and dentils, must be disposed so as to fall regularly under one another, and, when columns occur, above the middle of them.

An order is said to be composed of two principal parts, the column and the entablature; these are divided into base, shaft, and capital in the one, and architrave, frieze, and cornice in the other, and are variously subdivided in the different orders. The Tuscan column must be mado seven diameters in height, the Doric eight, the Tonic nine, and the Corinthian and Composite ten. The height of tho entablature, according to some authorities, should be one-fourth the height of the column, and, according to others, two of its diameters. The parts of the entablature of all but the Doric may be divided into ten equal parts, four of which are given to the cornice, three to the frieze, and three to the architrave; and in the Doric, the entablaturo being divided into eight parts, three must be given to tho cornice, three to the frieze, and tho remaining two to the architrave. For the minor divisions a diameter of the column is made into a scale of sixty minutes, by which they are arranged; but this is obviously irrelevant if tho whole height of the entablature is determined by the height of the column, and not by its diameter; in this case, therefore, they must be proportioned from the general divisions already ascertained. Columns must be diminished, according to Vitruvius, more or less as their altitude is less or greater,—those of about fifteen feet high being made one-sixth less at their superior than at their inferior diameter, while that proportion is lessened gradually, so that columns fifty feet high shall be diminished one-eighth only. On this subject, however, many of his disciples controvert the authority of their master; and somo of them have fixed the diminution at one-sixth of a diameter for columns of all sizes in all the orders. The entasis of columns is disputed also, some authorities making it consist in preserving the cylinder perfect one-quarter or one-third the height of the shaft from below, diminishing thence in a right line to the top; while others, following Vitruvius, make the column increase in bulk in a curved line from the base to three-sevenths of its height, and then diminish in the same manner for the remaining four-sevenths, thus making the greatest diameter near the middle.

It being difficult to determine among the masters of the Italo-Vitruvian school whose designs of the various orders are to be preferred, we have selected those of Palladio, certainly not for any superior merit they possess, but because ho is more generally esteemed than any other, and because he the most strictly adhered to the precepts of Vitruvius, as far as he could understand them. It should be remarked however, that although Palladio recommended fluting all but the shaft of the Tuscan column, he very seldom fluted columns in his own practice; and indeed it was the custom of the Italian school not to flute, whatever their doctrine may be to the contrary; for fluted columns in Italian architecture are exceptions to the general practice. Swelled or pillowed friezes are not peculiar to Palladio; they are more or less common to the works of most of the masters of the same school. Prostyles being almost unknown in Italian architecture, antae are not often required; but when they are, the meanest succedaneum imaginable is recurred to. Of this Palladio’s "Villa Capra near Vicenza and Lord Burlington’s Palladian villa at Chiswick afford striking examples. Pilasters, however, are very common, so common, indeed, that they may be called pro-columns, as they are often used as an apology for applying an entablature. They are described as differing from columns in their plan only, the latter being round, and the former square; for they are composed with bases and capitals, are made to support entablatures according to the order to which they belong, and are fluted and diminished with or without entasis, just as columns of the same style would be. When they are fluted, the flutes are limited to seven in number on the face, which, it is said, makes them nearly correspond with the flutes of columns; and their projection must be one-eighth of their diameter or width when the returns are not fluted; but if they are, a fillet must come against the wall. Pedestals are not considered by the Italo-Vitruvian school as belonging to the orders, but they may be employed with them all, and have bases and surbases or cornices to correspond with the order with which they may be associated. The dado of a pedestal must be a square whose side shall be equal to that of the plinth of the column or pilaster which rests on it, or a parallelogram a sixth or even a fourth of a diameter taller. The intercolumniations of columns are called pycnostyle, systyle, eustyle, diastyle, and araeostvle, and are strictly adhered to in Italian architecture when columns are insulated, which is not very often; when they are attached, the interspaces are not limited, except when a peculiar arrangement called araeostyle is adopted. This consists of two systyle intercolumniations, the column that should stand in the mid-distance between two others being placed within half a diameter of one of them, making, in fact, coupled columns or pilasters. It is applied to insulated columns as well as to those which are attached. Following Vitruvius, the Italian school makes the central intercolumniation of a portico wider than any of the others. The height of arched openings, in arcades or elsewhere, is generally about twice their width; if, however, they are arranged with a columnar ordinance, having columns against the piers, they are made to partake of the order to which the columns belong, being lower in proportion to their width with the Tuscan than with the Doric, and so on; and the piers are allowed to vary in the same manner, from two-fifths to one-half of the opening. With columnar arrangements, moulded imposts and archivolts are used; the former being made rather more than a semi-diameter of the engaged columns in height, and the latter exactly that proportion. Variously moulded keystones are used, too, projecting so that they give an appear ance of support to the superimposed entablature. Smaller columns with their entablature are sometimes made to do the duty of imposts, and sometimes single columns are similarly applied; at other times, columns in couples are allowed to stand for piers to carry arches. In plain arcades the masonry is generally rusticated, without any other projection than a plain blocking course for an impost, and a blocking course or cornice crowning the ordinance. Niches and other recesses are at times introduced in the plain piers, which are in that case considerably wider than usual, or in the spandrels over wide piers. Very considerable variety is allowed in these combinations. Doors and windows, whether arched or square, follow nearly the same proportions, being made, in rustic stories, generally rather less than twice their width in height, and in others either exactly of that proportion, or an eighth or a tenth more. If they have columned or pilastered frontispieces, these are sometimes pedimented; and, except in rustic stories, whether with or without columns, a plain or moulded lining called an architrave is applied to the head and sides of a door or window. This architrave is made from one-sixth to one-eighth the width of the opening it bounds, and it rests on a blocking course or other sill, as the case may be. In the absence of columns or pilasters in the frontispiece, their place is frequently supplied by consols or trusses of various form and arrangement, backed out by a narrow pilaster, which may be considered as the return of the frieze of the entablature, and which supports the cornice. It is not uncommon for the architrave lining to project knees at the upper angles, and this is sometimes done even with consols and their pilasters. With columned frontispieces to gateways, doors, and windows, arose the custom, so frequent in Italian architecture, of rusticating columns, by making them alternately square and cylindrical, according to the heights of the courses of rustic masonry to which they are generally attached, and with which they are less offensive than in other collocations. The practice of the Cinquecento school of piling columns on columns with their accessories is warranted by the doctrine of its master; but his precepts not being practicable, recourse has been had to the inferior works of the Romans, which present examples of it. The difficulty of preserving anything like a rational arrangement is acknowledged on all hands to be great, if not insurmountable; for if the first or lowest order be at an intercolumniation fitting its proportions, the second or next above it, though diminished ever so little, is already deranged, for it has the same distance from column to column that the inferior order has whilst the columns themselves are smaller in diameter, and their entablature consequently shallower. This derangement must, of course, increase with every succeeding ordinance, rendering it indeed impossible to make such a composition consistent. The most approved practice in arranging order above order appears to be, that the upper column shall take for its diameter the superior diameter of the one below it; that when the columns are detached their axes shall be in the same perpendicular line; but when attached or engaged, the plinth of the pedestal of the upper shall impend the top of the shaft of the lower column. The most rational mode, however, for diminishing, if reason can be applied to such compositions, is to carry the diminution through, the outlines of the columns of the lowest order being drawn up in the same direction, and so the columns of every story would take up their place and be diminished in regular gradation. When columns are attached, or pilasters are used, in Italian architecture, the almost invariable custom is to break the entablature over every column or pilaster, or over every two when they are in couples. Because of the great length of the intercolum-niation, this would appear to have been done at first; but it has frequently been done by some of the most distinguished practitioners of the school, even without that excuse, so that it may be held as approved by them. A basement is either a low stereobate or a lofty story, according as it is intended to support a single ordinance the whole height of the main body of the structure, or indeed the lowest of two or more orders; or as it occupies the ground story of a building, and supports an ordinance, or the appearance of one, above. In either case much is necessarily left to the discretion of the architect; but in the latter the height of the order it is to support is the generally prescribed height of the basement. A basement may be rusticated or plain; if it be low, and is not arranged like a continued pedestal, it must have neither cornice nor blocking course; but if lofty, a deep bold blocking course is indispensable. An attic may vary in height from one-quarter to one-third the height of the order it surmounts; attics are arranged with a base, dado, and coping cornice, like pedestals, and generally have pilasters broken over the columns below. The rule for the form, composition, and application of pediments in Italian architecture, if it may be gathered from the practice of the school, appears to be to set good taste at defiance in them all. We find pediments of every shape, composed of cornices, busts, scrolls, festoons, and what not, and applied in every situation, and even one within another, to the number of three or four, and each of these of different form and various composition. The proportion laid down for the height of a pediment is from one-fourth to one-fifth the length of its base, or the cornice on which it is to rest. Balustrades are used in various situations, but their most common application is in attics, or as parapets on the summits of buildings, before windows, in otherwise close continued stereobates, to flank flights of steps, to front terraces, or to flank bridges. Their shapes and proportions are even more diversified than their application; that of most frequent use is shaped like an Italian Doric column, compressed to a dwarfish height, and consequently swollen in the shaft to an inordinate bulk in the lower part, and having its capital, to the hypotrachelium, reversed to form a base to receive its grotesque form. The base and coping comice of a balustrade are those of an ordinary attic, or of a pedestal whose dado may be pierced into balusters. The general external proportions of an edifice, when they are not determined by single columnar ordinances, appear to be unsettled. The grand front of the Farnese Palace in Rome is in two squares, its length being twice its height; the length of each front of Vignola’s celebrated pentagonal palace of Caprarola is two and a quarter times its height above the bastions. In Palladio’s works we find the proportions of fronts to vary so considerably as to make it evident that he did not consider himself bound by any rule on that point. In some cases we find the length to be one and a sixth times the height, in others one and a fourth, one and a half, two, two and a sixth, and even three and a sixth; and elevations by other masters of the school are found to vary to the same extent. The proportions of rooms, again, range from a cube to the ratio of one to two, though it is preferred that the height should be a sixth, or even a fifth, less than a side when the plan is a square; but the sesquialteral form, with the height equal to the breadth, and the length one-half more, is considered the most perfect proportion for a room. There is considerable variety and beauty in the foliate and other enrichments of an architectural character in many structures in Italy, but very little ornament enters into the columnar composition of Italian architecture. Friezes, instead of being sculptured, are swollen; the shafts of columns, it has been already remarked, are very seldom fluted, and their capitals are generally poor in the extreme; mouldings are indeed sometimes carved, but not often; rustic masonry, ill-formed festoons, and gouty balustrades, for the most part supply the place of chaste and classic enrichment. This refers more particularly to the more classic works of the school; in many of the earlier structures of Italy, and especially on monuments of various kinds, we find what may be called a graceful profusion of ornament, of the most tasteful and elegant kind; few carved mouldings, however, and very few well-profiled cornices, are to be met with in Italian compositions of any kind. In many of the later architectural works of that country we find again a profusion of ornament of the most tasteless and inelegant description, chiefly in the gross and vulgar style, which is distinguished as that of Louis XIV. of France.

In the 15th century such was the reverence of men for the revived works of ancient literature and science, that the pretence of the Italians, that they had restored ancient classical architecture on the precepts of an architect of the Augustan age, was sufficient to open the way for them all over civilised Europe. In the course of that and the following century Italian architecture was adopted and Italian architects employed in France, Spain, Germany, Great Britain, and their respective dependencies; and now, in the 19th century, Vitruvius and Palladio are as predominant on the shores of the Baltic as on those of the Mediterranean; though in England and in some parts of the Continent their influence is considerably diminished since the time of Inigo Jones and Claude Perrault. It has been already remarked, too, that the Cinquecento was later in gaining a footing in Britain than on the Continent, in consequence of the love of the beautiful national style of architecture, which our ancestors do not appear to have been induced to resign to the barbarian innovators of the South, as readily as most other nations were to give up theirs. The French, though they received the Vitruvian architecture from the Italians, were patriotic enough, as soon as they had acquired its principles, to confine the practice of it almost entirely to native architects, in whose hands it assumed a different character from that which it possessed in Italy, and became what maybe called the French style of Cinquecento. Its ecclesiastical structures are less faulty than are those of the corresponding period in Italy, but its secular edifices are as far inferior to those of that country. The grand palatial style, which is exemplified in the Farnese Palace in Rome, never found its way into France; but instead, there arose that monstrous and peculiarly French manner, of which the well-known palaces of the Tuileries and Luxembourg are egregious examples. In the age of Louis XIV. the French appear to have reverted to the Italian manner in a certain degree; for the palace of Versailles includes almost all the extravagances of that school in its worst period, and contains, moreover, architectural deformities which Italy never equalled till it imitated them. They consist in the style of enrichment which is distinguished by the name, and is due in part to the gross taste, of the monarch in whose reign it had its origin. The same period produced one of the most classical architects of the French school—its Palladio or Inigo Jones—Perrault, whose design for the buildings of the Louvre was preferred to that of Bernini, though, indeed, the preference was no compliment to the one nor discredit to the other, considering to whom the decision was of necessity referred. The Hotel des Invalides is of the same age: it exhibits the graces of the Italian cupola, surmounting a composition which includes more than all the faults of St Peter’s in Rome. The church of Sainte Genevieve, or the Pantheon, a work of the following reign, was intended to be in the ancient Roman style, and of Roman magnificence; but it is rather papally than imperially so. Ancient Rome was regarded in the columnar ordinance, but modern Rome in the architectural composition. In it the ecclesiastical style of the Cinquecento is commingled with the simple beauties of Roman architecture, almost, indeed, to the destraction of the latter; and it is crowned by a too lofty cupola. More recently the works of the ancients have been studied by the architects of France, greatly to the amelioration of their style, although many of them still appear to disregard the peculiarities of real Greek architecture, and to retain their devotion to Vitruvius and the 15th century. Spain received but soon modified the Italo-Vitravian architecture, and has never recovered from the architectural excesses into which her architects plunged when the wealth of their countrymen in the 16th and 17th centuries enabled them to accomplish such enormous works. Of these, the man of the greatest fame out of his own country is Herrera, the architect of the Escorial, a vast palace built upon the ingeniously rural plan of a gridiron. It is a vast but bare, cold, and repulsive building. Not less is the cathedral at Valladolid a grand failure, though Herrera must be credited with much more self-restraint and reserve in the use of ornament than the Italian architects of his own time, and some of his contemporaries and successors in Spain. One of the most famous of these, Churriguerra, gave his name to a fashionable style which was neither more nor less than the most rococo travesty of Italian Renaissance that could be invented; and another school of architects, imitating the delicate chasing of silversmiths’ work, produced another variation of the style, "which was christened “Plateresque.” If this is less cold than Herrera’s work, and less offensive than Churriguerra’s, it contains at the same time none of the elements of a really great and lasting style of architecture, and is only interesting as a local variety of style. The Italian revival was the means of extinguishing the Pointed style of architecture in Germany, and certainly without affording it an equivalent. Italian architects were employed in Germany, and Germans acquired their manner; but they did not improve it, nor did they make it productive of so many good effects as the Italians themselves did. The change in religion which followed the change in architecture in so large a part of Germany may have tended to prevent the latter from acquiring that degree of exuberance there which it reached in Italy; but even in Catholic Germany the splendid Pointed cathedrals have never given way to modifications of the pseudo-classic St Peter’s. In the use of Cinquecento architecture for secular structures, it may be truly said that the Germans have not excelled the Italians, nor, on the other hand, have they equalled them in the absurdities and extravagances which are so frequently observable in the works of some of the latter. The Germans also have turned their attention to the works of the ancients, and the fruit of this is evident in many parts of the country, particularly in Prussia; still, however, they have yet to show that it is possible to apply the Greek models to modern uses, and to exhibit a proper sense of the exquisite perfection of their detail, as well as to emancipate themselves from the trammels of the Vitruvian school. The northern Continental nations have been dependent for their architecture on Germany, France, or Italy, and can produce nothing that gives them a claim to consideration in such a review as the present. St Petersburg is exclusively the work of architects of the nations just enumerated, and presents a mass of the merest common-places of Italian architecture, in structures calculated by their extent only, like Versailles, the Escorial, and St Peter’s, to impose on the vulgar eye.

Modern English Architecture.

We have already more than once had occasion to refer incidentally to the introduction of Cinquecento architecture into Britain; and in noticing it more particularly, and tracing its course, we are saved the trouble of keeping up a distinction between the different parts of our triple nation, because at the time it actually crossed the Channel the union of the kingdoms had taken place.

When the Pointed style received its deathblow in England, in the reign of Henry VIII., it did not immediately cease to exist; nor was it immediately succeeded by the Italian when it became extinct. It was gradually declining through all the 16th century, during the latter part of which period what has been called the Elizabethan style became somewhat permanent. It consists of a singular admixture of the Italian orders with many peculiarities of the Pointed style, and in many examples the latter appears predominant. With such difficulty, indeed, did that fascinating manner give up its hold on the minds of men in this country, that the Cinquecentists appear to have relinquished the hope of effecting its destruction, unfortunately, however, not until the injury was done; and for some time we were left without a style of any kind, unless that may be called by the name which marks the edifices of the reign of James I., and of which the oldest parts of St James’s Palace are a specimen.

The destraction of the Pointed style has been referred by some to the change in religion which took place under the Tudor line of English monarchs, but certainly without sufficient reason. It was the “Reformation” of architecture in Italy, and not that of religion in Great Britain, that effected it; and it may be doubted whether the change would not have taken place sooner in this country if its connection with Italy had not been so materially affected by the moral change here; for it was Germany and France that supplied us with architectural reformers during the reigns of Henry VIII. and his children, and not Italy, whose professors might possibly have obtained more credit than their disciples did.

So dilatory were we, indeed, in the cultivation of the Italian style, that the first professor of it who was actually employed on edifices in this country came to it from Denmark! It is true he w as an Englishman; but so little hope did he appear to have of success at home, that he accepted an invitation from the king of that country. He had gone to Venice to study painting; but becoming enamoured of architecture, as he saw it in the works of Palladio, he had made that his study instead, and had already acquired considerable reputation in that city when Christian IV. of Denmark invited him to his court to occupy the post of his first architect. A train of circumstances brought him to England a few years after James I. came to the English crown, and he was appointed architect at first to the queen, and subsequently to Henry prince of Wales. But this does not appear to have then obtained employment for him, since after the death of the prince he went again to Italy, where he remained till the office of surveyor-general, which had been promised him in reversion, fell vacant. This was the celebrated Inigo Jones, who has been called the English Palladio; and, indeed, he succeeded so well in acquiring the peculiar manner of that architect, that he richly deserves whatever credit the appellation conveys. It is unfortunate, however, for his own reputation, that he had not looked beyond Palladio and their common preceptor Vitruvius to the models the latter pretends to describe; in which case he might have been the means of solving the question whether the truly classical architecture of the ancients could ever be introduced here with any advantage. But instead of that he brought nothing home but Italian rules and Italian prejudices. Jones commenced the truly Gothic custom of thrusting Cinquecento fittings into our Pointed cathedrals, by putting up an Italian screen in that of Winchester; and he barbarised the ancient cathedral of St Paul in London, by repairing it according to his notions of Pointed architecture, whilst at the same he defaced its exterior· by affixing to it an Italian front. Of the Palladian style, however, he was a complete master. He designed a royal palace, which was to have been built at Whitehall, in a manner as far superior to those of Versailles and the Escorial as the works of Palladio are to those of Borromini. The only part of Jones’s design ever executed is the structure called the Banqueting House, whose exterior is an epitome of many of the faults, and most of the beauties of the Palladian school. It rises boldly from the ground with a broad, simple, and nearly continuous basement, or stereobate, and the various compartments of its principal front are beautifully proportioned; but though the circular pediments to the windows, the attached unfluted columns, with broken entablatures and stylobates, the attic and balustrade, be the materials of Palladian, it may be confidently denied that they are consistent with classical, architecture. Another well-known work of this architect is the Italo-Vitruvian Tuscan church of St Paul, Covent Garden, whose eastern portico is well-proportioned in general, but grossly deformed in detail, and whose interior was left to take care of itself, having absolutely no charm either of proportion or detail.

Architecture was in abeyance in this country, again, from the troublous times of Charles I. till the restoration of the monarchy in the person of his son, whose French taste would have completely Gallicised the architecture of the nation, if the genius of Sir Christopher Wren had not been present to avert the infliction, or rather to modify it; for it cannot be denied that the influence of the French manner had an effect on the architecture of this country from that period down to the middle of the last century. Indeed, Wren himself knew the style he practised mainly from books and the structures of France; and, in consequence of his visit to France, the peculiarities of the French style are obvious in many of his less esteemed works. Fortunately, however, he was proof against the grosser peculiarities of the Cinquecento, whether in the books of the Italians or in the edifices of the French; and his own productions show that he had imbibed much of the spirit of the antique monuments of Italy, which he could have known only from engravings, and those very imperfect ones. The field that was opened to his genius by the great fire of London in 1666, and its result, are equally well known. It is true that the general absence of taste and feeling with regard to the Pointed style extended even to him. Wren was guilty of many offences in that respect, besides giving authority to the opprobrious term Gothic; and in no case more so than inthe construction of the towers added to Westminster Abbey, which are a lasting proof of his ignorance of its most obvious principles. Nevertheless, to the influence of our beautiful native style on his mind the architecture of his period is indebted for some of its best works. If Wren had not been accustomed to contemplate the graceful and elegant pyramids or spires of his native country, he would never have originated the tapering steeple, in the composition of which with the materials of Italian architecture he still stands as unrivalled as he was original. Witness the· steeples of Bow Church and St Bride’s in London, the former of which is hardly surpassed in grace and elegance by the pointed spires themselves. It must remain a constant subject of curious speculation, what effect would have been produced on this great head of the English school of Cinquecento architecture if he had known the remains of ancient Greece and Rome from personal observation. With his splendid genius and fine taste, if he had not been imposed on by the specious pretence of the Italo-Vitruvian school, his works might have been models for imitation and study, as they are objects of admiration; as it was, he avoided many of the faults of that school, and improved on many of its beauties. Although he did not know the Greek style at all, and knew the Roman only through imperfect mediums, and, indeed, had never seen an example of either, whenever he has varied from the Italian practice it has been towards the proportions and peculiarities of the Greek! The great west front of St Paul’s, though it is said to be imitated from that of St Peter’s in Rome, or rather from what it was proposed to be, with the two towers to form its wings, is a much finer, a more imposing, and more classical specimen of architecture than its prototype; for the advantage the latter should have in being of columns in one height is lost entirely in their poverty, and in the miserable arrangement of the whole front, whereas that of St Paul’s is in two noble pseudo-prostyle and recessed porticoes, with the columns fluted, and generally conceived and executed in much better taste than those of St Peter’s. The entablatures, though massive, are finely proportioned, and sufficiently ornate to be elegant; they are, too, quite continuous, and the upper one is surmounted by a noble pediment, whose pyramidal form gives at the same time dignity and a finished appearance to the whole front. The coupling of the columns, however, and the putting of one columnar ordinance over another, can only be defended by the practice of the Italian school; though, in the present case, both are rendered less offensive by the judicious management of the architect. Nothing shows more strikingly the superiority of St Paul’s to St Peter’s as an architectural composition, than a parallel of their flanks. The great magnitude of the latter may strike the vulgar eye with admiration in the contrast; but the rudest taste must appreciate the surpassing merit of the former in the form and arrangement of the cupola, and the noble peristyle, with its unbroken entablature and stylobate, out of which it rises, when compared with the sharper form and depressed substructure of that of St Peter’s. The superiority of St Paul’s in the composition of the main body of the edifice is not less in degree, though, perhaps, less obvious, than in the superstructure. In the one it is broken and frittered, and in the other almost perfectly continuous, in broad, bold, and effective masses.

The history of the works of Sir Christopher Wren is the history of the architecture of the period in this country; and as it must be admitted that he was not so successful in the composition of the architecture of secular structures as of ecclesiastical, it will follow that our secular edifices of that time are of inferior merit. If it were not indeed an historical fact, it would hardly be credited that Chelsea College, the old College of Physicians in London, and the halls of some of the city companies, arc by the architect of Bow Church and St Paul’s.

The style introduced by Sir John Vanbrugh, who may be said to have succeeded Sir Christopher Wren in the direction of architecture in England, was distinguished by massiveness unsuited to the style in which he built, which was, of course, Italian. It was, however, free from the extravagances which characterise that style generally in other countries at the same period, but -was certainly more suited to the soberer character of ecclesiastical than of secular structures, whereas his principal works were noblemen’s mansions. Vanbrugh’s faults were generally those of Michel Angelo; he was a painter architect, and did not understand beauty of proportion and detail so well as the pictorial arrangement of lights and shadows,—to produce which in the Cinquecento it is almost necessary to part with all the higher beauties of architecture. Hawksmoor added to the style of his master that noble ornament in which Italian works are so very deficient—a prostyle portico. His compositions are marked by severe simplicity, and only want to be absolved from a few faults and enriched with a few elegances to be among the best of modern times. Not the least distinguished architect of the same age (the first half of the 18th century) was the earl of Burlington, who was a passionate admirer of the style of Palladio and Inigo Jones. Many of the edifices erected by Kent are asserted to be from the designs of that nobleman, who, with considerable talent, was, however, a somewhat bigoted devotee to Vitruvius and the Cinquecento generally, as well as to Palladio in particular; for he frequently used columns representing half-barked trees in conformity with the silly tales of Vitruvius, and the sillier whims of his disciples. The portal of his own house in Piccadilly, and that of the King’s Mews, were special examples of this bad taste, and of other faults of the school besides. Lord Burlington built for himself at Chiswick a villa on the model of the Villa Capra, or Rotonda, near Vicenza—a structure which has been called the master-piece of Palladio. In form and proportion it is certainly elegant, but its details strongly exhibit the poverty of Italian columnar architecture, when unaided by the frittering which is its bane, and almost its only element of effect. Gibbs, a contemporary, had, like Hawksmoor, imbibed a taste for the classic prostyle portico, which he evinced in St Martin’s Church in London; but that he also was in the trammels of the Italian school is no less evident, in the same structure, to a considerable extent, and still more so in the church of St Mary in the Strand, which is a mediocre specimen of architecture, though a favourable one of its style. During the following half-century (the latter half of the 18th) Sir William Chambers and Sir Robert Taylor were the most distinguished architects of this country. They were both men of genius and skill, who had availed themselves of the remains of Roman antiquity to good purpose (for as yet those of Greece were cither unknown or unappreciated), and the former has left us, in the Strand front of Somerset House in London, perhaps the best specimen of its style in existence. Other parts of the same edifice, however, are far from deserving the same degree of praise; indeed, as an architectural composition, the river front is altogether inferior in merit to the other, though of much greater pretence. The inner fronts to the great quadrangle, though exhibiting good parts, are, as a whole, not above mediocrity. An air of littleness pervades them; and the general effect of the fronts themselves is made still worse by the little clock towers and cupolas by which they are surmounted; and to this may be added the infinity of ill-arranged chimneys, which impart an ’ air of meanness and confusion that nothing can excuse. While Sir William Chambers and a few others were applying the best qualities of Italian architecture, indeed, improving its general character, and, it may be said, making an English style of it, there were many structures raised in various parts of the country in a manner hardly superior to that of the time of James I.,—structures in which all the meanness and poverty of the Cinquecento are put forth, without any of its elegance of proportion, or that degree of effectiveness which men of talent contrived to give it. During the same period, too, the seeds of a revolution were sown, which almost succeeded in ejecting the Italian style and its derivative from this country, without perhaps having furnished a complete equivalent.

In the year 1748 James Stuart and Nicholas Revett, two painters pursuing their studies in Rome, having moreover paid some attention to architecture, issued “Proposals for publishing an accurate description of the Antiquities of Athens, &c.” These proposals met with general approbation, and in consequence they determined on prosecuting their plan; but various hindrances prevented their arrival in Athens till March 1751, when they commenced measuring and delineating the architecural monuments of that city and its environs. In this work they were unremittingly employed (as far as their own exertions went, for they were frequently interrupted by the Turks) for several years, so that they did not reach England with the result of their labours until 1755; and, by a series of almost unaccountable delays, the first volume of their work did not appear until the year 1762. Sixteen years more expired before the second issued from the press; and the third was not published until 1794, being nearly fifty years from the time the work was first announced! In the meantime a Frenchman of the name of Le Roy, who was at Rome when our countrymen issued their proposals, had gone to Athens, and collecting in a very short time some loose materials, had published at Paris, in 1758, a work which he called Les Ruines des plus beaux Moηumens de la Grèce, <kc., in which he makes not the slightest mention of Stuart and Revett, or of their labours or intentions, with all of which he was well acquainted. This work is, moreover, notoriously and grossly incorrect,—so incorrect, indeed, as to make it difficult of belief that its author ever saw the objects of which he professes to give the representations. It was, however, from M. le Roy’s work that the public had to judge of the merits and beauties of Greek architecture; for the first volume of Stuart and Revett's Antiquities did not appear for several years after it, and that doeβ not contain any pure specimen of the national or Doric style: the second, which does, was not published for twenty years after Le Roy’s. Considering, therefore, the source of information on the subject, it can hardly be wondered at that Greek architecture was vituperated on all sides; and by none with greater acrimony than by Sir William Chambers, whose apology must be ignorance and the prejudices of education. He really did not know the style he carped at; and his education in the Italo-Vitruvian school had unfitted him for appreciating its grand, chaste, and simple beauties, even if he had known it. Notwithstanding the misrepresentations of Le Roy, the vituperations of Chambers, the established reputation of Italian architecture, and the trammels which Vitruvius and his disciples had fixed on the public mind, when Stuart and Revett’s work actually appeared, the Greek style gradually advanced in esteem, by its intrinsic merits alone—for it has had no factitious aids; and since that period, Greece and all her colonies which possess remains of her unrivalled architecture have been explored, and we now possess correct delineations of almost every Greek structure which has survived, though in ruins, the wreck of time and the desolation of barbarism. To our country and nation, then, is due the honour of opening the temple of Greek architectural art, of drawing away the veil of ignorance which obscured the beauties it contains, and of snatching from destruction, and consequent oblivion, the noble relics of ancient architecture which bear the impress of the Grecian mind. Not only, indeed, were we the first to open the mine, but by us it has been principally worked; for among the numerous treatises on the Hellenic remains which now exist, by far the greatest number, and indisputably the most correct, are by Englishmen, and have been published in England. It required, however, a generation for the effects of ignorance and prejudice in some, and imperfect knowledge in others, to wear away before any effects of the study of the Greek style could be obvious in our structures. The works of the Adams, who were the contemporaries and immediate successors of Sir William Chambers, evince a taste for the beauties of Greek architecture, but a very imperfect knowledge, indeed, of the means of reproducing them. The architects who had the direction of our principal works during the earlier part of this century had the disadvantage of being pupils of those who were themselves, as we have shown, incompetent to appreciate the Greek style; and at a time, too, when the state of Europe prevented all access to the remains of Greece and Rome, so that no great improvement could perhaps be expected from them. Personal study of the monuments they wish to rival is the absolute duty of all architects, and it is possible that study even of the older examples may in all cases teach them some useful lesson. The structures of Egypt may show us how to arrange large masses harmoniously and effectively, those of Greece and Rome how to impart grace and dignity. The structures of Italy show us how far the materials of ancient architecture may be moulded to modern uses, while at the same time they give practical warning of what may result from the abuse of the most obvious principles of the art, and from the neglect of our national style or the requirements of our own country and climate, with which it is almost unnecessary to say it is quite impossible to harmonise the works of so entirely different a climate as that of Greece.

The difference between the representations of the Athenian antiquities by Stuart and his colleague, and the misrepresentations of them by Le Roy, appears to have opened the eyes of the world to those of ancient Rome, to see if they too had not been dealt with unjustly; for much more correct delineations of them had appeared than those of Palladio and Desgodets,—delineations of them as they exist, exhibiting the spirit of the originals, and not warped to the Vitruvian precepts, and thereby stripped of their best quality, truth. The excavation of the ancient cities of Herculaneum and Pompeii has opened to us much interesting and instructive matter, and their ruins have now been correctly delineated.

It is an argument in proof of the classical beauty of the Pointed style, that when the eyes of men were opened to the perfections of Greek architecture, they began to discover its merits also. Pointed architecture, under the opprobrious name Gothic, had long been a subject of discussion among antiquaries,—that is, essays were written by them to prove how the pointed arch originated, but none appreciated its beauties. Our Pointed cathedrals and churches were, after the example of Inigo Jones, ruthlessly barbarised in course of repairing and fitting them up. If an architect?-were employed to do anything about one of them, he appears to have thought it incumbent on him to convert it to the doctrines of his own faith—to Italianise it. Deans and chapters for the most part entrusted their commissions to country masons and plasterers, who also operated according to the laws of the “five orders.” About the middle of the 18th century one Batty Langley endeavoured to draw the attention of the world to Pointed architecture, by reducing it to rules, and dividing it into orders. Fortunately he was only laughed at, and both he and the book he published on the subject were soon forgotten. One of the first men in rank and influence of his time, in matters of taste particularly, Horace Walpole, patronised Pointed architecture, but ineffectually. He had himself neither taste nor feeling to appreciate its beauties, as his Strawberry Hill clearly shows. Delineations were indeed put forth from time to time, but generally so rude and imperfect, that they did more harm than good. The Society of Antiquaries, however, at length took up the subject, engaged Mr John Carter, an ardent and judicious admirer of our national architecture, and commenced the publication of a series of splendid volumes, containing engravings of its best specimens, from drawings and admeasurements by him. The Antiquities of Athens had already done much to dispossess men of their prejudicies, by showing that Greek architecture, though neither Vitruvian nor Palladian, was nevertheless beautiful; and the great work of the Society of Antiquaries did the same for Pointed architecture. Since the death of Mr Carter our national buildings have been studied, catalogued, drawn, and published by an infinity of admirers, who have done their work with zeal which has been thoroughly enthusiastic. The works of the elder Pugin were the first to show how architecture ought to be drawn, whilst the work of Mr Rickman was the first to show how it ought to be studied. From the time of these two pioneers in the work, it would be impossible to catalogue a hundredth of the works which have be?.n devoted to the subject. Nor have they been written by architects only. On the contrary, a large number of them are the work of amateurs, and it may be truly asserted that never since art has been written upon at all have so vast a number of publications, on every branch of it, been given to the world as within the last thirty years have been devoted to the illustration and history of our national Gothic architecture. Germany and France have been equally prolific on the same subject, and the only difficulty now is, out of the mass of materials how to select that which is useful and to the point. In Spain and Italy no such zeal has been shown, and the elucidation of their mediaeval antiquities has been left almost entirely to foreign hands.

Saracenic Architecture.

The beautiful forms by which Saracenic or Arabian architecture is best known were wrought into a style, if they were not invented, by the descendants of the wild Arab tribes who accepted Mahomet as their leader and prophet. In estimating their influence upon architecture, the first point to be considered is whether the Arabs, as they emerged from their deserts and overran the rich countries of Syria, Persia, and Egypt, brought with them any art of their own, or whether they formed their style after their conquests were secured, when they had become great, and had consequently leisure and power to form it by the aid of foreigners. Now, in the Koran no notices are found that would lead us to suppose that any definite forms of art were known to the Arabs in early times. We gather also that the minaret, one of the most prominent and beautiful forms of their architecture, could not have been used in early times, since we are told that the call to prayers was then made from the roofs of the mosques.

The earliest example of a mosque in Arabia itself is supposed to have been that at Mecca, 705 a.d. But this was rebuilt in the 15 th century, and that of Medina in the 16th, and we have no definite account of the original structures. The earliest of those which still exist are the Mosque of Amrou at Cairo (about 642 a.d.), and that of Damascus (705). Both of these were built of columns, <fcc., obtained by the destruction of Roman work.

In the Mosque of Tooloon at Cairo we find for the first time anything original. It was constructed about 879, and is said to have been designed by a Christian architect. Indeed, numerous passages in the early history of the Saracens seem to show that their architects and art workers generally were foreigners, attracted from Baghdad, Byzantium, and other places. It was the same throughout their progress in Spain as well as in Egypt; and however that style was eventually formed, which has given to us the beautiful domes and minarets of Cairo, the Alhambra in Spain, and the houses of Algiers, there can be little doubt but that it was based upon the art of Persia and Byzantium.

Ultimately it developed into two very distinct forms,— the Arabic of Cairo and the Moorish of Spain. But these still showed themselves, both in general form and in details, to be members of the same great family which we now call Saracenic. The chief structures in this style are the mosques and tombs. The former are very simple in plan, consisting, usually, of a mere open space with colonnades round and with a prayer niche (mehrab) in the side towards Mecca. Near this was a pulpit (mimbar), and as this part of the edifice was of course the most frequented, the colonnades were made of extra depth. In the centre of the court was a fountain, just as in the atrium of the Christian basilicas; and conspicuously, sometimes at each corner of the mosque, was placed a minaret. The size of the whole and the number and richness of the columns might vary, but the general arrangement was nearly always the same, the really essential parts being the prayer niche, the pulpit, the fountain, some protection against the burning noonday heat, and some elevated place from which the priest could call to prayers. A remarkable exception to the ordinary plan occurs in the celebrated Mosque Soultan Hassan at Cairo, which is in the form of a cross, the four arms being arched over, whilst the centre is left open and contains the usual fountain. Closely connected with the mosque is, often, the tomb of its founder. This is nearly always covered with a dome which, when on a large scale, was almost invariably a sign of a sepulchral edifice.

In these mosques and tombs we meet with general forms and details unknown elsewhere in Western art at the time of their erection. First of all we meet with the pointed arch. Very early in the style, and long before the era of Pointed architecture, this arch was used by the Saracens. But peculiar to their art are the beautiful minarets. Springing from a square base, they were gradually brought to an octagon or a round with a corbelled gallery at every change, and each part ornamented by diaper work of the most elaborate kind. The domes are equally varied and beautiful. They spring from a square base, and are gathered into the usual circular form in the most graceful manner. Quite opposite also to the Western mode, the external surfaces of the domes are sometimes decorated with diaper or other work, beautiful in. itself and equally so in its application, and never is the Saracenic dome concealed outside by a conical roof. The want of a crowning cornice to the long lines of the walls was to some extent supplied by a peculiarly bold crest ornament often filled in with rich scroll or other work. A variety of these adorns many of the mediaeval palaces of Venice. The ornamentation was almost entirely conventional, as the strict rules of the Koran forbade the copying of any natural objects. That this rule was not always followed may be seen in the Alhambra; but it, nevertheless, was in general attended to, and wonderfully beautiful were the results of this absence of all copying. Intricate scrollwork, flat in appearance on the surface, but really in various planes and intertwining, formed the usual basis. And from the scrolls came a sort of leafwork certainly like nothing in nature, but most graceful and varied in its elegant curves. The whole is utterly conventional—as entirely the creation of the artist’s mind as the most conventional work of a Gothic architect. The capitals of the columns were usually some adaptation of the classic. But in Spain, as specially seen in the Alhambra, they were of quite an original type, somewhat like that which we have described as being the germ of the Ionic, but with long leaves under the block, tied together with a band at the top of the shaft.

One of the ornaments peculiar to the Saracens, and constantly used by them, was the honey-comb by which they brought the square base, which they almost always used on plan, into the circular dome or niche-head.

It was, in fact, the Saracenic pendentive. In its simplest form it occurs very early in the style, as, e.y., at the Mosque of Tooloon at Cairo, and was composed of a series of small niches, the pointed head of each of which bent forward at the top and formed the springing point of two others. The repetition of a few rows of this produced a pendentive in which it is impossible to detect any harsh point of junction between the square base and the circular finish. Sometimes this honey-comb work was exceedingly intricate, and formed niche-heads, roofs, &c. Good examples of this occurs at the Zisa, Palermo, and at the Alhambra. The entrance doorways were often grandly composed in a very high square recess; but the Saracens were as carefid as the Gothic architects not to dwarf the size of the interior of their buildings by making the actual openings large, and thus the recess was brought down in height by elaborate work in the upper part, and the actual doorway thus reduced to just the size required for use. The windows were, of necessity, small, in order to guard against the heat; they were fitted up with thick bars of marble or of plaster, in elaborate diaper patterns.

these being filled in with pot metal glass, brilliantly coloured. The ceilings, when not domed, were flat, showing the timbers, which, in the finest examples, were richly painted and gilt, the wood being first canvased over, and then covered with a fine thin stucco to receive the decoration. The pavements were of marble mosaic, in some cases lighted up in colour by enamelled earthenware tesserae. The walls were often lined with still more elaborate mosaic, the outlines being in some cases marked out with mother-of-pearl. Add to this that the pulpits, doors, and other woodwork were of the most exquisite workmanship, and the bronze hinges, &c., often chased in a manner scarcely to be paralleled in any other style, and we have a combination of outlines and details which could scarcely be surpassed in design or execution in buildings of a size comparatively so small. Admirable descriptions of Saracenic architecture in Spain have been given by the late Mr Owen Jones and Μ. Coste; of that in Egypt, also by M. Coste, and in India by Mr Fergus-son. Of the houses in Egypt the best descriptions, probably, are those given in The Modern Egyptians, by Mr Lane, who has illustrated his work by numerous details of the carved wood and other work in which the Arabs excelled. Of the houses in Algiers, a peculiar class, an account is given by Professor Lewis in the Transactions of the li. Institute of British Architects, 1868-9.

It remains only to say that the present successors of the Saracens seem now to have lost nearly all claim to individuality in art, and to be unable even to copy or imitate the illuminated MSS., the mosaics, the carving in wood or in ivory, which lend so great a charm to the old work. What is now done is merely a copy, and a bad copy, of the work of their European neighbours.

Chinese Architecture.

The buildings of the Chinese are very inferior in character to those of India; in fact, Mr Fergusson goes so far as to say, “China possesses scarcely anything worthy of the name of architecture.” Sir W. Chambers has described one of the Buddhist temples, that at Ho-nang, which is not unlike those of India in arrangement. There is an extensive court, with avenues of trees, leading to a flight of steps and portico of four columns. In a second vestibule behind this are four colossal figures bearing various emblems. Beyond this is a very large second court, entirely surrounded by colonnades and small sleeping cells for the priests or bonzes; in other words, a huge cloister, much like the Indian viharas. In the same ranges are four pavilions filled with idols, and large rooms for refectories, behind which are the kitchen, courts, &c. At the extreme corners of the grand court are four other pavilions, the dwellings of the higher order of priests. At equal distances behind each other, down the centre of the court, are three larger pavilions, called tings, entered on each side by a flight of steps, and a fourth engaged in the cloister itself, and having a front portico and one flight of steps only. The first three are square, two stories in height, the lowest surrounded by fourteen columns, each face or front showing six. They have rude caps, composed of eight brackets, projecting various ways. Sir William Chambers says there are four species of tings,— three used for temples and the fourth for gardens; some having a gallery and fretted railing round the first floor on the outside, the upper story being set back. The roofs all have the peculiar hollow dip, which leads one to suppose their prototype was the tent, the sag of the cloth of which would suggest the form. They are frequently surmounted with a sort of cresting and finial, and each angle is turned up sharply, and ornamented with a dragon. Sometimes the columns have a frieze perforated in the form of frets; sometimes the same is also under the eaves of the upper roof. Examples are also given of smaller octagonal tings, intended to cover the large vessels in which the Chinese burn gilt paper to their idols.

Mr Simpson has given an interesting account of the temple of Heaven at Peking. It lies in an open space of about one mile square, surrounded by a triple enclosure. In this space were kept the animals destined for sacrifice. The temple proper consisted of several detached structures, the most sacred being to the south, and consisting of a raised platform approached by three terraces, and bearing simply an altar unscreened by any building and open to the sky. The northern structure was roofed but not enclosed.

Four pillars supported the main roof, which was 99 feet high, and lower roofs round the higher one were upheld by 24 columns of less height, all richly sculptured and gilt.

The accompanying illustrations (figs. 52 to 54) represent Chinese temples of different types.

The most striking buildings in China are, however, the tapering towers which they call taas, and our old writers pagodas. These are of brick covered with marble, or most generally with glazed tiles; and are built in stories, one over the other, from three, four, or five, to as many as nine in number. Each story is reduced in width, and has a gallery round it. The roofs are hollow or sagging, like those formerly described. They project a great deal, the corners being turned up sharply. On these light bells are suspended, which make a constant ringing when the wind blows. The roofs are covered with glazed tiles of various colours, and the summit ornamented with a species of spire and finial. The most celebrated of these was that known as the porcelain tower at Nanking. It had nine stories, and was about 200 feet high, exclusive of the iron spire. At each angle was a bell, making seventy-two in all; and there were eight chains hanging from the top of the finial to the angles of the spire, and carrying nine bells each, or seventy-two more. This celebrated building was destroyed by the Taepings in 1853. The taa is not a pagoda or temple, but a memorial of some event or of some great personage. At Peking is one used as an observatory, and at Nanganfoo one was erected simply to bring good luck.

Buildings called Toov Tang, or halls of ancestors, are found in all considerable towns. These much resemble temples, but instead of idols, memorial tablets are placed in the niches to record the transactions and deeds of the “worthies” or celebrated inhabitants of the neighbourhood.

The Pai Loo, or Pai Fang, is another common object in China. These are monumental memorials, though they have been mistaken for triumphal arches. Quatremère says, the Chinese annals reckon 3636 of these, erected in honour of literary men, philosophers, princes, generals, &c. The smaller are of wood, forming a sort of doorway. The larger have three openings side by side, and over these are several broad panelled fascias for inscriptions and carving, which is often very bold and in high relief, and over all is a projecting cornice carrying a tiled roof. Chambers has given one, the side gateways of which have semicircular arches, with festoons of drapery. The resemblance of these to the famous Sanchi tope is evident, as is also their being adaptations from wooden originals, for the stones are put together with mortices and other joints just as a wooden framework would be. The Chinese gateways are, however, very poor in comparison with those of India.

There is not much variety of design about the houses of the Chinese, as every one must be on a scale corresponding to the rank of the inhabitant. Le Comte mentions a case where a mandarin was obliged to pull down one that he had constructed of a somewhat better quality than those of the others. Chambers has given a plan of a house which he says is of very common design. It is about 260 feet from front to back, and about 65 feet wide. It is entered at the front by a passage nearly 20 feet wide, which goes nearly through the entire building. On each side of this, fronting the street, is a shop, with its back shop. It should be stated, that the divisions on the two sides of the central passage exactly correspond with each other. First we have two studies and two small bedrooms; then two saloons or reception rooms, about 24 feet by 18, looking into open courts or gardens, with fish ponds, fountains, flowers, &c., divided by walls; then two more saloons with bedrooms, and then the great dining-hall, which runs right across the house. This is about 60 feet by 30, and is carried on eight columns. Behind this is the kitchen and other offices. The first floor has two bedrooms, one on each side of a passage, for the shop-keeper; then on each side is a saloon and the bedrooms for the family. Between these last, and also carried on columns, is the hall where the family idol is worshipped. This overlooks the open gardens before mentioned. At the further end of these courts are two more saloons and bedrooms, and then a hall, said to be devoted to the use of strangers or visitors, which is over the ground floor dining-hall, and of the same size. Chambers tells us every house has a number of movable partitions kept ready, to be put up to subdivide the larger rooms.

The tombs are as singular as the rest of the Chinese edifices. The grandest of them, viz., those of the Ming dynasty, which ended in 1628, have been well described by Mr Simpson in the Transactions of the P. I. £. A., 1873-4. One of these tombs is at Nanking, but the chief are about 40 miles north of Peking. The entry is by a grand Pai Loo of five gateways in white marble, and then through several other gateways to a singular dromos, nearly a mile long, of 32 colossal figures (ranged in pairs), some human, others of camels, griffins, elephants, &c. Such a dromos exists also at Shanghai. The tombs, thirteen in number, are ranged round the base of a hill and extend for eeveral miles. Each consists of an earthen mound about half a mile in circuit, having, at its base, a crenellated retaining wall 20 feet high. The mound has no entrance, nor any indication of the exact place of burial. To the south of the tomb is a temple in an open court, about 1200 feet by 500. The plan is just the ordinary one of a palace, and the names, “The House of the living and the House of the dead,” seem to show clearly that this resemblance was intended.

The Chinese method of construction is very peculiar. Their roofs are put up first, supported on wooden posts, which are removed as the permanent fabric is built. The walls of the grand edifices are of stone, but the ordinary material is brick, and the work is often executed with beautifully close joints. In palaces and temples the whole was often gorgeously coloured with glazed tiles, or the bricks themselves were coloured and glazed. A magnificent example of this is a temple near the summer palace at Peking, all of which is of bright majolica, except its marble base. As with all structures belonging to the emperor the colour was yellow, it being a capital offence for any other person to use that colour.

The Chinese never use square timber when they can get round trees of a suitable size, probably on account of the lightness, strength, and convenience of the bamboo. The roofs are of very peculiar construction, and all timbers are left visible. The windows are filled in with the lining of the oyster shell, which looks like talc, and is quite as transparent; and the main door is frequently a perfectly round aperture. The old buildings of the Chinese, like those of the Saracens, are fast going to decay, and the streets of even their grand capital, Peking, now exhibit immense ranges of ruined buildings.

Ancient American Architecture.

It was not long before the exhumation by Mr Layard, in Central Asia, of the wonderful remains of fine art entombed in earthen mounds, that Mr J. L. Stephens, when engaged on a mission from his Government—that of the United States of North America—to some of the mutable states of Central America, heard of and tracked out in the forests of Yucatan 1 the remains of a bygone time, exhibited in sculptural and architectural monuments of a coarse character, affording a strange counterpart to those which Mr

Layard describes as having existed in and about the valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates. The remains of fifty or sixty cities have been discovered, the most interesting being those of Chololu, Palenque, Uxmal, Tescuco, and Mitla. The chief structures were evidently temples (fTeocalHs), raised high above the surrounding buildings on grand basements, square on plan, and rising by huge steps to the summit, so as to have the general outline of a low truncated pyramid. One at Palenque is 280 feet square at the base, and about 60 feet high to the platform, on which stands the temple, the latter being oblong on plan, measuring about 7 6 feet by 25. It was a low building, with a roof formed by stone gradini, so as to be, in fact, a continuation of the pyramid. Other structures, supposed to be palaces, are described by Mr Stephens, Mr Catherwood, Lord Kingsborough, &c., and copiously illustrated in their works. Many of them are very extensive, but of no great elevation. They are chiefly built on massive stone basements and surmounted by cornices, the friezes of which are adorned with evident imitations of logs of wood in upright rows. The greater part of the roofs were of wood, but among the objects represented in Mr Catherwood’s Views of Ancient Monuments in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan, are several examples of vaults having the arch form, but not being arched vaults,—that is to say, of vaults presenting the appearance internally, or upon the soffit, of arches, but formed by the gathering over of horizontally-coursed masonry, with the inner and lower angles worked away— or cleaned off, as it is technically expressed—to the appearance on the inside which an arched vault would present.

(See fig. 59.) The circumstance tħat the arch form presented in the American monuments is produced by the gathering over of horizontally-ranged masonry, and not by means of arch structure, would seem to show clearly that if the builders ever had intercourse with the Old World, it was before the properties of the arch were known and exemplified in it. These remains show an advance on the 1 Lord Kingsborough’s great work, The Antiquities of Mexico, contains, in some of the later volumes, representations of monuments which would almost appear to be the same as some of those subsequently explored by Mr Stephens.

Pelasgic and Celtic monuments of the Old World, and take the general character of the stoneworks of Egypt and India; but like those works, they exhibit the vaulted form by gathering over and not by arching.

Mr Catherwood states that he and Mr Stephens concur in the opinion expressed by Mr Prescott, in his History of the Conquest of Mexico, — “that though the coincidences are sufficiently strong to authorise a belief that the civilisation of Anahuac (Ancient

Mexico) was in some degree influenced by Eastern Asia, yet the discrepancies are so great as to carry back the communication to a very remote period, so remote that this foreign influence has been too feeble to interfere materially with the growth of what may be regarded, in its essential features, as a peculiar and indigenous civilisation;” and this opinion the monuments, as presented by Mr Catherwood, would seem fully to justify. But Mr Catherwood adds to this, as the ground, it would appear, for coinciding with Mr Prescott’s opinion, that the results arrived at by Mr Stephens and himself “are briefly, that they (the American monuments) are not of immemorial antiquity, the work of unknown men; but that, as we now see them, they were occupied and probably erected by the Indian tribes in possession of the country at the time of the Spanish conquest, that they are the production of an indigenous school of art, adapted to the natural circumstances of the country, and to the civil and religious polity then prevailing; and that they present but very slight and accidental analogies with the works of any people or country in the Old World.”

Less artistic, but more vast and massive, are the structures in Peru, which have been as yet imperfectly explored.

Referred by Mr Prescott to the reigns of the Incas, they are now considered to have been the works of a far earlier race, of whom the Incas were the conquerors. The rudest of these early works are sepulchral, and much of the same kind as the cromlechs and stone-circles already referred to (p. 383). One circle at Sillustani is 90 feet diameter, another 150 feet, and they have a massive paved platform all round them outside, which is not found in similar remains in the Old World. The cromlechs are not covered merely by a flat stone, but are rudely domed over by overlapping stones.

A much more artistic class of tombs is built of stones in the form of a tower, but increasing in width towards the top, and domed as above described. Most of them are round on plan, but some are square and two stories high, the upper being covered with overlapping stones cut to the arch shape. Many of these are of hard stone, beautifully fitted together, and the chambers are lined with a peculiar stucco still in good preservation.

Some other sepulchral remains are on a much grander scale, being immense mounds held up by huge retaining walls. One of these mounds is 108 feet high, and 276 yards by 75 at the top. None seem to have been as yet explored. Of the fortresses one of the grandest examples is at Cuzco, 760 feet above the level of that city. It has three lines of fortifications in terraces 1800 feet long, the lower terrace havin" a retaining wall now 25 feet high, the second

(30 feet behind the first) 18 feet, and the third (18 feet behind the second) 14 feet high. The walls are of cyclopean masonry, accurately fitted, one stone being 27 feet by 14

by 12, and many are 15 by 12 by 10 feet. The plan shows considerable skill, as the walls are not straight, but built with recesses and re-entering angles, evidently for giving the garrison command of the ground close to the walls. The most interesting remains in Peru are those called Huacas; but whether they were forts, or palaces, or tombs, is not as yet clearly ascertained. They are described as being enclosed by walls (in various examples 100 to 180 yards long, and 60 or 70 yards broad), and divided by cross walls, thus forming enclosures or chambers, many of which are still lined with stucco. In some of these are considerable remains of staircases, but the upper parts are destroyed. The chambers and enclosures are almost invariably filled with clay, which presents great difficulties in their examination. This filling in may, possibly, be accounted for by the construction of the walls, which are immensely thick (some at Chanchan are 15 feet), and usually of sun-dried bricks, either small (adobes), n∖z,, about two-thirds the size of ours, or very large (adobines), some being 1 to 2 yards long.

Present Position of Architecture.

We have, in conclusion, a few remarks to make upon the present position of architecture. The increase of commerce and of wealth in the United Kingdom of late years, has thrown into the hands of the architect and engineer a vast amount of work, both for public and private edifices. Not only has there been an increase in the number of buildings, but the old parts of very many towns are being rebuilt on a larger and grander scale, and new, wide streets are being formed through their busiest and most densely peopled quarters. In London, in the great manufacturing towns of the north, in the universities, in the seaport towns, north and south, and in the pleasure-seeking cities on the sea-board on every coast, this process is going on at a rapid rate; and we look with interest and anxiety as to what are replacing the old buildings (many of them landmarks in our art) which have been destroyed, or what is to range beside those which are left. And besides these reconstructions, there are rising up, in every part of the country, railway stations, colossal hotels, baths and washhouses, working men’s dwellings, and such other edifices as the Crystal and Alexandra Palaces, of a kind entirely unknown to the past generation. In addition to these we have the altogether new towns of Swindon, Wolverton, Crewe, Fleetwood, Barrow-in-Furness, Middlesborough, &c. These last afford, perhaps, the least encouraging view of modern work as contrasted with the old. Our old towns were usually picturesquely placed on the margin of a river for trade, or on a hill for defence; gradually increased round some nucleus of importance—a church or monastery or castle; and comprised the mansions of the rich as well as the shops of the trader and dwellings of the poor. But the modern town is all built at once, on some sudden call, on a site selected, perhaps, simply from its being at the junction of two railways. It shows only long straight streets of small dwellings for artisans, unbroken, except, perhaps, by a church, or an assembly-room, or more forcibly by the long, unpicturesque lines of railway sheds. Neither the architect nor the engineer has had much to do with this, and the result is about as wretchedly uninteresting a series of streets as it is possible to conceive. Horace Walpole’s satirical description of London, “a gigantic mass of littleness,” would apply well to them.

It has been better with the extension of the old towns. At first this gave us such long, bald lines of streets as Bath shows in stone, and Baker Street, &c., in London, in brick. These léd by a natural result to a more ornate class, and we had the Regent’s Park, and Regent Street, London, wherein a number of houses are grouped together into one mass, abounding with Roman columns and cornices, and receiving something of the massive appearance and lightness of stone from being covered with stucco, just as most of Palladio’s buildings in Italy were. But whilst they were far better in general effect than the class which preceded them, the columns and their long unbroken lines of cornices often sadly interfered with the requirements of the dwellings, and in the new streets and terraces of our towns we see but few imitations of Roman porticoes and pediments, and the speculating builder mostly limits himself to putting a portico to the door, a few mouldings (in stucco) to the windows, and a slight cornice as a finish to the tops.

On the Continent the usual style of living—in flats —enables the builders to produce, with the same number of rooms, a more massive external effect than with us. One large entrance doorway suffices for the whole, and thus four or five separate houses (as they are in reality) have the effect of one large mansion. Still more is this the case when a courtyard, requiring a carriage entrance, occupies the centre of the building.

Of a far higher class than the private dwellings are many of the places of business recently erected in our great towns. In the new banks, exchanges, insurance offices, <fcc., many of our most noted architects have produced good results; and if we cannot congratulate ourselves upon much that is being done, we can, at least, say that the new work is an improvement upon the old. In no instance, perhaps, is the advance more to be noted than in the clubhouses and the great warehouses for storing the lighter class of goods. A façade having long lines of windows, in many stories, each story of considerable height, and with only one main entrance doorway, affords the materials, of course, for forming a massive and pleasing effect much as that of the Continental houses above described. And the opportunity has certainly not been lost. Our plan, too, of letting each owner build to a considerable extent according to his own design, results in a more picturesque arrangement of our streets than those of a Continental town, which usually present lines of uninteresting houses, all of much the same design.

As a still further mark of progress we must mention the town-halls and other civic structures at Bradford, Halifax, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Plymouth, Preston, &c., and the local museums and picture galleries, as at Cambridge, Edinburgh, Exeter, Leeds, Liverpool, Oxford. Salisbury, &c. Not only do these great civic buildings give importance by their magnitude to the towns, but they lead to other works in rivalry or imitation, just as a mediaeval building of note did in olden times, and the goodness of their design is therefore a matter of prime importance. The museums are gradually helping to fill up a void most painfully felt by every stranger in our towns, and will help to preserve many local pieces of antiquity which would otherwise have been lost.

Of a higher class still are the colleges at Edinburgh, Glasgow, London, Manchester (Owens), &c., and many of the additions to those of the old universities. In these colleges the number of rooms of varying size, the entrance tower, and the internal quadrangles, allow of picturesque effects, but seldom present any one very grand mass. This has, however, been produced at University College, London, by the central portico (probably the finest in England), which rises high above the rest of the edifice.

In the civic buildings a bolder effect can be produced by their actual requirements, viz., a grand hall of large area and height, with spacious corridors and staircases, and a high clock tower, which seems to furnish the natural complement to such structures. If we have not rivalled Ypres or Louvain, we have at least improved on the wretched civic buildings of the last century.

Larger and grander than any of the above works are the Houses of Parhament in London. However much of the detail may be open to criticism, it must be readily acknowledged that the architect had in his mind, and steadily carried out, the idea of combining the whole into one grand mass, in place of leaving it as a mere series of fronts, as in the Bank of England or Somerset House; and the variously designed steeples and towers culminating in the one grand tower at the royal entrance form the whole into one of the grandest buildings of the age.

Of a class unknown to the last generation are the railway stations, some of the largest edifices of the time, but usually almost hidden by another new class of buildings, viz., the colossal hotels. The stations themselves are in the main mere great vaults of glass on iron ribs, whose curved outlines are disfigured by the iron ties which the safety of a great extent of such roofing requires, and thus the only beauty, viz., the cur ved form, is to a large extent obscured. It is a fortunate circumstance that this form is the best adapted to the purpose, and when, as in many notable instances, the skill or good taste of the engineer has allowed of the ties being dispensed with, the vast size and lightness of the vault have a very impressive look. The hotels, which in most cases form the frontage of the stations in our country, are, for the most part, worthy of the striking positions which they occupy; but they are chiefly by living architects, and so beyond the scope of our criticism. No one, however, can study the way in which most of them are attached to the station buildings which they front without wishing most heartily that the engineer of the one and the architect of the other had worked somewhat more in harmony with each other.

Of an entirely novel design and construction was the Crystal Palace, admirably adapted, no doubt, for the purpose for which Paxton designed it, or for any other purpose for which a flood of light without impediment is required. But the manner in which the second, at Sydenham, has been altered is instructive. Where a grand orchestra was required the top was covered as a great sounding board, and when pictures or art works were to be exhibited the sides were closed,—the result showing plainly that the top lights are of the chief value, the side ones being little required except for the prospect through; and even for picture galleries a much smaller amount of light is required than in the Crystal Palace roof. Its curved form is, however, very pleasing, and the brilliancy of the light glass roof will ensure its being adopted in many buildings where a vivid light is required.

We have now passed hurriedly in review most of the forms of modern architecture, and we need scarcely add that it is developed in every conceivable style. If a church is to be built we may, indeed, pretty safely predict that it will be in one of the many pointed styles, but even then it may be English, French, or Italian. But of any other kind of edifice no one could safely predict the style. Probably it might be safe to assert that a theatre would not have (as Covent Garden in London had) a Grecian Doric portico, or an Egyptian pylon be made to do duty (as in Piccadilly, London) for a couple of shops. One might also be tolerably sure that a monument to a distinguished person would not be a granite column -with a staircase up the middle, and a statue almost out of sight, with a lightning conductor through the head at top, as at the duke of York’s column, London. But short of this, almost any prediction as to the style might come true; and as nearly every building of note throughout the world is brought to the eyes of tho public by means of engravings or photographs, there seems little chance of its being otherwise.

In the United States the architects of the public buildings appear to be of much the same feeling as were English architects some years ago. The churches are often Gothic, but the other great edifices are in the main Italian, such as the capitols of Ohio, New York (Albany), and Washington. The last is a building of great size and picturesque outline, depending for its chief effect on the lavish use of porticoes and colonnades.

In Canada very much the same state of things exists as in the United States, the art in each being much the reflex of that in the old country.

The adoption of Greek, Roman, or Italian architectural details, little modified by climate and customs, is, in fact, to be noted in almost every country—any form of art peculiarly national being now abandoned in their favour; and if the houses in Paris were to be transported to Berlin or Cairo, they would simply agree with what has already been done in those cities. And if, further, the Bourse or the Pantheon at Paris, the Museum at Berlin, the Glyptothek at Munich, or the great church of St Isaac at St Petersburg, were to be severally changed to any of the other cities, it would be fairly in harmony with the modern works around it. though the nationality and language of the peoples in those cities are utterly distinct from each other. This abandonment of natural and peculiar styles is now producing another result quite foreign to anything known in art history before. From the earliest period known until the 17th century almost every nation had its own peculiar forms of art, and practised it (modified, perhaps, by the conditions of climate) in every part of the world which it colonised or conquered; and the result was the interesting remains of Roman art, clearly to be identified as such in Europe, Asia, and Africa; of Norman in France, England, Italy, and Sicily; and of Saracenic from Spain to India. This clear identification of a nation by its art works is as valuable to the historian as to the artist. But we can look for this no longer. We ourselves build Greek, Roman, or Italian palaces in our great towns of India, whilst close by, perhaps, is a church or cathedral in our English style of Gothic, and a college in the style of the Saracens, who themselves, centuries back, brought it with them as the art of foreign conquerors from Egypt or Persia. And the French in Algiers, to celebrate the triumph of their religion, erect a splendid church copied from the mosques of the people whom they have conquered, and whose religion they detest.

On the Application of Colour to Architecture.

On none of the subsidiary arts connected with architecture has there been in modern practice so little agreement with all ancient rules or customs as on this. It is only of late years that any one has conceded that the duty of architects is to give the best possible combination of form and colour, and that the completest form of architecture is that which affords examples of'such a combination.

For the last three centuries architects have shown almost a contempt for colour, to such a degree, indeed, that the world till lately was taught to believe that purity of style and absence of colour always went together; and that it was only a vulgar and uneducated eye which saw the greatest evidence of good and matured taste in the harmonious application of colour and form. Our sculptors encouraged this feeling by their dislike to the application of colour to their work, even when it was purely architectural. Both architects and sculptors found it convenient, apparently, to disencumber themselves of one-half of the responsibilities of their calling, and escaped all obligation of studying the laws of colour, or of entering on the large field of its application to architecture; whilst our painters, partly because they lacked the opportunity, partly, it is true, because their art had ceased to be exercised for the public benefit in the old sense, had ceased to regard wall-painting as their legitimate work, and had so completely sunk into the habit of treating only small subjects in a small way, that it will take an age to develop in them the power of dealing properly with those large wall spaces which present them with the grandest opportunity of achieving real distinction. It is abundantly clear that those who argue against the application of colour to architecture, do so without the weight which the authority of their ancestors would have given them. Of late years much attention has been devoted to this point; there has been considerable discussion, and in the end, though there has been much difference of opinion as to the extent to which colour was applied by the Greeks and Romans, there has been none as to the fact that, at any rate, some introduction of colour was well-nigh invariable in their work. Mr Owen Jones’s Apology for the Colouring of the Greek Court at the Crystal Palace contains, in a small compass, quite sufficient evidence to show how strong is the ground of those who maintain the necessity of colour in classic buildings; and equally valuable is the report, drawn up by the Committee of the Institute of British architects, on the colouring of the Elgin marbles, with Professor Faraday’s analyses of portions of the coatings of marbles brought from several ancient buildings in Athens, upon all of which he makes it perfectly clear that colour was extensively and generally applied. Professor Semper of Berlin, in treating of the origin of architectural polychromy, proves that the Syrians, Persians, Egyptians, Chinese, Indians, Jews, Phoenicians, and Greeks all used colour in their architecture and sculpture; and we may safely conclude, therefore, that there is no country which has been in any way remarkable f r its architectural monuments in which the necessity of the om-bination has been ignored or forgotten. This statement is sufficient on the subject so far as it affects all ancient schools of art.

If we turn to later times we shall discover in all the schools of mediaeval artists a still greater and more pronounced adhesion to the same principle. It seems, indeed, almost superfluous to say that there are most abundant evidences of the fact that the architects of the Middle Ages were seldom satisfied until they had covered their walls with colour; in one place with that in which nature has been so lavish in marble and precious stones; in another with the artificial tints of tiles and bricks; in another with the bright stencilling of gay diapers over entire walls; or, lastly, in the teaching of Scripture story, or legend or history, by the aid of the greatest painters of the day.

If we look for an instant to Italy we shall see what a lesson these artists have left us there. There is, for instance, the Arena chapel at Padua, designed by Giotto, and then painted by him with his own hands in such fashion that, to the present day, this simple little room—some 20 feet by 40 in its dimensions—is one of the greatest pilgrimage places in Europe for all lovers of Christian art; and again, in that far grander work—the noble church so finely stationed on the steep slopes of the Apennines at Assisi— we see how Cimabue, Simone Memmi, Giotto, and many others, helped to cover with pictures, conceived in a really divine spirit, the walls which would otherwise, no doubt, have been resplendent with the less artistic, but still most effective labours of the patient stenciller. The Same lesson is taught if we look at the Campo Santo of Pisa, and see how Andrea Orcagna, that great architect, painter, sculptor, and poet, and beside him a succession of artists, among whom we count Buffalmacco, Simone Memmi, Giotto, and Benozzo Gozzoli, helped each in their turn in this illumination of architecture; or at the church and refectory of Sta Croce, and the church and chapter-house of Sta Maria Novella, and the crypt of San Miniato, Florence; or at that masterpiece of decorative art—St Mark’s at Venice— where precious marbles and mosaics rich in gold and bright colour almost dazzle the eye with their magnificence, but combine to make an interior in which none can fail to admit that the effect of the mere architecture of the building has been extraordinarily enhanced.

Nor was such practice as this peculiar to mediaeval artists; for the earlier Renaissance men had the same feeling in some degree, and Benozzo Gozzoli has shown us in his exquisite paintings in the chapel of the Riccardi Palace at Florence, and Perugino and Raffaelle in the Stanze of the Vatican, how their work might be best adorned.

But it was not only in Italy—the land par excellence of colour—that men had a true appreciation of its value. It need hardly be told how St Louis, in the palmiest days of the French kingdom, covered the w r alls of the Sainte Chapelle of Paris with gold and colour and mosaic, and filled its windows with stained glass of the richest hues, so that to the present day it is an example of the most gorgeous colouring it is possible to conceive; or how, in England, when our monarchs wished to rival the zeal and enthusiasm of St Louis, they gave, in St Stephen’s Chapel at Westminster, an example equally sumptuous and rich in colour; whilst at the same time, not only in our cathedrals, but in almost every parish church throughout our country, traces of more or less colouring are found to have existed over nearly the whole surface of the walls. Taking for granted, therefore, that every one will allow that it was, at any rate, the intention of all architects, as far as possible, to combine colour with form, it remains to be seen how this was accomplished.

There were two great and distinct orders of architectural colourists, the constructional and the decorative. The first were those who built their walls partially or altogether with coloured materials; the second those who so built them that colour might afterwards be added, and with an especial view to its introduction. It is of the works of the former of these two classes that it is right to speak first, because the way in which they did their work was, on the whole, a more thoroughly enduring and proper way than that of the other school. It was also more definitely the work of architects.

The works of the constructional school of architectural colourists must be subdivided into two classes :—1st, Those in which the coloured materials were part of the substance of the walls, and necessary for the stability of the whole fabric; and 2dly, Those in which the walls were covered with decoration, such as mosaic, or tiles, or thin veneers of marble, which had nothing whatever to do with their structural requirements.

The first class was that which was, on the whole, both the best and the most frequently adopted. The few examples which we see in this country, and, indeed, generally throughout the north of Europe, belong to it. The poverty of England in coloured stones or marbles will account sufficiently for the comparative rarity of the examples we can adduce. Among them are many of the Northamptonshire churches,—as Irchester, Strixton, and St Peter’s, Northampton,—which are built with horizontal bands or courses of dark red and light stones used alternately; in other districts we find courses of stones and flint alternated, as in the church at Penton Mewsey, near Andover, and in a gateway at Rochester. In others flint and stone are used, but with inferior effect, in a regular chequerwork over the whole surface of the wall. In the church standing close to the north side of Rochester Cathedral, a course of chequer-work in flint and stone is introduced under one string-course, and two courses of flint separated by one of stone under another. The churches of Essex, Suffolk, and Norfolk abound in examples of tracery, and other devices formed by cutting out patterns in the stone, and filling them in with carefully-cut and faced flints of very dark colour, so as to produce a very elaborate system of decoration in two tints. In the cloisters of Westminster Abbey the groining is executed in chalk, with occasional lines of dark stone at regular intervals. Our red brick buildings are constantly diapered with patterns in black. The interiors of our churches, when not painted, were usually left with the natural colour of all the stone work—whether wrought or not—visible on the interior, an arrangement which, though rough and rugged in character, ccrtainly gives a great amount of natural colour in a low key, but infinitely more agreeable to the eye than the cold expanse of plaster generally visible in new public buildings. Finally, throughout the 13th century the use of polished marble columns, of a colour much darker than that of the materials of the wall, is one of the most marked features in all the best English work, and cannot properly be omitted in any catalogue of modes of coloured construction. Every one of these arrangements is noticeable as having been introduced intentionally, and with a sole view to variety of colour. In France examples are much more numerous than in England, and the very interesting church at Vézelay is an early instance of the alternated use of dark and light stones in the interior as well as the exterior. Sta Maria in Capitolio, at Cologne, has some good remains of the same kind; and St Anne’s Kloster, at Lübeck, is built with alternate courses of red brick and stone. It is in Italy, however, that we find the most plentiful store of examples of this kind of work, of which a few may be mentioned. The cathedral, baptistery, and the buildings generally in Pisa and Lucca are built, both inside and out, with white stone courses, with thin courses of black marble occurring at about every fourth course. This is a very delicate and effective mode of dividing the wall space. The baptistery and campanile of the cathedral at Pistoia, and the campanile of Siena, are built in almost equal courses of black and white. In Genoa we find the same equal division of the courses in the façades of the c⅜thedral, and of the churches of San Matteo and San Stefano. At Bergamo the porch of Sta Maria Maggiore is executed in red, white, and grey marble. It is of three divisions in height, the highest stage being entirely of grey marble; the middle stage has all the moulded parts of red, and the arches and their spandrils of grey marble; the space at the back of the porch and over its main arch are built in equal courses of red and white marble; the groining is in black, red, and white marble, fitted to diamond-shaped panels, and all the shafts are of red marble. The whole design depends for effect almost entirely upon the arrangement and counter-changing of the three primary colours, the white becoming by age sufficiently yellow to take its place very well as one of them. Similar to this in the colours of its marbles is the 13th century front of the Broletto or town-hall at Como; but here the courses are very irregular in their height, and not arranged upon any symmetrical rule. The campanile of the cathedral at Florence is the last example of this class that need be mentioned, and it is the very finest of all; here the component colours are red marble of Perugia, green serpentine, and white marble (the two latter have the effect at a slight distance of being black and yellow), but these colours are further varied by the introduction of very elaborate patterns inlaid in delicate marble mosaic on almost every available space, whilst glass mosaic is introduced behind sculpture in the stages near the ground, in order to make the figures as distinct as possible. It is important to observe that, in this unsurpassed work, Giotto showed not only his sense of the value of colour, but equally his feeling for true architectural proportion. No building was ever more carefully designed in this way; and the result is so great a success in outline, in detail, and in colour, as to make it one of the most worthy of study of any work in Europe. Here it may be observed, that in the doorways of St Mark’s, Venice, we have examples of exquisite beauty, of sculpture of foliage and figures in marble set off by a ground filled in entirely with mosaic, similar in idea to the way in which figures are set upon a mosaic ground in Giotto’s work at Florence.

In the great church of San Petronio at Bologna, the flat space between the two stone moulded plinths is of red marble, and above the plinths the wai 's are all of red brick. This coloured plinth is very fine in its effect, and dignifies the whole building. The upper part of the Ducal Palace and the house called the Ca’ d’Oro, at Venice, are examples of a coloured chequer-work over the whole surface of the wall. In the Ducal Palace this is aιτanged so as to form a regular diaper divided by lines of white and grey marble. The monument of Can Signorio, one of the Scaliger family, in the churchyard of Sta Maria ΓAntica at Verona, is a good example of the successful application of coloured materials to works of delicate detail. It is a lofty erection, composed of a great canopied monument in the centre, with a number of smaller canopied niches rising out of it, or standing upon shafts around it. The base is all of red marble, the niches have red marble columns, white gables, and red pyramids above them. The central mass is mainly of a yellowish tint, with white marble niches and pinnacles of red marble, and, owing to the extent to which the colours are counterchanged, the effect is very good. The west doorway of Sta Anastasia, and the north doorway of San Fermo Maggiore, both at Verona, are beautiful examples of the simple alternation of white, red, and grey marbles in the jamb and arches; and in both these cases the extreme beauty of the effect appears to be owing to the delicacy and harmony of the tints of the marble employed, and to the absence of the very violent contrasts of colour which are sometimes seen.

There are other examples of buildings decorated with inlaid ornaments which belong to this class; such are some of the French churches, as, e.g., those throughout the Puy de Dome, of which we may select as a typical example Nôtre Dame-du-Port, Clermont Ferrand. Here the lower part of the walls is of uniform colour, the windows have alternate voussoirs of light and dark stone, and the wall above them is entirely covered with a mosaic diaper; the walls are crowned by a heavy cornice supported on corbels, between each of which the space is filled in with a star in mosaic. Similar examples occur at S. Etienne, Nevers, in Poitou, on the banks of the Loire, and frequently in volcanic districts where dark and light materials, tufa and scoriae, abound, and suggest the treatment which has been adopted. Some of the churches at Pisa are very beautifully and delicately enriched with inlaying. The little church of San Matteo has round all its arches inlaid chevrons, diamonds, or triangles, and a line of inlaying under the moulded eaves cornice of the aisle. The front of San Michele, also in Pisa, is covered with inlaid patterns filling in the spandrils, or following all the architectural lines of the arcading with which the whole upper portion is covered; similar inlaid patterns are to be seen between corbels under the tympanum of the south door of San Paolo, Pistoia. An inlaid pattern is carried along under the string-course below the aisle windows of the Cathedral of Lucca, and here, as in the other examples which have been given, the inlaid material is dark, on the white ground of the stone wall, and the object of its introduction was, no doubt, to give as much emphasis as possible to important features. In the case of the windows at Lucca the label is of dark marble, whilst the rest of the head of the window is white. In the church of San Domenico, Perugia, a window arch is built of grey stone, with occasional voussoirs of red, and on these, in order to make them as conspicuous as possible, small rosettes are carved. Another window in the same church has alternate voussoirs of red and white stone, and a red shaft for a monial. In the Palazzo Publico of Perugia the cornices and strings have ranges of corbels, the spaces between which are filled in with red marble to make the shadow deeper and more effective; in the windows, the shafts are of red marble; and in the doorway the tympanum is of red marble, with figures in white in front of it. The west front of Lucca Cathedral is inlaid in the most elaborate manner, the upper part with illustrations of field sports, and the lower part with geometrical patterns. Here, too, and in Giotto’s campanile at Florence, the shafts themselves are inlaid in the same way as the rest of the work.

In the arcades outside the walls of San Fermo Maggiore, and in the windows of the little church opposite the cathedral, at Verona, great effect is produced by the ingenious combination of brick and stone; and throughout the north of Italy examples of this sort of arrangement of colour occur, and there is none more easy of imitation or reproduction with good effect at the present day and in our own country. In Sant’ Antonio, at Padua, an arcade of brick and stone in the west front has all its spandrils filled in with red marble; and the case of the east end of the church at Murano will be remembered by all who have read Mr Ruskin’s Stones of Venice. Here the substance of the walls is red brick for a few feet from the ground, and above that a rather coarse yellow brick; red brick is used in place of labels, <fcc., to define the arches; the shafts are of various marbles; and courses of marble, cut in triangles and alternately coloured and carved, are also introduced. The examples here given are enough to show, at any rate, the general prevalence of a love of colour in the Middle Ages throughout Europe.

It would be somewhat beyond the scope of the examination of such a subject from its architectural side to go at any length into the mode of decorative painting, which was almost universally adopted at the same time. In this application of colour all countries agree, and there is hardly room to doubt the beauty and expediency of the practice. The passage to the chapter-house at Salisbury, the early church of St Mary at Guildford, the chapels at the east end of Winchester Cathedral, are interesting English examples of early work. The Norfolk screens and roofs are still more interesting and beautiful works of the richest description,. and so numerous were these that at one time no church seems to have been thought furnished which had none of this kind of decoration. These had every portion of their moulded surfaces adorned in the richest way with gold and colours, whilst their solid panels were covered with pictures of single figures or subjects. English roofs were decorated in the same fashion, and of these the finest examples are in Peterborough Cathedral and St Alban’s Abbey. If we turn to the pages of illuminated manuscripts we shall find views of towns in which whole houses are decorated with masses of colour on the outside to distinguish them from their neighbours. And in rather later times, as we see in Florence, in Brescia, at Augsburg, at Meran, and often elsewhere, most brilliant effects were produced by painting subjects on the external walls of palaces and houses. But, generally speaking, beautiful as this sort of decoration was, it erred rather in ignoring to a considerable extent the architecture which it adorned,—unlike the earlier works, where the effort of the colourist was usually and rightly to make all the mouldings or members of the work decorated more distinct and intelligible than they can be in the absence of colour. Without coloured illustrations of an elaborate description it would be impossible to explain any or all the features of architectural polychrome. But enough has been said to show that the subject is one not only of interest to architects, but of importance to all who care for architecture, for it is hardly possible that works such as those which have here been shortly referred to should be passed over by the student or amateur of architecture as though they had no interest for us, and it may be confidently asserted that modern schools of architecture cannot with safety ignore so interesting a development of the art. (τ. h. l.—g. e. s.)

Bibliography.

The following works may be consulted on the various departments of the subject:—·

Egyptian. —Denon, Voyage dans la Haute et Basse Egypte ; F. C. Gau, Antiquités de la Nubie; K. R. Lepsius, Denkmäler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien; Aug. Mariette, Itinéraire de ta Haute-Egypte; Murray’s Handbook for Egypt; Prof. Piazzi Smyth, Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid; General Howard Vyse, Pyramids of Gizeh, illustrated by J. S. Perring; Sir J. Gardner Wilkinson, Ancient Egyptians, and Architecture of Ancient Egypt. Jewish. —L. Canina, L'Architettura Antica, vol. i.; J. Fergus-son, articles in Smith’s Dictionary of Bible; Count Μ. de Vogué, Les Eglises de la Terre Sainte. Assyrian. —P. E. Botta, Monuments de Ninève ; J. Fergusson, Palaces of Nineveh and Persepolis ; A. H. Layard, Journey to Nineveh and its Remains; Victor Place, Ninève et ι Assyrie; C. J. Rich, Ruins of Babylon, and Journey to Persepolis. Persian. —L. Canina, Architcttura Antica ; E. Flandin and P. Coste, Voyage en Perse; W. K. Loftus, Chaldaea and Susiana; H. B. Tristram, Land of Moab. Lycian, &c. —L. Canina, Architettura Antica; Sir C. Fellows and G. Scharf, Travels in Asia Minor, and Discoveries in Ancient Lycia; C. T. Newton, Discoveries in the Levant; C. Texier, Description de l’ Asie Mineure. Grecian. —C. R. Cockerell, Temples of Egina and Bassce; Unedited Antiquities of Attica, and Ionian Antiquities, published by the Dilettanti Society; J. I. Hittorf, Architecture antique de la Sicile; Duke of Serradifalco, Antichità di Sicilia; Stuart and Revett, Antiquities of Athens; C. Texier, Asia Mineure; W. Wilkins, Antiquities of Magna Graecia. Etruscan. —L. Canina, L'Antica Etruria Maritima; G. Dennis, The Cities and Cemeteries of Etruria. Roman. —G. A. Blouet, Baths of Caracalla; Canina, Architettura Antica ; A. Desgodets, Les Edifices antiques de Rome; Sir W. Gell and J. P. Gandy, Pompeiana; F. Mazois, Palais de Scaums; F. Mazois and F. C. Gau, Pompeii; A. Palladio, L' Antichità di Roma; G. L. Taylor and E. Cresy, Architectural Antiquities of Rome; Vogué, Syrie Centrale; R. Wood, Ruins of Palmyra and Balbec. Pointed. —Various essays in Archceologia; J. Britton, Cathedrals and Architectural Antiquities; C. L. Eastlake, History of the Gothic Revival; J. H. Parker, Introduction to the Study of Gothic Architecture; A. Pugin, Specimens and Examples of Gothic Architecture; T. Rickman, Styles of Gothic Architecture; G. E. Street, Gothic Architecture in Spain. Saracenic. —P. Coste, Les Arabes en Espagne, and Architecture Arabe de Caire; Owen Jones and Jules Goury, Plans, <kc., of the Alhambra; Girault de Prangey, Monuments Arabes et Moresques. Chinese. —J. Fergusson, History of Architecture ; Quatremère de Quincy, Dictionnaire Historique d'Architecture; W. Simpson, Lecture before R.I.B.A. 1873-4; Detached Essays of Arch. Pub. Society.

Early American. —T. J. Hutchinson, Two Years in Peru; C. R. Markham, Travels in Peru; Ε. G. Squier’s Pamphlet (1870); J. L. Stephens and F. Catherwood, Incidents of Travel. [table]

[table]

[table]

GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS (ESPECIALLY CLASSICAL AND MEDIAeVAL).

Abaciscus, diminutive of Abacus, applied to the chequers or squares of a tessellated pavement.

Abacus, from the Gr. &βαζ, a tray, or flat board, Ital. abaco, Fr. tailloir, the upper part of the capital of a column, pier, &c. (See separate article, and Capital.) Abated, a term for such work in mediaeval masonry as is worked down or sunk.

Abbey (Fr. abbaye, Ital. abbadia, or contracted, badia, Ger. Abtei, Kloster), a term for the church and other buildings used by conventual bodies presided over by an abbot or abbess, in contradistinction to cathedral, which is presided over by a bishop, and priory, the head of which was a prior or prioress. (See separate article.)

Acroterium (Gr. hκpωτhpιοv, the summit or vertex), a statue or ornament of any kind placed on the apex of a pediment. The term is often restricted to the plinth, which forms the podium merely for the acroterium.

Aisle, sometimes written Isle, Yle, and Alley (Lat. and I tai. ala, Fr. aile, bas-coté, Ger. Seitenschiff, Seitenchor), in its primary sense the wing of a house, but generally used to describe the alleys or passages at the sides of the naves and choirs of churches. (See separate article.)

Alcove, a recess in a room usually screened off by pillars, balustrade, or drapery.

Alien-Houses, religious houses in England belonging to foreign ecclesiastics, or under their control. They generally were built where property had been left by the donors to foreign orders to pray for their souls. They were frequently regular priories, but sometimes only cells, and even granges, with small chapels attached. Some, particularly in cities, seem to have been a sort of mission-houses. There were more than 100 in England. Many alien-houses were suppressed by Henry V., and the rest by Henry VIII.

Alley, also called Ambulatory (Lat. deambulatorium), the covered passages round a cloister. (See also Alure.) Almery, also Aumery, Aumbrie, and Ambry (Fr. armoire, Ital. armario), a recess in the wall of a church, sometimes square-headed, and sometimes arched over, and closed with a door like a cupboard—used to contain the chalices, basins, cruets, &c., for the use of the priest; many of them have stone shelves. They are sometimes near the piscina, but more often on the opposite side. The word also seems in mediaeval times to be used commonly for any closed cupboard, and even bookcase.

Almonry (Lat. eleemosinarium, Fr. aumonerie, Ger. Almosenhaus), the place or chamber where alms were distributed to the poor in churches, or other ecclesiastical buildings. At Bishopstone Church, Wiltshire, it is a sort of covered porch attached to the south transept, but not communicating with the interior of the church. At Worcester Cathedral the alms are said to have been distributed on stone tables, on each side, within the great porch. In large monastic establishments, as at Westminster, it seems to have been a separate building of some importance, either joining the gatehouse or near it, that the establishment might be disturbed aβ little as possible.

Almshouses, small buildings for the residence of the aged poor, generally endowed with some yearly stipend. The greater portion were built after the Reformation. Two interesting early examples are—that at St Cross, near Winchester, and that near the Preaching Cross of the Black Friars at Hereford.

Altar, anciently written Auter, or Awter (Lat. and I tai. altare, Fr. autel), the elevated table devoted to the celebration of the Eucharist. (See separate article.)

Alure (Lat. alura—allorium, probably from alcdorium), an alley, passage, the water way or flat gutter behind a parapet, the galleries of a clerestory, sometimes even the aisle itself of a church. The term is sometimes written valure, or r>aloring. Amphiprostyle (Gr. aμ<ρi, around or about, and prostyle, q.v.) A temple with a portico at each end is said to be amphiprostylar.

Angel-Lights, the outer upper lights in a perpendicular window, next to the springing; probably a corruption of the word anglelights, as they are nearly triangular.

Annulet (Lat. annulus, a ring), a term applied to the small fillets or bands which encircle the lower part of the Doric capital immediately above the neck or trachelium.

Antae (probably from the Gr. àvrlos, or some other derivative of the preposition i,vτl, opposite to), the pier-formed ends of the walls of a building, as in the portico of a Greek temple. A portico is said to be in antis when columns stand between antae, as in the temple of Theseus, supposing the peristyle or surrounding columns removed.

Ante-Chapel, a small chapel forming the entrance to another. There are examples at the Cathedral and at Merton College, Oxford, and at King’s College, Cambridge, besides several others. The ante-chapel to the Lady chapel in cathedrals is generally called the Presbytery.

Ante-Choir, the part under the rood loft, between the doors of the choir and the outer entrance of the screen, forming a sort of lobby. It is also called the Fore-Choir.

Antefixae (Lat. ante, before, and fixus, fixed), upright blocks with an ornamented face placed at regular intervals on a cornice. Antefixae were originally adapted to close and hide the lower ends of the joints of the covering tiles on the roof of a temple.

Apophyge (Gr. i∙πo<pυyh, a flying off), the lowest part of the shaft of an Ionic or Corinthian column, or the highest member of its base if the column be considered as a whole. The apophyge is the inverted cavetto or concave sweep, on the upper edge of which the diminishing shaft rests.

Apse (Gr. αψir, Lat. absis, tribuna, concha, Fr. abside, rond-point, Ital. apside, tribuna, Ger. Ablauf), the semicircular or polygonal termination to the chancel of a church. (See separate article.)

Apteral (Gr. a priv., and ιrτeρiv, a wing), a temple without columns on the flanks or sides.

Araeostyle (Gr. aρaiοs, rare or weak, and στι>Kοs, a column), a wide intercolumniation. (See Eustyle.) The space assigned to this term by Vitruvius is uncertain; the modems assign to it four diameters.

Araeosystyle (compounded of araeostyle and systyle, q.v.) expresses the arrangement attendant on coupled columns, as in the western front of St Paul's Cathedral.

Arcade (Fr. arcade, arcature, Ital. areata, Ger. Bogengang), a range of arches, supported either on columns or on piers, and detached or attached to the wall. (See separate article.)

Architrave (Gr. hpχh, chief, and Lat. trabs, a beam), the chief beam—that part of the entablature which rests immediately on the heads of the columns and is surmounted by the frieze; it is also called the epistylium or epistyle. The moulded enrichment on the sides and head of a door or window is called an architrave.

Archivolt, a contraction of the Italian architrave voltato, is applied to the architrave moulding on the face of an arch, and following its contour.

Armature, the French term for the iron stays by which the lead lights are secured in windows. (See Stanchions and Saddle Bars.) Arris, the sharp edge or angle in which two sides or surfaces meet. Ashlar, also written Ashler, Ashelere, &c., (probably from the Lat. assella), squared stones, generally applied to those used for facing walls. In a contract of date 1398 we read—“Murus erit exterius de puro lapide vocato achilar, plane incisso, interius vero de lapide fracto vocato roghwallT “Clene hewen” ashler often occurs in mediaeval documents; this no doubt means tooled or finely scappled, in contradistinction to rough-axed, faces.

Ashler Pieces, upright pieces of wood going from the common rafters so as to cut off the lower angle of the roof in the attic story. Astragal (Gr. iστpiγaKοs, a bone of the ancle), a convex moulding.

This term is generally applied to small mouldings, torus to large ones of the same form. (See Torus.) Attic, a low story above an entablature, or above a cornice which limits the height of the main part of an elevation. Although the term is evidently derived from Αττικ0s, we find nothing exactly answering to it in Greek architecture; but it is very common in both Roman and Italian practice. What are otherwise called tholobates in St Peter’s and St Paul’s Cathedrals are frequently termed attics.

Back-Choir, a place behind the altar in the principal choir, in which there is, or was, a small altar standing back to back with the former.

Bahut, the French term for a wall of plain masonry on which there is some superstructure.

Bailey, said to be a corruption of Ballium by some, and derived by others from the French “bailie,” a corruption of “bataille,” because there the soldiers were drilled in battle array; the open space between the inner and outer lines of a fortification. Sometimes there were more than one, as the Inner and Outer Bailey; we have the Old Bailey at London and at York, and the Upper and Nether Baileys at Colchester.

Baldaquin, Baldacchino. See Ciborium. Ball-Flower, an ornament in the form of a ball inserted in the cup of a flower, which came into use in the latter part of the 13th, and was in great vogue in the early part of the 14th century. It is generally placed in rows at equal distances in the hollow of a moulding, frequently by the sides of mullions. The earliest known is said to be in the west part of Salisbury, w here it is mixed with the tooth ornament. It seems to have been used more and more frequently, till at Gloucester Cathedral, in the south side, it is in profusion.

Baluster, a small column or pier supporting the coping in a pierced parapet: the parapet itself when pierced 13 hence called a Balustrade. Baluster Shaft, the shaft dividing a window in Saxon architecture. At St Alban’s are some of these shafts, evidently out of the old Saxon church, which have been fixed up with Norman capitals.

Band, a sort of flat frieze or fascia running horizontally round a tower or other parts of a building, particularly the base tables in perpendicular work, commonly used with the long shafts characteristic of the 13th century. It generally has a bold, projecting moulding above and below, and is carved sometimes with foliages, but in general with cusped circles, or quatrefoils, in which frequently are shields of arms.

Band of a Column (Fr. bague), a series of annulets and hollows , going round the middle of the shafts of columns, and sometimes of the entire pier. They are often beautifully carved with foliages, &c., as at Amiens. In several cathedrals there are rings of bronze apparently covering the junction of the frusta of the columns. At Worcester and Westminster they appear to have been gilt; they are there more properly called Shaft Rings.

Baptistery, a separate building to contain the font, for the rite of baptism. They are frequent on the Continent—that at Rome near St John Lateran, and those at Florence, Pisa, Pavia, &c., are all well-known examples. The only examples in England are at Cranbrook and Canterbury—the latter, however, is supposed to have been originally part of the treasury.

Barbican, an outwork for the defence of a gate or drawbridge; also a sort of pent-house or construction of timber to shelter warders or sentries from arrow’s or other missiles.

Barge Board. See Verge Board. Bartizan, supposed to be derived from the Ger. Barl·izene (Fr. échauguetté), a small turret, corbelled out at the angle of a wall or tower to protect a warder and enable him to see around him. They generally are furnished with oylets or arrow-slits.

Base (Gr. Bd<rιs, Lat. spira, basis, Fr. and Ital. base, Ger. Fuss), that part of a column on which the shaft stands. The only base used by the Egyptians was a mere square plinth. The Assyrians evidently understood the value of a base as an architectural accessory, and some bases shown on the bas-reliefs are strongly moulded. But all actually remaining are like the one recently placed in the British Museum, which consists merely of a large torus. The Persian bases were finely moulded, elegant in outline, and more richly ornamented than in any other style. The chief mouldings are a torus, and a large reversed cyma. In pure Greek work a base is never used in the Doric, but always in the Ionic and Corinthian. The plainer sort is that well known as the Attic, consisting mainly of a hollow between two tori; but the tori are, in other instances, deeply channelled, so as to have a very complicated appearance. The Romans had bases to all their orders, the more usual form being like the Attic. The Romanesque and Norman bases were evidently copies, for the most part, from classic forms; but were often adorned with leaves at the angles of the square plinths, thereby leading them into the round in a very pleasing way. This was done still more elegantly in the Early English style, whose most characteristic base was much like the Attic, but with the hollow prolonged upwards in a deep water-holding section. The Perpendicular were mostly very high, formed with two or more plinths and bold mouldings, chiefly reversed ogees.

Base Court (Fr. basse cour, i,e, i the lower court), the first open space within the gates of a castle. It was used for exercising cavalry, and keeping live stock during a siege. (See Enceinte.) Base of a Wall, or Ground Table, mouldings round a building just above ground; they mostly consist of similar members to those above described (Base), and run round the buttresses. The flat band between the plinth and upper mouldings is frequently panelled and carved with shields, as in Henry VII. Chapel at Westminster.

Basement. A basement story is a story placed wholly or partly below the level of the ground on the outside of and about the building. Basement, applied specially, as architects apply it, means the compartment in the elevation of a building upon which any columnar pilastered or arcaded ordinance may rest; as in the Strand front of Somerset House, of which the basement begins at the level of the floor of the vestibule, being about that of the street pavement, and extends upwards to half the height of the adjoining building east and west.

Basilica (Gr. βaσιKικh, i.e., the royal house), a term given by the Greeks and Romans to the public buildings devoted to judicial purposes. (See separate article. )

Batement Lights, the lights in the upper part of a perpendicûlar window, abated, or only half the width of those below.

Batter (Fr. battre, to beat). Building over in projecting courses like inverted steps is termed battering, gathering, or corbelling over. The term is often applied to the converse operation of throwing back, as in a revêtement or retaining wall.

Battlement (Fr. bretesse, Ital. mcrlo, Ger. Zinne), a parapet with a series of notches in it, from Λvhich arrows may be shot, or other instruments of defence hurled on besiegers. The raised portions are called merlons, and the notches embrasures, or crenelles. The former were intended to cover the soldier while discharging his weapon through the latter. Their use is of great antiquity; they are found in,the sculptures of Nineveh, in the tombs of Egypt, and on the famous François vase, where there is a delineation of the siege of Troy. In ecclesiastical architecture the early battlements have small shallow embrasures at somo distance apart. In the Decorated period they are closer together, and deeper, and the mouldings on the top of the merlon and bottom of the embrasure are richer. During this period, and the earlier part of the Perpendicular, the sides or cheeks of the embrasures are perfectly square and plain. In later times the mouldings were continued round the sides, as well as at top and bottom, mitring at the angles, as over the doorway of Magdalene College, Oxford. The battlements of the Decorated and later periods are often richly, ornamented by panelling, as in the last example. In castellated work the merlons are often pierced by narrow arrow-slits. (See Oylet.) In South Italy some battlements are found strongly resembling those of old Rome and Pompeii; in foreign ecclesiastical architecture the parapets are very rarely embattled.

Bay (Fr. travée, Ital. compartimento, Ger. Abtheilung), any division or compartment of an arcade, roof, &c. Thus each space from pillar to pillar, in a cathedral, is called a bay, or severey.

Bay Window, any window projecting outwards from the wall of a building, either square or polygonal on plan, and commencing from the ground. If they are carried on projecting corbels, they are called Oriel windows. Their use seems to have been confined to the later periods. In the Tudor and Elizabethan styles they are often semicircular on plan, in which case some think it .more correct to call them Bow Windows. For those in mediaeval halls, see Dais, Hall.

Bead, a small cylindrical moulding of frequent use.

Bed-Mould, the congeries of mouldings which is under the projecting part of almost every cornice, of which, indeed, it is a part.

Belfry (Fr. clocher —if applied to a church, beffroi —if to the tower of a hotel de ville; Ital. campanile, Ger. Glockenthwrm), properly speaking, a detached tower or campanile containing bells, as at Evesham, but more generally applied to the ringing room or loft of the tower of a church. (See Tower.) Bell of a Capital. In Early English and Decorated work, immediately above the necking is a deep, hollow curve; this is called the bell of a capital. It is often enriched with foliages.

Bell-Cot, Bell-Gable, or Bell-Turret. The place where one or more bells are hung in chapels, or small churches which have no towers. Bell-cots are sometimes double, as at Northborough and Coxwell; a very common form in France and Switzerland admits of three bells. In these countries also they are frequently of wood, and attached to the ridge. Those which stand on the gable, dividing the nave from the chancel, are generally called Sanctus Bells. A very curious, and it is believed unique, example at Cleves Abbey juts out from the wall. In later times bell turrets were much ornamented; these are often called Flèches.

Bema (Gr. βημa, Lat. tribunal·), the semicircular recess or hexedra, in the basilica, where the judges sat, and where in after times the altar was placed. It generally is roofed with a half dome or concha. The seats, θρόνοι, of the priests were against the wall, looking into the body of the church, that of the bishop being in the centre. The bema is generally ascended by steps, and railed off by Cancelli.

Bench Table, the stone seat which runs round the walls of large churches, and sometimes round the piers; it very generally is placed in the porches.

Bezantée, a name given to an ornamented moulding much used in the Norman period, resembling bezants, coins struck in Byzantium.

Billet (Fr. billette), a species of ornamented moulding much used in Norman, and sometimes in Early English work, like short pieces of stick cut off and arranged alternately.

Blocking-Course, a deep but slightly projecting course in an elevation, to act as cornice to an arcade, or to separate a basement from a superior story. (See String-Course.)

Boss (Fr. clef de voûte, Ital. bozza, Ger. Buckel·), an ornament, generally carved, forming the key-stone at the intersection of the ribs of a gro[ned vault. Early Norman vaults have no bosses. The carving is generally foliage, and resembles that of the period in capitals, &c. Sometimes they have human heads, as at Nôtre Dame at Paris, and sometimes grotesque figures. In later vaulting there are bosses at every intersection.

Bowtell (supposed to be akin to Bottle), the mediaeval term for a round moulding or torus. When it follows a curve, as round a bench end, it is called a Roving Bowtell, qv. Brace Mould, two ressaunts or ogees united together like a brace in printing, sometimes with a small bead between them.

Bracket (Fr. corbeau, cul-de-lampe, Ital. rnensola, Ger. Kragstein), a projecting ornament carrying a cornice. Those which support vaulting shafts or cross springers of a roof are more generally called Corbels.

Brattishing or Brandishing, is no doubt derived from the French breteche, a sort of crest ridge on a parapet, or species of embattlement. The term, however, is generally employed to describe the ranges of flowers which form the crests of so many parapets in the Tudor period.

Broach (front broche, a spit), now used to designate a particular form of spire, the sides of which, with the angles of the tower, finish with a sort of haunching. (See Spire.) Buttress, anciently written Botrasse, or Boterasse (Ital. puntello, Fr. contrefort, Ger. Strebepfeiler), masonry projecting from a wall, and intended to strengthen the samo against the thrust of a roof or vault. Buttresses are no doubt derived from the classic pilasters which serve to strengthen walls where there is a pressure of a girder or roof timber. In very early work they have little projection, and in fact are “strip-pilasters.” In Norman work they are wider, With very little projection, and generally^ stop under a cornice or corbel table. Early English buttresses project considerably, sometimes with deep sloping weatherings in several stages, and sometimes with gabled heads, as at Beverley. Sometimes they are chamfered, and sometimes the angles have jamb shafts, as in the last example. At Wells and Salisbury they are richly ornamented with canopies and statues. In the Decorated period they became richly panelled in stages, and often finish with niches and statues and elegantly carved and crocketted gablets, as at York. In the Perpendicular period the . weatherings became waved, and they frequently terminate with niches and pinnacles.

Buttress, Flying (Fr. arc-boutant, Ital. puntello arcuato, Ger. Strebebogen), a detached buttress or pier of masonry at some distance from a wall, and connected therewith by an arch or portion of an arch, so as to discharge the thrust of a roof or vault on some strong point.

Buttress Shafts, slender columns at the angle of buttresses, chiefly used in the Early English period.

Cabling. The flutes of columns are said to be cabled when they are partly occupied by solid convex masses, or appear to be refilled with cylinders after they had been formed.

Caisson. See Cassoon. Campanile, a name given in Italy to the bell tower of a town hall or church. In that country this is almost always detached from the latter. (See Belfry.) Canopy, the upper part or cover of a niche, or the projecting ornament over an altar or seat or tomb. The word is supposed to be derived from conopaeum, the gauze covering over a bed to keep off the gnats (κώνωψ), a mosquito curtain. Early English canopies are generally simple, with trefoiled or cinquefoiled heads; but in the later styles they are very rich, and divided into compartments with pendants, knots, pinnacles, &c. The triangular arrangement over an Early English and Decorated doorway is often called a canopy. The triangular canopies in the north of Italy ai e peculiar. Those in England are generally part of the arrangement of the arch mouldings of the door, and form, as it were, the hoodmoulds to them, as at York. The former areabove and independent of the door mouldings, and frequently support an arch with a tympanum, above which is a triangular canopy, as in the Duomo at Florence. Sometimes the canopy and arch project from the wall, and are carried on small jamb shafts, as at San Pietro Martire at Verona. An extremely curious canopy, being a sort of horseshoe arch, surmounting and breaking into a circular arch, from Tournay is given. Similar canopies are often over windows, as at York Minster over the great west window, and lower tiers in the towers. These are triangular, while the upper windows in the towers have ogee canopies.

Cant. When the corner of a square is cutoff octagonally, it is said to be canted. Thus a bay window with octagonal comers is called a canted bay.

Capital (Gr. κeφdλaιοv, Lat. capitulum, Ital. capitello, Sp. chapitel, Ger. Knauff Kapital, Fr. chapiteau), the upper part of a column, pilaster, pier, &c. Capitals have been used in every style down to the present time. That mostly used by the Egyptians was bell-shaped, with or without ornaments. The Persians used the double-headed bell, forming a kind of bracket capital. The Assyrians apparently made use of the Ionic and Corinthian, which were developed by the Greeks, Romans, and Italians, into their present well-known forms. The Doric was apparently an invention or adaptation by the Greeks, and was altered by the Romans and Italians. But in all these examples, both ancient and modern, the capitals of an order are all of the same form throughout the same building, so that if one be seen the form of all the others is known. The Romanesque architects altered all this, and in the carving of their capitals often introduced such figures and emblems as helped to tell the story of their building. Another form was introduced by them in the curtain capital, Hide at first, but afterwards highly decorated. It evidently took its origin from the cutting off of the lower angles of a square block, and then rounding them off. The process may be distinctly seen, in its several stages, in Mayence Cathedral. But this form of capital was more fully developed by the Normans, with whom it became a marked feature. In the Early English capitals a peculiar flower of three or more lobes was used, spreading from the necking upwards in most graceful forms. In Decorated and Perpendicular this was abandoned in favour of more realistic forms of crumpled leaves, enclosing the bell like a wreath. In each style bold abacus mouldings were always used, whether with or without foliage.

Carrels (Lat. carola), small chapels or oratories enclosed by screens; also sometimes the rails of the screens themselves; and sometimes the separate seats or pews for monks near the windows. It wa9 at one time supposed that the scrolls on which inscriptions of texts, &c., are formed were called carrels, but this seems a mistake.

Caryatides, human female figures used as piers, columns, or supports. Caryatic is applied to the human figure generally when used in the manner of Caryatides.

Casement, a deep hollow moulding, sometimes filled with foliage, and then called a Vignette; also the frame which holds the lead lights of a quarrel-glazed window.

Cassoon, or Caisson, a deep panel or coffer in a soffit or ceiling. This term is sometimes written in the French form, caisson, sometimes derived directly from the Italian cassone, the augmentative of cassa, a chest or coffer.

Catπedral (Ital. duomo, cattedralc, Fr. cathédrale, Ger. Dοm∙ kirche), the principal church where the bishop has his seat (cathedra) as diocesan. (See separate article.)

Cathetus (Gr. κdθeτos, a perpendicular line). The eye of the volute is so termed because its position is determined, in an Ionic or voluted capital, by a line let down from the point in which the volute generates.

Cauliculus (Lat. a stalk or stem), the inner scroll of the Corinthian capital. It is not uncommon, however, to apply this term to the larger scrolls or volutes also.

Cavetto (Ital. cavare, to dig out), a moulding whose form is a simple concave, impending.

Ceiling (Ital. soffi-to, soppalcho, Fr. plafond, lambris, Ger. Stubcn-decke>, that covering of a room which hides the joists of the floor above, or the rafters of the roof. Most churches have either open roofs, or are groined in stone. At Peterborough and St Albans there are very old flat ceilings of boards curiously painted. In later times the boarded ceilings, and, in fact, some of those of plaster, have moulded ribs, locked with bosses at the intersection, and are sometimes elaborately carved. In the cloisters at Lincoln, the nave and choir at York, the side aisles of the choir at Winchester, the church at Warmington, and several other places, there are ceilings formed of oak ribs, filled in at the spandrils with narrow thin pieces of board, in exact imitation of stone groining. In the Elizabethan and subsequent periods, the ceilings are enriched with most elaborate ornaments in stucco. (See Groined Vaulting.) cells, small monastic houses, generally in the country, belonging to large conventual buildings, and intended for change of air for the monks, as well as places to reside in to look after the lands, vassals, &c. Thus Tynemouth was a cell to St Albans; Ashwell, Herts, to Westminster Abbey. (See Grange.) Also the small sleeping apartments of the monks; also a small apartment used by the anchorite or hermit.

Chamfer, Champfer, or Chaumfer. When the edge or arris of any work is cut off at an angle of 45° in a small degree, it is said to be chamfered; if to a large scale, it is said to be a canted corner. (See Cant.) The chamfer is much used in mediaeval work, and is sometimes plain, sometimes hollowed out, and sometimes ’ taoulded.

Chamfer Stop. Chamfers sometimes simply run into the arris by a plane face; more commonly they are first stopped by some ornament, as by a bead; they are sometimes terminated by trefoils, or cinquefoils, double or single, and in general form very pleasing features in mediaeval architecture.

Chancel, a place separated from the rest of a church by a screen (rαnccZ∕iw). The word is now generally used to signify the choir of a small church.

Chantry (Lat. canluaria, Fr. chantrcrie, Ger. Kantorei), a small chapel generally built out from a church. They generally contain a founder’s tomb, and are often endowed places where masses might be said for his soul. The officiator, or mass priest, being often unconnected with the parochial clergy, the chantry has generally an entrance from the outside.

Chapel (Lat. and Ital. capella, Fr. chapelle, Ger. Kapelle), a small, detached building used as a substitute for a church in a large parish; an apartment in any large building, a palace, a nobleman’s house, an hospital or prison, used for public worship; or an attached building running out of and forming part of a large church, generally dedicated to different saints, each having its own altar, piscina, &c., and screened off from the body of the building.

Chapiter, the old English name for a Capital. Chapter House (Lat. capitolium, Ital. caρitolo, Fr. chapitre, Ger. Kapitelhaus), the chamber in which the chapter or heads of the monastic bodies assembled to transact business. They are of various forms; some are oblong apartments, as Canterbury, Exeter, Chester, Gloucester, &c.; some octagonal, as Salisbury, Westminster, Wells, Lincoln, York, &c. That at Lincoln hasten sides, and that at Worcester is circular; most are groined over, and some, as Salisbury, Wells, Lincoln, Worcester, &c., depend on a single slight vaulting shaft for the support of the massive vaulting. This picturesque plan is almost exclusively English.

Charnel House (Med. Lat. carnarium, Fr. ossuaire), a place for depositing the bones which might be thrown up in digging graves. Sometimes, as at Gloucester, Hythe, and Ripon, it was a portion of the crypt; sometimes, as at Old St Paul’s and Worcester (both now destroyed), it was a separate building in the churchyard; sometimes chantry chapels were attached to these buildings. Μ. ViolIet-le-Duc has given two very curious examples of ossuaires, — one from Fleurance, the other from Faouet.

Choir (Lat. chorus, Ital. coro, Fr. choeur, Ger. Ghor, Old English, quire, quere), that part of a church or monastery where the breviary services or “horae” are chanted. (See separate article.)

Ciborium (Fr. baldaquin, Ital. baldacchino), a tabernacle or vaulted canopy supported on shafts standing over the high altar. Gervase of Canterbury calls every bay of the quire there a ciborium, probably because the groining rose and formed a sort of canopy over each bay.

Cinquefoil, a sinking or perforation like a flower of five points or leaves, as a quatrefoil is of four. The points are sometimes in a circle, as in the lower windows at Lincoln, and sometimes form the cusping of a head.

Cleithral (Gr. κ∖e7θpοv, an enclosed or shut-up place), is applied to a covered Greek temple, in contradistinction to Hypoelhral, which designates one that is uncovered; the roof of a cleithral temple completely covers or encloses it.

Clerestory, Clearstory (Ital. chiarο piano, Fr. clairevoie, claire étage, Ger. Lichtgaden). When the middle of the nave of a church rises above the aisles and is pierced with windows, the upper story is thus called. Sometimes these windows are very small, being mere quatrefoils, or spherical triangles. In large buildings, however, they are important objects, both for beauty and utility. 'The window of the clerestories of Norman work, even in large churches, are of less importance than in the later styles. In Early English they became larger; and in the Decorated they are more important still, being lengthened as the triforium diminishes. In Perpendicular work the latter often disappears altogether, and in many later churches, as at Taunton, and many churches in Norfolk and Suffolk, the clerestories are close ranges of windows.

Cloister (Lat. claustrum, Ital. chiostrο, Fr. cloitre, Ger. Kloster), an enclosed square, like the atrium of a Roman house, with a walk or ambulatory round, sheltered by a roof generally groined, and by tracery windows, which were more or less glazed. (See separate article.)

Close, the precinct of a cathedral or abbey. Sometimes the walls are traceable, but now generally the boundary is only known by tradition.

Coffer, a deep panel in a ceiling.

Column (Lat. columna), a tapering cylindrical mass, placed vertically on a level stylobate, in some cases with a spreading congeries of mouldings called a base, and having always at its upper and smaller end a dilating mass called a capital. Columns are either insulated or attached. They are said to be attached or engaged when they form part of a wall, projecting one half or more, but not the whole, of their substance. For the columns of different styles and orders of architecture, see the general article, supra. Consol or Console, a bracket or truss, generally with scrolls or volutes at the two ends, of unequal size and contrasted, but connected by a flowing line from the back of the upper one to the inner convolving face of the lower.

Coping (Ital. coperto, corona, Fr. chaperon), the capping (whence the name is probably derived) or covering of a wall. This is of stone, weathered to throw off the wet. In Norman times, as· far as can be judged from the little there is left, it was generally plain and flat, and projected over the wall with a throating to form a drip. Afterwards it assumed a toms or bowtell at the top, and became deeper, and in the Decorated period there were generally several sets-off. The copings in the late Perpendicular period assumed something of the wavy section of the buttress caps, and mitred round the sides of the embrasure, as well as the top and bottom.

Corbel (from the low Latin corbeyus, a basket, Ital. mensola, Fr. corbeau, cul-de-lampe, Ger. Kragstein), the name in mediaeval architecture for a piece of stone jutting out of a wall to carry any superincumbent weight. A piece of timber projecting in the same way was called a tassel or a bragger. Thus the carved ornaments from which the vaulting shafts spring at Lincoln are corbels. Norman corbels are generally plain. In the Early English period they are sometimes elaborately carved, as at Lincoln above cited, and sometimes more simply so, as at Stone. They sometimes end with a point apparently growing into the wall, or forming a knot, as at Winchester, and often are supported by angels and other figures. In the later periods the foliage or ornaments resemble those in the capitals. (See Capital.) Corbel Table, a projecting cornice or parapet, supported by a range of corbels a short distance apart, which carry a moulding, above which is a plain piece of projecting wall forming a parapet, and covered by a coping. Sometimes small arches are thrown across from corbel to corbel, to carry the projection.

Corbie Steps, a Scottish term for the steps formed up the sides of the gable by breaking the coping into short horizontal pieces.

Cornice (Fr. corniche, Ger. Kranz), the projection at the top of a wall finished by a blocking-course, common in classic architecture. In Norman times, the wall finished with a corbel table, which carried a portion of plain projecting work, which was finished by a coping, and the whole formed a Parapet In Early English times the parapet was much the same, but the work was executed in a much better way, especially the small arches connecting the corbels. In the Decorated period the corbel table was nearly abandoned, and a large hollow, with one or two subordinate mouldings, substituted; this was sometimes filled with the ball flowers, and sometimes with running foliages. In the Perpendicular style, the parapet frequently did not project beyond the wall-line below; the moulding then became a string (though often improperly called a cornice), and was ornamented by a quatrefoil or small rosettes set at equal intervals immediately under tho battlements. In many French examples the moulded string is very bold, and enriched with foliage ornaments.

corona, a term applied to the deep vertical face of the projected part of the cornice between the bed-mould and the covering mouldings.

Cove—Coving. The moulding called the cavetto,—or the scotia inverted,- on a large scale, and not as a mere moulding in the composition of a cornice, is called a cove or a coving.

Crenelle, a word generally considered to mean an embrasure of a battlement, but latterly proved to apply to the whole system of defence by battlements. In mediaeval times no one could “crenel-late” a building without special licence from his supreme lord. (See Battlement, Embrasure.) Cresting, an ornamental finish in the wall or ridge of a building, which is common on the Continent. An example occurs at Exeter Cathedral, the ridge of which is ornamented with a range of small fleurs-de-lis in lead.

Crocket (Ital. uncinetto, Fr. crochet, crosse, Ger. Häklein, Knollen), an ornament running up the sides of gablets, hood-moulds, pinnacles, spires; generally a winding stem like a creeping plant, with flowers or leaves projecting at intervals, and terminating in a finial.

Crop (Ang.-Sax. crop), the top of anything. A word anciently used for a Finial, which see.

Cross. This religious symbol is almost always placed on the ends of gables, the summit of spires, and other conspicuous places of old churches. In early times it was generally very plain, often a simple cross in a circle, as at Beverley. Sometimes they take the form of a light cross crosslet, or a cross in a square. In the Decorated and later styles they became richly lloriated, and assumed an endless variety of forms. Of memorial crosses the finest examples are the Eleanor crosses, erected by Edward I. Of these a few yet remain, one of which has recently been re-erected at Charing Cross. Preaching crosses were often set up by the wayside as stations for preaching; the most noted is that in front of St Paul’s. The finest remaining sepulchral crosses are the old elaborately-carved examples found in Ireland.

Cross-Aisle, an old name for a transept.

Cross-Springer, the transverse ribs of a vault. Crow-Steps. See Corbie Steps. Crow Stone, the upper stone of a gable; see also as last.

Crypt (Lat. crypta, Ital. volto sotterraneo, Fr. crypte, Ger. Gruft), a vaulted apartment of greater or less size, usually under the choir. (See separate article.)

Cupola (Ital. cupo, concave, profound), a spherical or spheroidal covering to a building, or to any part of it.

Cusp (Fr. feuille, Ital. cuspide, Ger. Knopf), the point where the foliations of tracery intersect. The earliest example of a plain cusp is probably that at Pythagoras School, at Cambridge,—of an ornamented cusp at Ely Cathedral, where a small roll, with a rosette at the end, is formed at the termination of a cusp. In the later styles the terminations of the cusps were more richly decorated; they also sometimes terminate not only in leaves or foliages, but in rosettes, heads, and other fanciful ornaments.

Cyclostyle (Gr. κiκKοs, a circle, and στυKοs, a column). A structure composed of a circular range of columns without a core is cyclostylar; with a core the range would be a peristyle. This is the species of edifice called by Vitruvius Monopteral. (See Monopteros.) Cyma (Gr. κύμα, a wave), the name of a moulding of very frequent use. It is a simple, waved line, concave at one end and convex at the other, like an Italic f. When the concave part is uppermost it is called a cyma-recta; but if the convexity appear above, and the concavity below, it is then a cyma-reversa.

Cymatium. When the crowning moulding of an entablature is of the cyma form, it is termed the Cymatium.

Cyrto-prostyle. An alternation of Cyrtostyle (7.v.), but indicating more clearly than Cyrtostyle does an external projection.

Cyrtostyle (Gr. κυρris, convex, and στι>Xοs, a column), a circular projecting portico. Such are those of the transept entrances to St Paul’s Cathedral.

Dado or Die, the vertical face of an insulated pedestal between the base and cornice or surbase. It is extended also to the similar part of all stereobates which are arranged like pedestals in Roman and Italian architecture.

Dais (Fr. dais, estrade, Ital. predella), a part of the floor at the end of a mediaeval hall, raised a step above the rest of the building. On this the lord of the mansion dined with his friends at the great table, apart from the retainers and servants. In mediaeval halls there was generally a deep recessed bay window at one or at each end of the dais, supposed to be for retirement, or greater privacy than the open hall could afford. I n France the word is understood as a canopy or hanging over a seat; probably the name was given from the fact that the seats of great men were then surmounted by such an ornament.

Decastyle (Gr. δiκa, ten, and στυλοs, a column), a portico of ten columns in front Dentil (Lat. dens, a tooth). The cogged or toothed member, common in the bed-mould of a Corinthian entablature, is said to be dentilled, and each cog or tooth is called a dentil.

Depressed Arches or Drop Arches, those of less pitch than the equilateral.

Design. The plans, elevations, sections, and whatever other drawings may be necessary for an edifice, exhibit the design, the term plan having a restricted application to a technical portion of the design. (See Plan.) Detail. As used by architects, detail means the smaller parts into which a composition may be divided. It is applied generally to mouldings and other enrichments, and again to their minutiae.

Diameters. The diameters of the lower and upper ends of the shaft of a column are called its inferior and superior diameters respectively; the former is the greatest, the latter the least diameter of the shaft.

Diaper (Ital. diaspro, Fr. diaspré, Ger. Geblumte), a method of decorating a wall, panel, stained glass, Cr any plain surface, by covering it with a continuous design of flowers, rosettes, &c., either in squares or lozenges, or some geometrical form resembling the pattern of a diapered table-cloth, from which, in fact (drap d’Ypres), the name is supposed by some to have been derived.

Diastyle (Gr. διά, through, and σrυKοs, a column), a spacious intercolumniation, to which three diameters are assigned. (See Eustyle. ) Dipteros (Gr. δis, twice, and πτeρ<ir, a wing), a double-winged temple. The Greeks are said to have constructed temples with two ranges of columns all round, which were called dipteroi. A portico projecting two columns and their interspaces is of dipteral or pseudo-dipteral arrangement.

Discharging Arch, an arch over the opening of a door or window, to discharge or relieve the superincumbent weight from pressing on the freestone.

Distemper. See Fresco. Distyle (Gr. δis, twice, and σrvλοs, a column), a portico of two columns. This term is not generally applied to the mere porch with two columns, but to describe a portico with two columns riι antis. Ditriglyph, an intercolumniation in the Doric order, of two triglyphs. (See Triglyph.) Dodecastyle (Gr. δ<iδ∈κα, twelve, and σrvλοs, a column), a portico of twelve columns in front. The lower one of the west front of St Paul’s Cathedral is of twelve columns, but they are coupled, making the arrangement pseudo-dodecastyle. The Chamber of Deputies in Paris has a true dodecastyle.

Dog-tooth, a favourite enrichment used from the latter part of the Norman period to the early part of the Decorated. It is in the form of a four-leaved flower, the centre of which projects, and probably was named from its resemblance to the dog-toothed violet.

Dome (Gr. δωμa, a structure of any kind, Lat. domus, a house or temple), a cupola or inverted cup on a building. The application of this term to its generally-received purpose is from the Italian custom of calling an archiépiscopal church, by way of eminence, Jl duomo, the temple; for to one of that rank, the cathedral of Florence, the cupola was first applied in modern practice. The Italians themselves never call a cupola a dome: it is on this side of the Alps the application has arisen, from the circumstance, it would appear, that the Italians use the term with reference to those structures whose most distinguishing feature is the cupola, tholus, or (as we now call it) dome. (See Cupola.) Donjon, the principal tower of a castle. (See Keep.) Dormer Beam or Dormant Beam, said to be a tie-beam, but more probably, as its name imports, a sleeper.

Dormer Window (Fr. lucarne, Ital. abbaino, Ger. Dachfenster), a window belonging to a room in a roof, which consequently projects from it with a valley gutter on each side. They are said not to be earlier than the 14th century. In Germany there are often several rows of dormers, one above the other. In Italian Gothic they are very rare; in fact, the former have an unusually steep roof, while in the latter country, where the Italian tile is used, the roofs are rather flat.

Dormitory (Fr. dortoir, Ital. dormitorio, Ger. Schlaf gemach), the 1)lace where the monks slept at night. It was sometimes one ong room like a barrack, and sometimes divided into a succession of small chambers or cells. The dormitory was generally on the first floor, and connected with the church, so that it was not necessary to go out of doors to attend the nocturnal services. In the large houses of the late Perpendicular period, and also in some of the Elizabethan, the entire upper story in the roof formed one large apartment, said to have been a place for exercise in wet weather, and also for a dormitory for the retainers of the household, or those of visitors.

Dössel or Dorsal. See Reredos. Dripstone, the moulding or cornice which acts as a canopy to doors and windows. Horizontal running mouldings, are sometimes called tablets, and sometimes dripstones.

Drop Arches. Sec Depressed Arches.

Dungeon, the prison in a castle keep, so called because the Norman name for the latter is donjon, and the dungeons or prisons are generally in its lowest story. (See Keep.) Echauguette. See Bartizan. Echinus (Gr. eχιros, an egg), a moulding of eccentric curve, generally cut (when it is carved) into the forms of eggs and anchors alternating, whence the moulding is called by the name of the more conspicuous. It is the same as Ovolo, q.v. Element, the outline of the design of a Decorated window, on which the centres for the tracery are formed. These centres will all be found to fall on points which, in some way or other, will be equimultiples of parts of the openings. Before any one can draw tracery well, or understand even the principles of its composition, he must give much attention to the study of the element. (See Tracery.) Elevation, the front façade, as the French term it, of a structure, a geometrical drawing of the external upright parts of a building.

Embrasure, the opening in a battlement between the two raised solid portions or merlons, sometimes called a crenelle. (See Battlement, Crenelle.) Enceinte, a French term for the close or precinct of a cathedral, abbey, castle, &c.

Entablature, or Intablature (Lat. in, upon, and tabula, a tablet), the superimposed horizontal mass in a columnar ordinance, which rests upon the tablet or abacus of a column. It is conventionally composed of three parts, architrave, frieze, and cornice.

Entail, Entayle, sculptured ornaments, generally of rich design, most probably derived from the Italian intaglio. Entasis, the swelling of a column, &c. In mediaeval architecture, some spires, particularly those called “broach spires,” have a slight swelling in the sides, but no more than to make them look straight; for, from a particular “deceptio visus,” that which is quite straight, when viewed at a height, looks hollow.*

Épi, the French term for a light finial, generally of metal, but sometimes of terra cotta, forming the termination of a pointed roof or spire.

Epistylium, or Epistyle (Gr. <⅛√, upon, and στυKοs, a column). This term may with propriety be applied to the whole entablature, with which it is synonymous; but it is restricted in use to the architrave or lowest member of the entablature.

Escape, an equivalent for the term Apophyge, q.v. Escutcheon (Lat. scutum, Ital. scudo, Fr. écusson, Ger. Wappenschild), a term for the shields used on tombs in the spandrils of doors or in string-courses. Also the ornamented plates from the centre of which door-rings, knockers, &c., are suspended, or which protect the wood of the key-hole from the wear of the key. In mediaeval times these were often worked in a very beautiful manner.

Estrade, a French term for a raised platform. (See Dais.) Eustyle (Gr. eδ, well, and στιKοs, a column), a species of inter-columniation, to which a proportion of two diameters and a quarter is assigned. This term, together with the others of similar import—pycnostyle, systyle, diastyle, and araeostyle— referring to the distances of columns from one another in composition, is from Vitruvius, who assigns to each the space it is to express. It will be seen, however, by reference to them individually, that the words themselves, though perhaps sufficiently applicable, convey no idea of an exactly defined space, and by reference to the columnar structures of the ancients, that no attention was paid by them to such limitations. It follows, then, that the proportions assigned to each are purely conventional, and may or may not be attended to without vitiating the power of applying the terms. Eustyle means the best or most beautiful arrangement; but as the effect of a columnar composition depends on many things besides the diameter of the columns, the same proportioned intercolumniation would look well or ill according to those other circumstances, so that the limitation of eustyle to two diameters and a quarter is absurd.

Façade. See Elevation. Faite, the French term for the ridge of a roof.

Faîtière, the ornament running along the ridge of a building. (See Cresting.) Fan Tracery. See Groined Vaulting. Fascia (Lat. a band.) The narrow vertical bands or broad fillets into which the architraves of Corinthian and Ionic entablatures are divided are called fasciae; and the term is generally applied to any similar member in architecture.

Feathering. See Cusp. Femerell, properly Fumerell, a sort of lantern in the ridge of a hall (when the fire was in the middle of the floor and not in a chimney) for the purpose of letting out the smoke.

Fenestral, a frame or “chassis,” on which oiled paper or thin cloth was strained to keep out wind and rain when the windows were not glazed.

Feretory, a sort of parclose which enclosed the feretrum, shrine, or tomb, as in Henry VII.’s chapel.

Fillet (Fr. filet, listel, Ital. listello, Ger. Binde), a narrow vertical band or listel, of frequent use in congeries of mouldings, to separate and combine them, and also to give breadth and firmness to the upper edge of a crowning cyma or cavetto, as in an external cornice. The narrow slips or breadths between the flutes of Corinthian and Ionic columns are also called fillets. In mediaeval work, the fillet is a small, flat, projecting square, chiefly used to separate hollows and rounds, and often found in the outer parts of shafts and bowtells. In this situation the centre fillet has been termed a keel, and the two side ones wings; but apparently this is not an ancient usage.

Finial (Fr. fleur od), the flower or bunch of flowers with which a spire, pinnacle, gablet, canopy, &c., generally terminates. Where there are crockets, the finial generally bears as close a resemblance as possible to them in point of design. They are found in early work where there are no crockets. The simplest form more resembles a bud about to burst than an open flower. They soon became more elaborate, as at Lincoln, and still more, as at Westminster and the Hotel Cluny at Paris. Many Perpendicular finials are like four crockets bound together. Almost every known example of a finial has a sort of necking separating it from the parts below. (See Epi.) Flamboyant, a name applied to the Third Pointed style in France {ogive tertiale), which seems to have been developed from the Second, as our Perpendicular was from the Decorated. The great characteristic is, that the element of the tracery flows upwards in long wavy divisions like flames of fire. In most cases, also, every division has only one cusp on each side, however long the division may be. The mouldings seem to be as much inferior to those of the preceding period, as our Perpendicular mouldings were to the Early English, a fact which seems to show that the decadence of Gothic architecture was not confined to one country.

Flèche (Ital. aguglia), a general term in French architecture for a spire, but more particularly used for the small slender erection rising from the intersection of the nave and transepts in cathedrals and large churches, and carrying the sanctus bell.

Flute, a concave channel. Columns whose shafts are channelled are said to be fluted, and the flutes are collectively called flutings.

Foliation. See Cusp. Font, the vessel used in the rite of baptism. The earliest extant is supposed to be that in which Constantine is said to have been baptised; this is a porphyry labrum from a Boman bath. Those in the baptisteries in Italy are all large, and were intended for immersion; as time went on, they seem to have become smaller. What they were in Saxon times is uncertain, though it is not improbable that some of the plain examples, called NormaD, may have been of earlieι date. Norman fonts are sometimes mere plain, hollow cylinders, generally a little smaller below than above; others are massive squares, supported on a thick stem, round which sometimes there are smaller shafts. In the Early English this form is still pursued, and the shafts are detached; sometimes, however, they are hexagonal and octagonal, and in this and the later styles assume the foιm of a vessel on a stem. Norman fonts have frequently curious carvings on them, approaching the grotesque; in later times the foliages, &c., partook absolutely of the character of those used in other architectural details of their respective periods. The font is usually placed close to a pillar near the entrance, generally that nearest but one to the tower in the south arcade, or, in large buildings, in the middle of the nave, opposite the entrance porch, and sometimes in a separate building. (See Baptistery.) Foot-Stall, a word supposed to be a literal translation of piédestal, οτ pedestal, the lower part of a pier. (See Base, Patin.) Formeret, the half ribs against the walls in a groined-ceiling.

Fratery, Frater House, supposed to be the hall where the friars met for dinner or other purposes; the same as refectory among the monks. ·

Free-stone (Fr. pierre de taille, Ital. pietra molle), stone used for mouldings, tracery, and. other work required to be executed with the chisel. The oolitic'stones are generally so called, although in some countries the soft sandstones are so used, and in some churches an indurated chalk called clunch is employed for internal lining and for carving.

Fresco, the method of painting on a wall while the plastering is wet. The colour penetrates through the material, which therefore will bear rubbing or cleaning to almost any extent. The transparency, the chiaroscuro, and lucidity, as well as force, which can be obtained by this method, cannot be conceived unless the frescoes of Fra Angelico or Raffaelle are studied. The word, however, is often applied improperly to mediaeval delineations in ancient churches, which are only painted on the surface in distemper or body colour, mixed with size or white of egg, whicl gives them an opaque effect.

Frieze (Ital. fregio, from the Lat. Phrygionius, enriched or embroidered), that portion of an entablature between the cornic( above and the architrave below. It derives its name from beinj the recipient of the sculptured enrichments either of foliage 01 figures which may be relevant to the object of the structure. The frieze is also called the Zoophorus, q.v. Frontispiece, the front or principal elevation of a structure. This term, however, is generally restricted in application to a Decorated entrance.

Fumerel. See Femerell. Gable, sometimes Gavil (Fr. pignon, I tai. colma, Ger. Giebel).

When a roof is not hipped or returned on itself at the ends, its ends are stopped by carrying up the walls under them in the triangular form of the roof itself. This is called the gable, or, in the case of the ornamental and ornamented gable, the pediment. Of course gables follow the angles of the slope of the roof, and differ in the various styles. In Norman work they are generally about half pitch; in Early English, seldom Jess than equilateral, and often more. In Decorated work they become lower, and still more so in the Perpendicular style. In all important buildings they are finished with copings or parapets. In early times the copings were nearly flat. In the later styles gables are often surmounted with battlements, or enriched with crockets; they are also often panelled or perforated, sometimes very richly. The gables in ecclesiastical buildings are mostly terminated with a cross; in others, by a finial or pinnacle. In later times the parapets or copings were broken into a sort of steps, called corbie steps. In buildings of less pretension, the tiles er other roof covering passed over the front of the wall, which then, of course, had no coping. In this case the outer pair of rafters were concealed by moulded or carved verge boards. (See Battlement, Coping, Corbie steps, · Parapet, Verge Board, &c.) Gable Window, a term sometimes applied to the large window under a gable, but more properly to the windows in the gable itself.

Gabled Towers, those which are finished with gables instead of parapets, as at Sompting. Many of the German Eomanesque towers are gabled.

Gablets, triangular terminations to buttresses, much in use in the Early English and Decorated periods, after which the buttresses generally terminate in pinnacles. The Early English gablets are generally plain, and very sharp in pitch. In the Decorated period they are often enriched with panelling and crockets. They are sometimes finished with small crosses, but offener with finials.

Galilee. This name is said to be derived from the Scriptural expression, “Galilee of the Gentiles.” Galilees are supposed to have been used sometimes as courts of law, but chiefly for penitents not yet admitted to the body of the church. At Durham thegalilee is a chapel at the main entrance into the nave.

Gallery, any long passage looking down into another part of a building, or into the court outside. In like manner, any stage erected to carry a rood or an organ, or to receive spectators, was latterly called a gallery, though originally a loft. In later times the name was given to any very long rooms, particularly those intended for purposes of state. (See Loft, Triforium. ) Gargoyle or Gurgoyle (Fr. gargouille, canon, lanceur, Ital. docçia di gronda, Ger. Ausguss), the carved termination to a spout which conveyed away the water from the gutters, supposed to be called so from the gurgling noise made by the water passing through it. Gargoyles are mostly grotesque figures.

Garretting, properly Galletting, from gallet, a small piece of stone chipped off by the chisel. A method of protecting the mortar joints in rough walls by sticking in chips of stone while the mortar is wet.

Gate-house, a building forming the entrance to a town, the door of an abbey, or the enceinte of a castle or other important edifice. They generally had a large gateway protected by a gate, and also a portcullis, over which were battlemented parapets with holes (machicolations) for throwing down darts, melted lead, or hot sand, on the besiegers. Gatehouses always had a lodge, with apartments for the porter, and guard-rooms for the soldiers; and generally rooms over for the officers, and often places for prisoners beneath. They are sometimes open in the rear, as at Cooling Castle, and often have doors with portcullises, &c., on both sides, in case the enemy should scale the walls, and attack them both in front and rear. In this case, the space betweên, on the ground floor, was generally groined over, with holes for missile weapons.

Glyph, a vertical channel in a frieze. (See Triglyph.) Gradino (Itai. dim. of gradus, a step). Architects frequently apply the plural of this term, gradini, to such series of great steps as are found at the mausoleum at Halicarnassus.

Grange, a word derived from the French, signifying a large barn or granary. They were usually long buildings with high wooden roofs, sometimes divided by posts or columns into a sort of nave and aisles, and with walls strongly buttressed. In England the term is applied not only to the barns, but to the whole of the buildings which formed the detached farms belonging to the monasteries; in most cases there was a chapel either included among these or standing apart as a separate edifice.

Griffe, a French term for an ornament at the angles of the base ot early pillars, for which we have no proper equivalent. It first consisted of a single leaf, which became more elaborate, and was, no doubt, the origin of the foliated bases.

Grille, the iron work forming the enclosure screen to a chapel, or the protecting railing to a tomb or shrine; more commonly found in France than in England. Our best example, perhaps, is that round the tomb of Queen Eleanor in Westminster Abbey. They are of wrought iron, ornamented by the swage and punch, and put together either by rivets or clips.

Groin, by some described as the line of intersection of two vaults where they cross each other, which others call the groin point; by others the curved section or spandril of such vaulting is called a groin, and by others the whole system of vaulting is so named.

Groin Arch (Fr. arc doubleau), the cross rib in the later styles of groining, passing at right angles from wall to wall,· and dividing the vault into bays or travées. Groin Ceiling, a ceiling to a building composed of oak ribs, the spandrils of which are filled in with narrow, thin slips of wood. There are several in England; one at the Early English church at Warmington, and one at Winchester Cathedral, exactly resembling those of stone.

Groin Centering. In groining without ribs, the whole surface is supported by centering during the erection of the vaulting. In ribbed work the stone ribs only are supported by timber ribs during the progress of the work, any light stuff being used while filling in the spandrils.

Groin Point, the name give by workmen to the arris or line of intersection of one vault with another where there are no ribs.

Groin Rib (Fr. nerf d'arête, Ital. costola, Ger. Rippe), the rib which conceals the groin point or jointe, where the spandrils intersect.

Groined Vaulting (Lat. fornix, testudo, Fr. voûte d'arête, Ital. fornice), the system of covering a building with stone vaults which cross and intersect each other, as opposed to the barrel vaulting {voûte de berceau), or series of arches placed side by side. The earliest groins are plain, without any ribs, except occasionally a sort of wide band from wall to wall, to strengthen the construction. In later Norman times ribs were added on the line of intersection of the spandrils, crossing each other, and having a boss as a key common to both; these ribs the French authors call nerfs en ogive. Their introduction, however, caused an entire change in the system of vaulting; instead of arches of uniform thickness' and great weight, these ribs were first put up as the main construction, and spandrils {remplissage) of the lightest and thinnest possible material placed upon them, the haunches only being loaded sufficiently to counterbalance the pressure from the crown. Shortly after, half ribs against the walls {formerets) were introduced to carry the spandrils without cutting into the walling, and· to add to the appearance. The work was now not treated as continued vaulting, but as divided into bays {travées), and it was formed by keeping up the ogive or intersecting ribs and their bosses; a sort of construction having some affinity to the dome was formed, which added much to the strength of the groining. Of course the top of the soffit or ridge of the vault was not horizontal , But rose from the level of the top of the forrneret-rib to the boss and fell again; but this could not be perceived from below. As this system of construction got more into use, and as the vaults were required to be of greater span and of higher pitch, the spandrils became larger, and wanted more support. To give this another set of ribs was introduced, passing from the springers of the ogive ribs, and going to about half-way between these and the ogive, and meeting on the ridge of the vault; these intermediate ribs are called by the French tiercerons, and began to come into use in the transition from Early English to Decorated. About the same period a system of vaulting came into use called hexpartite, from the fact that every bay is divided into six compartments instead of four. It was invented to cover the naves of churches of unusual width. The filling of the spandrils in this style is very peculiar; and, where the different compartments meet at the ridge, some pieces of harder stone have been used, which have rather a pleasing effect. The arches against the wall being of smaller span than the main arches, cause the centre springers to be perpendicular and parallel for some height, and the spandrils themselves are very hollow. As styles progressed, and the desire for greater richness increased, another series of ribs called liernes, was introduced; these passed cross-ways from the ogives to the tiercerons, and thence to the doubleaux, dividing the spandrils nearly horizontally. These various systems increased in the Perpendicular period, so that the vaults were quite.a network of ribs, and led at last to the Tudor, or, as it is called by many, fan tracery vaulting. In this system the ribs are no part of the real construction, but are merely carved upon the vous-soirs, which form the actual vaulting. Fan Tracery is so called because the ribs radiate from the springers, and spread out like the sticks of a fan. These later methods are not strictly groins, for the peridentives are not square on plan, but circular, and there is therefore no arris intersection or Groin Point (which see).

Groins, Welsh, or Underpitch. When the main longitudinal vault of any groining is higher than the cross or transverse vaults which run from the windows, the system of vaulting is called underpitch groining, or, as termed by the workmen, Welsh groining. A very tine example is at St George’s Chapel, Windsor.

Ground Table. See Base of a Wall. Guilloche or Guillochos (Gr. yυιov, a member, and K6χos, a snare), • an interlaced ornament like network, used most frequently to enrich the torus.

Guttae (Lat. drops). The small cylindrical drops used to enrich the mufules and regulae of the Doric entablature are so called.

Gutter, the channel for carrying off rain-water. The mediaeval gutters differed little from others, except that they are often hollows sunk in the top of stone cornices, in which case they are generally oalled channels in English, and chéneaux in French.

Hagioscope, a term derived from the Greek, improperly used to describe certain oblique openings in the mediaeval buildings for the purpose of seeing the altar. (See Squint.) Hall (Fr. salle, salon, Ital. sala, salone, Ger. Saal), the principal apartment in the large dwellings of the Middle Ages used for the purposes of receptions, feasts, &c. In the Norman castle the hall was generally in the keep above the ground floor, where the retainers lived, the basement being devoted to stores and dungeons for confining prisoners. Later halls, indeed some Norman halls (not in castles), are generally on the ground floor, as at Westminster, approached by a porch either at the end, as in this last example, or at the side, as at Guildhall, London, having at one end a raised Dais (which see) or Estrade. The roofs are generally open, and more or less ornamented. In the middle of these was an opening to let out the smoke (see Louvre, Femerell), though in later times the halls have large chimney places with funnels or chimney shafts for this purpose. At this period there were usually two deeply recessed bay windows at each end of the dais, and doors leading into the withdrawing-rooms or the ladies’ apartments; they are also-generally wainscoted with oak, in small panels, to the height of five or six feet, the panels often being enriched. Westminster Hall was originally divided into three parts, like a nave and side aisles, as are some on the Continent.

Helix (Gr. eλιξ r a wreath or ringlet), used synonymously with Cauliculus, q.v. Its plural is Helices.

Herring-Bone Work, bricks or other materials arranged diagonally in building.

Hexastyle (Gr. tξ, six, and στvλοs, a column). A portico of six columns in front is of this description. Most of the churches in London which have porticoes have hexaprostyles.

High Altar, the principal altar in a cathedral or church. Where there is a second, it is generally at the end of the choir or chancel, not in the Lady Chapel. At St Albans it stood at the end of the nave, close to the choir screen.

Hip-Knob, the finial on the hip of a roof, or between the barge boards of a gable.

Hood-Mould, a word used to signify the drip-stone or label over a window or door opening, whether inside or out; but it seems more properly to be applied to the mouldings at the arris of the arch at the inner side of such opening.. Sometimes these assume the form of a label, and have jamb-shafts. Frequently the soffit is slightly hollowed and finishes with an arris. (See Dripstone, Label.) Hotel de Ville (Itai. broletio, palazzo, communale), the town-hall or guild-hall, in France, Germany, and Northern Italy. The building in general serves for the administration of justice, the receipt of town dues, the regulation of markets, the residence of magistrates, barracks for police, prisons, and all other fiscal purposes. As may be imagined, they differ very much in different towns, but they have almost invariably attached to them, or closely adjacent, a large clock-tower (beffroi), containing one or more bells, for calling the people together on special occasions.

Hotel Dieu (Fr. maison dieu, Ital. ospedale, lo spedale), the name for an hospital in mediaeval times. In England there are but few remains of these buildings, one of which is at Dover; abroad there are many. The most celebrated is the one at Angers, described by Parker. They do not seem to differ much Li arrangement of plan from those in modern days—the accommodation for the chaplain, medicine, nurses, stores, &c., being much the same in all ages, except that in some of the earlier, instead of the sick being placed in long wards like galleries, as is now done, they occupied large buildings, with naves and side aisles like churches. The reader is referred to the works of Parker, Viollet-le-Duc, and Verdier and Cattois, for further details.

Hypaethr03 (Gr. iπi, under, and alθhρ, the air), a temple open to the air, or uncovered. The term may be the more easily understood by supposing the roof removed from over the nave of a church in which columns or piers go up from the floor to the ceiling, leaving the aisles still covered.

Hypogea (Gr. i>πο, under, and yτj, the earth), constructions under the surface of the earth, or in the sides of a hill or mountain.

Hypotrachelium (Gr. i>πi, under, and τράχηλος, the neck), the moulding or the groove at the junction of the shaft with the capital of a column. In some styles the hypotrachelium is a projecting fillet or moulding, and in others, as the Doric, it is composed of a channel or groove, .and sometimes of more than one.

Ichnography (Gr. iχvοs, a footstep or track, and ypaφh, a description or representation), the drawing of a plan, or representation of the site of an object on a horizontal plane.

Impost, a term in classic architecture for the horizontal mouldings of piers or pilasters, from the top of which the archivolts ’ or mouldings which go round the arch spring. The word is scarcely applicable to mediaeval architecture, as the mouldings in general spring from the capital of a shaft, or from a corbel; or they continue without breaking down to the base, or till they are stopped by a chamfer or a regular base moulding, or they die into a plain shaft, or at any rate one of different section.

Intercolumniation, the distance from column to column, the clear space between columns.

Interlaced Arches, arches where one passes over two openings, and they consequently cut or intersect each other.

Iron Work, in mediaeval architecture, as an ornament is chiefly confined to the hinges, &c., of doors and of church chests, &c. Specimens of Norman iron work are very rare. Early English specimens are numerous, and very elaborate. In some instances not only do the hinges become a mass of scroll work, but the surface of the doors is covered by similar ornaments. In both these periods the design evidently partakes of the feeling exhibited in the. stone or weed carving. In the Decorated period the scroll work is more graceful, and, like the foliage of the time, more natural. As styles progressed, there was a greater desire that the framing of the doors should be richer, and the ledges were chamfered or raised, then panelled, and at last the doors became a mass of scroll panelling. This, of course, interfered with the design of the hinges, the ornamentation of which gradually became unusual. In almost all styles the smaller and less important doors had merely plain strap hinges, terminating in a few bent scrolls, and latterly in fleurs-de-lis. Escutcheon and ring handles, and the other furniture, partook more or less of the character of the time. On the Continent the knockers are very elaborate. At all periods doors have been ornamented with nails having projecting heads, sometimes square, sometimes polygonal, and sometimes ornamented with rosee, &c. The iron work of windows is generally plain, and the ornament confined to simple fleur-de-lis heads to the stancheons. The iron work of screens enclosing tombs and chapels is noticed under Grille, q.υ. Jamb, the side-post or lining of a doorway or other aperture. The jambs of a window outside the frame are called Reveals.

Jamb-Shaft. Small shafts to doors and windows with caps and bases; when in the inside arris of the jamb of a window they.are sometimes called Esconsons.

Ja⅛bette, a French term for the upright ashlar piece between the inside of the plate and the rafters.

Jube, one of the names of the ambo or reading desk in the early Christian church. In later times, a term especially applied to the rood-loft or gallery over thé screen, whence the words “Jube, Domine, benedicere,” &c., were read.

Keel-Moulding, a round on which there is a small fillet, somewhat like the keel of a ship. It is common in the Early English and Decorated styles.

Keep (Fr. donjon), the inmost and strongest part of a mediaeval castle, answering to the citadel of modern times. The arrangement is said to have originated with Gundulf, the celebrated bishop of Rochester.. The Norman keep is generally a very massive square tower, the basement or stories partly below ground being used for stores and prisons. The main story is generally a great deal above ground level, with a projecting entrance, approached by a flight of εteps and drawbridge. This floor is generally supposed to have been the guard-room or place for the soldiery; above this was the hall, which generally extended over the whole area of the building, and is sometime separated by columns; above this are other apartments for the residents. There are winding staircases in the angles of the buildings; and passages and small chambers in the thickness of the walls. The keep was intended for the last refuge, in case the outworks were scaled and the other buildings stormed. There is generally a well in a mediaeval keep, ingeniously concealed in the thickness of a wall, or in a pillar. The most celebrated of Norman times are the White Tower in London, the castles at Rochester, Arundel, and Newcastle, Castle Hedingham, &c. The keep was often circular, as at Conishorough and Windsor. ·

Key-Stone, in classic architecture, the centre voussoir of an arch, often ornamented with carving. In Pointed architecture there is often no key-stone. For those to groined arches, see Boss.

Knob, Knot, the bunch of flowers carved on a Corbel, or on a Boss.

Label, the outer projecting moulding over doors, windows, arches, &c., sometimes called Dripstone or Weather Moulding, or Hood-Mould. The former terms seem scarcely applicable, as this moulding is often found inside a building where no rain could come, and consequently there is no drip. The latter term is described under Hood-MoUld. In Norman times the label frequently did not project at all, and when it did it was very little, and formed part of the series of arch mouldings. In the Early English’styles they were not very large, sometimes slightly undercut, sometimes deeply, sometimes a quarter round with chamfer, and very frequently a “roll" or “scroll moulding,” so called because it resembles the part of a scroll where the edge laps over the body of the roll. Labels generally resemble the string-courses of the periods, and, in fact, often return horizontally ami form strings. They are less common in Continental architecture than in English. (See Dripstone, Hood-Mould, String-Courses.) Label Terminations, carvings on which the labels terminated near the springing of the windows. In Norman times these were frequently grotesque heads of fish, birds, &c., and sometimes stiff foliage, as at Shoreham. In the Early English and Decorated periods they are often elegant knots of flowers, or heads of kings, queens, bishops, and other persons supposed to be the founders of churches. In the Perpendicular period they often finished with a short, square mitred return or knee, and the foliages are generally leaves of square or octagonal form.

Lacunar (Lat.), a panelled or coffered ceiling or sofiit. The panels or cassoons of a ceiling are by Vitruvius called lacunaria. Lantern (Lat. laterna), a turret raised above a roof or tower, and very much pierced, the better to transmit light. In modern practice this term is generally applied to any raised part in a roof or ceiling containing vertical windows, but covered in horizontally. The name was also often applied to the louvre or ferneren on a roof to carry off the smoke; sometimes, too, to the open constructions at the top of towers, as at Ely Cathedral, Boston in Lincolnshire, probably because lights were placed in them at night to serve as beacons.

Lanterns of the Dead, curious small slender towers, found chiefly ' in the centre and west of France, having apertures at the top, where a light was exhibited at night to mark the place of a cemetery. Some have supposed that the round towers in Ireland may have served for this purpose.

Lavabo (Fr. lavoir, Ital. lavatoio), the lavatory for washing hands, generally erected in the cloisters of monasteries. Those at Gloucester, Norwich, and Lincoln are best known. A very curious one at Fontenay, surrounding a pillar, is given by Viollet-le-Duc. In general it is a sort of trough, and in some places has an almery for towels, &c.

Lich Gate, a covered gate at the entrance of a cemetery, under the shelter of which the mourners rested with the corpse, while the procession of the clergy came to meet them. There is a very fine one at Ashwell, Herts.

Lierne Rib, a rib crossing nearly horizontally from the ogive ribs to the tiercerons or the ares doubleaux, or forming patterns in fan and stellar vaulting. (See Groined Vaulting.) Lip Mould, a moulding of the Perpendicular period like a hanging 'lip.

Loft, the highest room in a house, particularly if in the roof; also a gallery raised up in a church to contain the rood, the organ, or singers.

Loop Hole (Fr. archière, meurtrière, Ital. feritoia), an opening in the wall of a building, very narrow on the outside, and splayed within, from which arrows or darts might be discharged on an enemy. They are often in the form of a cross, and generally have round holes at the ends. (See Oylets.) Louvre, a lantern upon the roof of a hall for tlje passage of the smoke, when the fire was made on the pavement in the middle. (See Femerell, Lantern.) Lucarne, a French term for a garret window; also used to signify the lights or small windows in spires.

Buffers (probably the same as Louvres), pieces of board, slate, or stone, placed slanting so as to exclude the rain, but to allow the passage of smoke, the sound of bells, &c.

Lunette, the French term for the circular opening in the groining of the lower stories of towers through which the bells are drawn up.

Machicolation (Fr. machicoulis'), an opening between a wall and a parapet, formed by corbelling over the latter, so that the defenders of the building might throw down darts, stones, and sometimes hot sand, melted lead, &c., upon their assailants below.

Manor House, the residence of the suzerain or lord of the manor; . in France the central tower or keep of a castle is often called the memoir. (See Keep.) Merlon, the solid part of a parapet between the embrasures of a battlement, Sometimes pierced by loop-holes.

Metope (Gr. μeτJπη, a middle space), the square recess between the triglyphs in a Doric frieze. It is sometimes'occupied by sculptures. · ’

Mezzanine (Ital. mezzanino, dim. of mezzo, the middle), a low story between two lofty ones. It is called by the French entresol, or inter-story.

Minster (Ger. Munster), probably a corruption of monasterium— the large church attached to any ecclesiastical fraternity. If the latter be presided over by a bishop, it is generally called a Cathedral; if by an abbot, an Abbey; if by a prior, a Priory. Miserere (Fr. miséricorde, Ital. predella), a seat in a stall of a large church made to turn up and afford support to a person in a position between sitting and standing. The under side is generally carved with some ornament, and very often with strange grotesque figures and Caricatures of different persons. ’(See Stall.) Mitre. A moulding returned upon itself at right angles is said to mitre. In joinery the ends of any two pieces of wood of corresponding form cut off at 45° necessarily abut upon one another so as to form a right angle, and are said to mitre.

Modillion (Lat modulus, a measure of proportion), so called because of its arrangement in regulated distances, the enriched block or horizontal bracket generally found under the cornice of the Corinthian entablature. Less ornamented, it is sometimes used in the Ionic. (See also Mutule.) Module (Lat. modulus, from modus, a measure or rule). This is a term which has been generally used by architects in determining the relative proportions of the various parts of a columnar ordinance. The semidiameter of the column at its base is the module, which being divided into thirty parts called minutes, any part of the composition is said to be of so many modules and minutes, or minutes alone, in height, breadth, or projection. The whole diameter is now generally preferred as a module, it being a better rule of proportion than its half.

Monastery, a set of buildings adapted for the reception of any of the various orders of monks, the different, parts of which are described in the separate article Abbey. Monopteros (Gr. μ6vοs, one, or single, and nτepiv, a wing). This term is used by Vitruvius to describe a temple composed of a circular range of columns supporting a tholus, cupola, or dome, but without walls. (See Peripteros.) Such an edifice would be more correctly designated as Cyclostylar. (See Cyclostyle. ) Monotriglyph (Gr. μ6vοs, one, or single, and Triglyph, g.v.) The intercolumniations of the Doric order are determined by the number of triglyphs which intervene instead of the number of diameters of the column as in other cases; and this term designates the ordinary intercolumniation of one triglyph.

Monument, a name given to a tomb, particularly to those fine structures recessed in the walls of mediaeval churches.

Mosaic (Lat. opus musivum, Ital. rnusaico, Fr. mosaique), pictorial representations, or ornaments formed of small pieces of stone, marble, or enamel of various colours. In Roman houses the floors are often entirely of mosaic, the pieces being cubieal. There are several fine specimens in Westminster Abbey, particularly the pavement of the choir.

Moulding (Lat. modulus, Ital. modanatura, Fr. moulure, Ger. Simswcrk). When any work is wrought into long regular channels or projections, forming curves or rounds, hollows, &e., it is said to be moulded, and each separate member is called a moulding. In mediaeval architecture the principal mouldings are those of the arches, doors, windows, piers, &c. The remains of Saxon work are so few, that we can tell but little about these mouldings. The arches have sometimes a simple rib on them, sometimes are chamfered, and sometimes are quite plain. Early Norman work is much the same. By degrees, however, the arrises were finished by a round or bowtell. Later, hollows and rounds together became common, and the arches were set back one behind another, each being frequently supported by a jamb-shaft or column, though very often the arch mouldings continued down the jambs without any break. In the Early English style, the mouldings, for some time, like those of the preceding period, formed groups set back in squares; they are smaller, lighter, more graceful, and frequently very deeply undercut. The scroll moulding is also common. Small fillets now became very frequent in the outer parts of the rounds. This has often been called the keel moulding, from its resemblance in section to the bottom of a ship: sometimes also it has a peculiar hollow on each side like two wings. Later in the Decorated style the mouldings are more varied in design, though hollows and rounds still prevail. The undercutting is not so deep, fillets abound, ogees are more frequent, and the wave mould, double ogee, or double ressaunt, is often seen. In many places the strings and labels are a round, the lower half of which is cut off by a plain chamfer. The mouldings in the later styles in some degree resemble those of the Decorated, flattened and extended; they run more into one another, having fewer fillets, and being as it were less grouped. One of the principal· features of the change is the substitution of one, or perhaps two (seldom more), very large hollows in the set of mouldings. These hollows are neither circular nor elliptical, but obovate, like an egg cut across, so that one-half is larger than the other. The brace mould also has a small bead, where the two ogees meet. Another sort of moulding, which has been called a ⅛ mould, is common in parapets, bases, and weatherings. For the ancient mouldings see the general article, supra.

Mouldings, Ornamented. The Saxon and early Norman mouldings do not seem to have been much enriched, but the complete and later styles of Norman are remarkable for a profusion of ornamentation, the most usual of which is what is called the zig-zag. This seems to be to Norman architecture what the meander or fret was to the Grecian; but it was probably derived from the Saxons, as it is very frequently found in their pottery. Bezants, quatrefoils, lozenges, crescents, billets, heads of nails, are very common . ornaments; besides these, battlements, cables, large ropes, round which smaller ropes are turned, or, as our sailors say, “wormed,” scallops, pellets, chains, a sort of conical barrels, quaint stiff foliages, beaks of birds, heads of fish, ornaments of almost every conceivable kind, are sculptured in Norman mouldings; and they are used in such profusion as has been attempted in no other style. The decorations on Early English mouldings are chiefly the dog-tooth, which is one of the great characteristics of this style, though it is to be found in the Transition Norman. It is generally placed in a deep hollow between two projecting mouldings, the dark shadow in the hollow contrasting in a very beautiful way with the light in these mouldings. In this period and in the next the tympanum over doorways, particularly if théy are double doors, is highly ornamented. Those of the Decorated period resemble the former, except that the foliage is more natural, and the dog-tooth gives way to the ball-flower. Some of the hollows also are ornamented with rosettes set at intervals, which are sometimes connected by a running tendril, as the ball-flowers are frequently. Some very pleasing leaf-like ornaments in the labels of windows are often found in Continental architecture. In the Perpendicular period the mouldings are ornamented very frequently by square four-leaved flowers set at intervals, but the two characteristic ornaments of the time are running patterns of vine leaves, tendrils, and grapes in the hollows, which by old writers are called “vignettes in casements,” and upright stiff leaves, generally called the Tudor leaf. On the Continent mouldings partook much of the same character.

Mullion, Munion, often corrupted into munting, monyal (Fr. meneau, Ital. regolo, Ger. Fensterpfoste). The perpendicular pieces of stone, sometimes like columns, sometimes like slender piers, which divide the bays or lights of windows or screen work from each other. In all styles, in less important work, the mullions are often simply plain chamfered, and more commonly have a very flat hollow on each side. In larger buildings there is often a bead or bowtell on the edge, and often a single very small column with a capital; these are more frequent in foreign work than in English. Instead of the bowtell they often finish with a sort of double ogee. As tracery grew richer, the windows were divided by a larger order of mullion, between which came a lesser or subordinate set of mullions, which ran into each other.

Mutule (Lat. mutulus, a stay or bracket), the rectangular impending block under the corona of the Doric cornice, from which guttae or drops depend. Mutule is equivalent to modillion, but the latter term is applied more particularly to enriched blocks or brackets, such as those of Ionic and Corinthian entablatures.

Naos (Gr. vais, a temple). This term is sometimes used instead of the Latin cella, as applied to the interior; strictly, however, it means the body of the edifice itself, and not merely its interior or cell.

Narthex (Gr. viρQffi, a ferula or rule), the long arcaded porch forming the entrance into the Christian basilica. Sometimes there was an inner narthex or lobby before entering the church. When this was the case, the former was called exo-narthex, and the latter eso-narthex. In the Byzantine churches this inner narthex forms part of the solid structure of the church, being marked off by a wall or row of columns, whereas in the Latin churches it was usually formed only by a wooden or other temporary screen.

Nave (Lat. navis, Ital. navata, Fr. nef, Ger. Schiff), the central part between the arches of a church, which formerly was separated from a chancel or choir by a screen. It is so called from its fancied resemblance to a ship. In the nave were generally placed the pulpit and font. Abroad it often also contains a high altar, but this is of rare occurrence in England. Instances of this, however, are to be found at Durham and St Albans.

Necking, the annulet or round, or series of horizontal mouldings, which separates the capital of a column from the plain part or a shaft. In Norman work they are often corded.

Newel (Fr. noyau, Ital. albero diuna scala, Ger. SpindeT), in mediaeval architecture, the circular ends of a winding staircase which stand over each other, and form a sort of cylindrical column.

Niche (Fr. niche, Ital. nicchia, Gr. Nische), a recess sunk in a wall, generally for the reception of a statue. They sometimes are terminated by a simple label, but more commonly by a canopy, and with a bracket or corbel tor the figure, in which case they are often called tabernacles. Octastyle (Gr. οκτώ, eight, and στvλos, a column), a portico of eight columns in front.

Ogee (Lat. cyma reversa, Ital. gola dritta, gola a rovcscio, Fr. cimaise, doucine, gorge, gueule, gueule renversée, talon, Ger. Hohl~ leisten), the name applied to a moulding, partly a hollow and partly a round, and derived no doubt from its resemblance to an 0 placed over a G. It is rarely found in Norman work, and is not very common in Early English. It is of frequent use in the Decorated, where it becomes sometimes double, and 13 called a wave moulding; and later still, two waves are connected with a small bead, which is then called a brace moulding. In ancient MSS. it is called a Ressaunt, q.v. Ogive, a term applied by the French to the pointed arch. Ogive Rib, the main ribs which cross each other on the intersection of the vaulting. (See Groined Vaulting.) Oratory (Fr. oratoire), a small chapel or place for prayer for the use of private individuals, generally attached to a mansion, and sometimes to a church. The name is also given to small chapel3 built to commemorate some special deliverance.

Order. A column with its entablature and stylobate is so called. The term is the result of the dogmatic laws ' deduced from the writings of Vitruvius, and has been exclusively applied to those arrangements which they· were thought to warrant. For the different details of an order, see Plate XXIV., fig. 1.

Order, the name given to the subordinate mullions and tracery which are of smaller size than others in the same window, &c. It is also applied to the groups of mouldings arranged on square faces set back behind one another in Norman and Early English work, and not cut in on the splayed faces of the jambs and arch moulds as in subsequent periods.

Ordinance, a composition of some particular order or style. It need not be restricted to a columnar composition, but applies to any species which is subjected to conventional rules for its arrangement.

Oriel or Oryel. See Bay Window. Orthography (Gr. ορθis, straight or true, andγpα≠½, a description or representation), a geometrical elevation of a building or other object, in which it is represented as it actually exists or may exist, and not perspectively, or as it would appear.

Orthostyle (Gr. οpθis, straight or true, and στύλον, a column), any straight range of columns. This is a term suggested to designate what is generally but improperly called a Peristyle, q.v., that is, columns in a straight row or range, but not forming a portico.

Ossuaire. See Charnel House. Ovolo (from the Ital.,’ meaning egg-formed), the name most commonly applied to the moulding which appears to have originated in the moulded head of the Doric column, and which, with an abacus, formed its capital.

Oylements, a word used in the Beauchamp Roll, signifying the small quatrefoil lights in the head of a Perpendicular window.

Oylets, or Oiellets, a name sometimes applied to the arrow-slits in towers, &c.; but it seems more probable its strict meaning is the round hole or circle with which these terminate.

Pace, the landing on a broad step in a stair; also any stage raised above the floor.

Pan or Pane. See Post and Pane Work. Pane, probably a diminutive of panneau, a term applied to a bay of a window, compartment of a partition, side of a tower, turret, &c., (See Bay.) Panel (Fr. panneau, Ital. quadretto, formello, Ger. Feld), properly the piece of wood framed within the styles and rails of a door, filling up the aperture, but often applied both to the whole square frame tod the sinking itself; also to the ranges of sunken compartments in cornices, corbel tables, groined vaults, ceilings, &c. In Norman work these recesses are generally shallow, and more of the nature of arcades. In Early English work the square panels are ornamented with quatrefoils, cusped circles, &c.', and the larger panels are often deeply recessed, and form niches with trefoil heads and sometimes canopies. In the Decorated style the cusping and other enrichments of panels become more elaborate, and they are often filled with shields, foliages, and sometimes figures. Towards the end of this period the walls of important buildings were often entirely covered with long or square panels, the former frequently forming niches with statues. The use of panels in this way became very common in Perpendicular work, the wall frequently being entirely covered with long, short, and square panels, which latter are frequently richly cusped, and .filled with every species of ornament, as shields, bosses of foliage, portcullis, lilies, Tudor roses,'&c. Wooden panellings very much resembled those of stone, except in the Tudor period, when the panels were enriched by a varied design, imitating the plaits of a piece of linen or a napkin folded in a great number of parallel lines. This is generally called tho linen pattern. Wooden ςeilings, which are veτy common, are composed of thin oak boards hailed to the rafters, collars, &c., and divided into panels by oak mouldings fixed on them, with carved bosses at the intersections.

Paradise, Parvise, Parvyce, a word of uncertain origin, but supposed to be a corruption of paradisus, an enclosed garden. Paradises were open places surrounded with an enceinte or stone parapet in front of cathedrals or other great buildings, and probably were used to keep the people from pressing on and confusing the marshalling of the public processions. That at Nôtre Dame, at Paris, is of irregular shape; that at Amiens was round. Nothing of the kind is left in England, though, from a passage in Chaucer, it is supposed there was one in the front of Westminster Hall. The Promptorium Parvulorum calls a parvise ρarlatorium, a place for conversation. The small chambers over porches have also been named parvises. The irregularly-shaped cloister at Chichester is still called a paradise.

Γarapet (from the Italian ρarapetto, something which comes against the breast, i.e., to lean against, Fr. parapet, Ger. Brustwehr e), a dwarf wall along the edge of a roof, or round a lead flat, terrace walk, &c., to prevent persons from falling over, and as a protection to the defenders in case of a siege. Parapets are either plain, embattled, perforated, or panelled. The last two are found in all styles except the Norman. Plain parapets are simply portions of the wall generally overhanging a little, with a coping at the top and corbel table below. Embattled parapets are sometimes panelled, but oftener pierced for the discharge of arrows, &c. Perforated parapets are pierced in various devices—as circles, trefoils, quatrefoils, and other designs—so that the light is seen through. Panelled parapets are those ornamented by a series of panels, either oblong or square, and more or less enriched, but are not perforated. These are common in the Decorated and Perpendicular periods.

Parascenium, in a Greek theatre, the wall at the back of the stage. Parastas (Gr. παpα<rταj, standing before), an end pilaster, the Greek term for which the Latin antae is generally used. (See Antje.) Parclose, a word used for any enclosure to a chantry, tomb, &c.

Parement, a French term for the outside ashlar or casing of a rubble wall, which is tied together by through or bond stones. (See Perpent.) Γarqetting, a species of plastering decorated by impressing patterns on it when wet. These seem generally to have been made by sticking a number of pins in a board in certain lines or curves, and then pressing on the wet plaster in various directions, so as to form geometrical figures. Sometimes these devices are in relief, and in the time of Elizabeth represent figures, birds, foliages, &c.; fine examples are to be seen at Ipswich, Maidstone, Newark, &c. The word (which is Latinised gypsacio in the Promptorium) may be derived from the old French fiter, to cast, to throw, as outside plastering is often thrown against the laths to make it adhere better. (See Rough Cast.) Γarvise. See Paradise. Vatin, Patand, from the French patin, a wooden sole, clog, or patten. The sills in timber-framing are thus named in some old works, .though modern French authors call them sablières. Pedestal. An insulated stylobate is for the most part so called. The term is, moreover, generally applied to any parallelogramic or cylindrical mass, used as the stand or support of any single object, as a statue or vase.

Pediment, that part of a portico which rises above its entablature to inclose the end of the roof, whose triangular form it takes. The cornice of the entablature, or its corona, and part of the bedmould only, with the addition of a cymatium, bounds its inclined sides, and gives it an obtuse angle at the apex. In Pointed architecture, however, the angle of a pediment is for the most part acute.

Pendent, a name given to an elongated boss, either moulded or foliated, such as hang down from the intersection of groins, especially in fan tracery, or at the end of hammer beams. Sometimes long corbels, under the w ill pieces, have been so called. The name has also been given to the large masses depending from enriched ceilings, in the later works of the Pointed style.

Pendent Posts, a name given to those timbers which hang down the side of a wall from the plate, and which receive the hammer braces.

Γendentive, a name given to an arch which cuts off, as it were, the corners of a square building internally, so that the superstructure may become an octagon or a dome. In mediaeval architecture these arches, when under a spire iu the interior of a tower, are called Squinches (which see).

Peribolus (Gr. τtρl, around or about, and j8dλλω, to throw), an inclosure. Any inclosed space is a peribolus; but the term is applied more particularly to the sacred enclosure about a temple. The wall forming the enclosure is also called the peribolus.

Peripteros (Gr. τepι, around or about, and ιrτep6r, a wing), a temple or other structure with the columns of its end prostyles, or porticoes, returned on its sides as wings at the distance of one intercolumniation from the walls. Almost all the Doric temples of the Greeks were peripteral. The term is applied by Vitruvius to peristylar struιtures.

Peristyle (Gr. ∙πtpl, around or about, and <rτDλor, a column), a range of columns encircling an edifice, such as that which surrounds the cylindrical drum under the cupola of St Paul’s. The columns of a Greek peripteral temple form a peristyle also, the former being a circular, and the latter a quadrilateral peristyle.

Perpent Stones (Fr. parpaing), bond or “through stones,” the Sιaτivoι of the Greeks and Romans. Long stones going right through walls, and tying them together from face to face.

Perron, the grand flight of external steps entering the mansions of the mediaeval nob∏ity or high officials, and considered in itself as a mark of jurisdiction, as it is said that sentence was there pronounced against criminals, who were afterwards executed at the foot of the steps—as at the Giant Stairs at Venice. One of the finest later examples is the flight in the Horse-shoe Court at Fontainebleau.

Pew , s, a word of uncertain origin, signifying fixed seats in churches, composed of wood framing, mostly with ornamented ends. They seem to have come into general use early in the reign of Henry VI., and to have been rented and “well payed for"’ (see Bale’s Image of Both Churches) before the Reformation. Some bench ends are certainly of Decorated character, and some have been considered to be of the Early English period. They are sometimes of plain oak board, 2⅜ to 3 inches thick, chamfered, and with a necking and finial generally called a poppy head; others are plainly panelled with bold cappings; in others the panels are ornamented with tracery or with the linen pattern, and sometimes with running foliages. The divisions are filled in λvith thin chamfered boarding, sometimes reaching to the floor, and sometimes only from the capping to the seat.

Piers, the solid parts of a wall between windows and between voids generally. The term is also applied to masses of brickwork or masonry which are insulated to form supports to gates or to carry arches.

Pignon, a French term for the gable of a roof. (See Gable.) Pilaster (from Lat. pila, a pillar), an inferior sort of column o∙. pillar; a projection from or against a pier, with the form and decorations of antae, but frequently (always in Roman examples) having capitals, like those of columns, assigned them.

Pillar, oγPyller(Fγ. pilier, I tai. pilastro, colonna, Ger. Pfeiler), a word generally used to express the round or polygonal piers or those surrounded λvith clustered columns, which carry the main arches of a building. Saxon and early Norman pillars are generally stout cylindrical shafts built up of small stones. Sometimes, however, they are quite square, sometimes with other squares breaking out of them (this is more common on the Continent), sometimes with angular shafts, and sometimes they are plain octagons. In Romanesque Norman work the pillar is sometimes square, with two or more semicircular or half columns attached. In the Early English period the pillars become loftier and lighter, and in most important buildings are a series of clustered columns, frequently of marble, placed side by side, sometimes set at intervals round a circular centre, and sometimes almost touching each other. These shafts are often wholly detached from the central pillar, though grouped round it, in which case they are almost always of Purbeck or Eethersden marbles. In Decorated work the shafts on plan are very often placed round a square set anglewise, or a lozenge, the long way down the nave; the centre or core itself is often worked into hollows or other mouldings, to show between the shafts, and to form part of the composition. In this and the latter part of the previous style there is generally a fillet on the outer part of the shaft, forming what has been called a keel moulding. They are also often as it were tied together by bands formed of rings of stone and sometimes of metal. About this period, too,' these intermediate mouldings run up into and form part of the arch moulds, the impost not being continuous; or rather there is no impost, but the shafts have each their own separate cap. (See Impost.) This arrangement became much more frequent in the Perpendicular period; in fact it was almost universal, the commonest section being a lozenge set with the long side from the nave to the aisle, and not towards the other arclies, as in the Decorated period, with four shafts at the angles, between which were shallow mouldings, one of which in general was a wide hollow, sometimes with wave moulds. As the pillar altogether by the arrangement was wider than the wall above, the shafts facing the nave ran up to the roof, and served in place of the vaulting shafts of the previous periods. The small pillars at the jambs of doors and windows, and in arcades, and also those slender columns attached to pillars, or standing detached, are generally called Shafts (which see.)

Pillowed. A swollen or rounded frieze is said to be pillowed or pulvinated.

Pinnacle (Fr. pinacle, finoison, ltal. pinacolo,— literally a little feather—Ger. Pinnakyl), an ornament originally forming the cap or eroyn of a buttress or small turret, but afterwards used on parapets at the corners of towers and in many other situations. Some writers have stated there were no Norman pinnacles; but conical caps to circular buttresses, with a sort of finial, are not uneommon in France at very early periods. Viollet-le-Duc gives examples from St Germer and St Remi, and there is one of similar form at the west front of Rochester Cathedral. In the later Norman period, two examples have been cited, one from Bredon in Worcestershire, and the other from Cleeve in Gloucestershire. In these the buttresses run up, forming a sort of square turret, and crowned with a pyramidal cap, very much like those of the next period, the Early English. In this and the following styles the pinnacle seems generally to have had its appropriate uses. It was a weight to counteract the thrust of the groining of roofs, particularly where there were flying buttresses; it stopped the tendency to slip of the stone copings of the gables, and counterpoised the thrust of spires; it formed the piers to steady the elegant perforated parapets of later periods; and in France especially served to counterbalance the weight of overhanging corbel tables, huge gargoyles, &c. In the Early English period the smaller buttresses frequently finished with Gablets (which see), and the more important with pinnacles supported with clustered shafts. At this period the pinnacles were often supported on these shafts alone, and were open below; and in larger work in this and the subsequent periods they frequently form niches and contain statues. About the Transition and during the Decorated period, the different faces above the angle shafts often finish with gablets. Those of the last-named period are much richer, and are generally decorated with crockets and finials, and sometimes with ball-flowers. Very fine groups are found at Beverley Minster and at the rise of the spire of St Mary’s, Oxford. Perpendicular pinnacles differ but little from Decorated, except that the crockets and finials are of later character. They are also often set angle-ways, particularly on parapets, and the shafts are panelled. In France, pinna ’ cles, like spires, seem to have been in use earlier than in England. There are small pinnacles at the angles of the tower in the Abbey of Saintes. At Roullet there are pinnacles in a similar position, each composed of four small shafts, with caps and bases surmounted with small pyramidal spires. In all these examples the towers have semicircular headed windows..

Piscinae, one or more hollows or cuvettes near the altars, with drains to take away the water used in the ablutions at the mass. They seem at first tö have been mere cups or small basins, supported on perforated stems, placed close to the wall, and afterwards to have been recessed therein and covered with niche heads, which often contained shelves to serve as aumbries. They are rare in England till the 13th century, after which there is scarcely an altar without one. They frequently take the form of a doublé niche, with a shaft between the arched heads, which are often filled with elaborate tracing.

Pitch of a Roof, the proportion of the height of a roof to its span. (See Gable.) Plan, a horizontal geometrical section of the walls of a building; or indications, on a horizontal plane, of the relative positions of the walls and partitions, with the various openings, such as windows and doors, recesses and projections, chimneys and chimney-breasts, columns, pilasters, &c. This term is often incorrectly used in the sense of Design, q.v. Pianceer is sometimes used in the same sense as soffit, but i⅛ more correctly applied to the soffit of the corona in a cornice.

Plastering (Fr. plâtre, Ital. intonaco, Ger. Butzarbeit), a mixture of lime, hair, and sand, to cover lath-work between timbers or rough walling, used from the earliest times, and very common in Roman work. In the Middle Ages, too, it was used not only in private but in public constructions. On the inside face of old rubble walls it was not only used for purposes of cleanliness, rough work holding dirt and dust, but as a ground for distemper painting (tempera, or, as it is often improperly called, fresco),.a, species of ornament often used in the Middle Ages. At St Alban’s Abbey the Norman work is plastered and covered with lines imitating the joints of stone. The same thing is found in the Perpendicular work at Ash in Kent. On the outside of the like walls, and often of wood-framing, it was used as rough cast; when ornamented in patterns outside, it is called pargetting. Γhnth (Gr. ιrλirθοτ, a square tile). In the Roman orders the lowest member of the base of a column is square and vertically faced; this is called a plinth.

Podium, strictly something upon or against which the foot may be placed; and in this sense, probably, it was applied to the wall which bounds the arena of an amphitheatre, and is thereby at the feet of the most advanced of the spectators.

Polytriglypπ, an intercolumniation in the Doric order of more than two triglyphs. (See Monotriglyph, Ditriglyph, and Triglyph.) Pommel, a name given to any round knob, as a boss, a finial, &c.

Poppy Heads, probably from the French poupée, the finials or other ornaments which terminate the tops of bench ends, either to pews 0 J ’ ≡ talls ∙ Th e y are sometimes small human heads, sometimes richly-carved images,· knots of foliages, or fi liais, and sometimes fleurs-de-lis simply cut out of the thickness of the bench end and chamfered.

Porch (Gr. viρθgξ, Lat. porticus, Fr. porche, I tai. portico, Ger. Vorhalle), a covered erection forming a shelter to the entrance door of a large building. The earliest known are the long arcaded porches in front of the early Christian basilicas, called Narthex (which see). In later times they assume two forms—one the projecting erection covering the entrance at the west front of cathedrals, and divided into three or more doorways, &c., and the other a kind of covered chambers open at the ends, and having small windows at the sides as a protection from rain. These generally stand on the north or south sides of churches, though in Kent there are a few instances (as Snodland and Boxley) where they are at the west ends. Porches are of very early use. Those of the Norman period generally have but little projection, and are sometimes so flat as to be but little more than outer dressings and hood-moulds to the inner door. They are, however, often very richly ornamented, and, as at Southwell in England and Kelso in Scotland, have rooms over, which have been erroneously called parvises. (See Paradise.) Early English porches are much longer, or project much further from the faces of the churches to which they are attached, and in larger and more important buildings have very frequently rooms above; the gables are generally bold and high pitched. In larger buildings also, as at Wells, St Albans, &c., the interiors are very rich in design, quite as much so, in fact, as thé exteriors. Decorated and Perpendicular porches partake of much the same characteristics, the pitch of roof, mouldings, copings, battlements, &c., being of course influenced by the taste of the time. As a general rule, however, the later porches had rooms over them more frequently than in earlier times; these are often approached from the lower story by small winding stairs, and sometimes have fire-places, and are supposed to have served as vestries; and sometimes thero are the remains of a piscina, and relics of altar3. as if they had been used as chantry chapels. It is probable there were wooden porches at all periods, particularly in ‘those places where stone was scarce; but, as may be expected from their exposed position, the earliest have decayed. At Cobham, Surrey, there was one that had ranges of semicircular arches in oak at the sides, of strong Norman character, which is now unfortunately destroyed. It is said there are several in which portions of Early English work still are traceable, as at Chevington, in Suffolk. In the Decorated and later periods, however, wooden porches are very common, some plain, and others with richly carved tracery and barge boards; these frequently stand on a sort of half story of stone work or bahut. The entrance porches at the west end of our cathedrals are generally called portals, and where they assume the character of separate buildings, are designated galilees. Both these are'more common on the Continent than in England. Many of the French cathedrals have the doors βo deeply recessed as to be almost like open porches. These are called portails or portes abrités. Many, however, have detached porches in front of the portals themselves. The noblest example of an open projecting western porch in England, and probably in the world, is at Peterborough, of the Early English period, attached to the Early Norman nave.

Portal (Fr. portail, Ital. portone), a name given to the deeply recessed and richly decorated entrance doors to the cathedrals on the Continent.

Portcullis (Μ. Lat. cataracta, Fr. herse, coulisse, Ital. saracinesca, Ger. Fallgatter), a strong-framed grating of oak, the lower points shod with iron, and sometimes entirely made of metal, hung so as to slide up and down in grooves with counterbalances, and intended to protect the gateways of castles, &c. The defenders having opened the gates and lowered the portcullis, could send arrows and darts through the gratings, and yet the assailants could not enter. One of these constructions was in existence until modern times in a gateway at York; they are said not to be older than the 12th century, and were probably (as their Italian name imports) invented as a defence against the sudden attacks of the Saracens on the coasts of that country.

Portico (an Italicism of the Lat. porticus), an open space before the door or other entrance to any building fronted with columns. A portico is distinguished as prostyle or in antis according as it projects from or recedes within the building, and is further designated by the number of columns its front may consist of. (See Distyle, Tetrastyle, Hexastyle, Octastyle, &c.) Porticus. In an amphiprostylar or peripteral temple this terra is used to distinguish the portico at the entrance from that behind, which is called the posticum.

Post and Pane Work, a name given to the carpentry framing of old wooden houses, panne in old French signifying any horizontal piece of timber, as a head, sill, or purlin, though its use now is confined to the latter, sills and plates at present being called sablières . Where timber was abundant, and stone scarce and dear to work, timber-framed houses naturally abounded. The posts or uprights seem in early times to have been con-βtructed of small oak trees, 6 or 7 inches square, roughly trimmed by the axe; the girders, &c., are larger, but seldom seem to have been sawn. The framing of the lower story generally stands on a sort of plinth or bahut of stone or brick, sometimes as high as the window sills, and the other fronts are each framed separately; and as the joists of .each story project over those of that below, each story also projects,· till, in narrow streets, it is said the houses almost touched each other at the top. To strengthen the framing, it was customary to tie the angles together with circular braces cut out of the croδked boughs of trees, and to fill in under and sometimes over the window openings with cross struts, sometimes like the St Andrew’s cross, and sometimes in circles and various designs. The main posts also were strengthened inside and out with a sort of projecting corbels, called in French liens or décharges, and by us spervers, which helped to carry the projecting plates above. In the better sort of work these timbers are chamfered and sometimes carved, and the gables have rich barge boards; the roofs invariably have great projections to throw off the wet, and the jutting of the stories, one over the other, no doubt was intended for the same purpose. Old post and pane work is put together with mortices and tenons pinned with pins or trunnels of hard wood; very often there is not a nail in the whole construction. The intermediate upright posts or quarters were called prick posts. All these houses are plastered, rough cast, or pargetted between the timbers, sometimes in handsome designs; and as the old oak gets black with age, or as the timbers are often nibbed over with oil, and the plaster whited, they are called in England black and white houses. (See Pargetting and Plastering.) Several churches in Essex have post and pane work.

Postern, a small gateway in the enceinte of a castle, abbey, &c., from which to issue and enter unobserved. They are often called Sally Ports. Posticum (Lat.) A portico behind a temple. (See Porticus and Portico.) Preceptory, a small establishment of the Knights Templars, managed by a preceptor, a subordinate officer to a master, in the same way as a priory was by a prior, and not an abbot.

Presbytery (Lat. presbyterium, Ital. presbiterio, Fr. presbytère), a word applied to various parts of large churches in a very ambiguous way. Some consider if to be the choir itself; others, what is now· named the sacrarium. Traditionally, however, it seems to be applied to the vacant space between the back of the high altar and the entrance to the lady chapel, as at Lincoln and Chichester; in other words, the Back or Retro Choir. Prick Posts, an old name given ' sometimes to the queen posts of a roof, and sometimes to the filling in quarters in framing. (See Post and Pane.) Priory, a monastic establishment, generally in connection with an abbey, and presided over by a prior, who was a subordinate to the abbot, and held much the same relation to that dignitary as a dean does to a bishop. (See Abbey. ) Procession Path (Lat. ambitus templi), the route taken by processions on solemn days in large churches—up the north aisle, round behind the high altar, down the south aisle, and then up the centre of the nave.

Γronaos (Gr. ιrpi, before, and vais, a temple), the inner portico of a temple, or the space between the porticus, or outer portico, and the door opening into the cella. This is a conventional use of the term; for, strictly, the prona03 is the portico itself.

Propylaeum (Gr. ∙κρi, before, and πύλη, a portal), any structure or structures forming the entrance to the peribolus of a temple; also the space lying between the entrance and the temple. In common usage this term in the plural (propylaea) is almost restricted to the entrance to the Acropolis of Athens, which is known by it as a name. The form propylon occurs in the Latin of Vitruvius.

Proscenium, the stage in ancient theatres.

Prostyle (Gr. πpi, before, and στυλοs, a column), a portico in which the columns project from the building to which it is attached.

Pseudo-Dipteral (Gr. ψeυSi ∣ s, false, and Dipteros, g.v.), false double-winged. When the inner row of columns of a dipteral arrangement is omitted and the space from the wall of the building to the columns is preserved, it is pseudo-dipteral. The portico of University College, London, is pseudo-dipterally arranged, the returning columns on the ends or sides not being carried through behind those in front.

Pseudo-Peripteral (Gr. ψ,υδή,, false, and Peripteros, g.v.), false-winged. A temple having the columns on its flanks attached to the walls, instead of being arranged as in a peripteros, is said to be a pseudo-peripteral.

Pulpit (Fr. chaire de T église, Ital. pulpito, Ger. Kanzel), a raised platform with enclosed front, whence sermons, homilies, &c., were delivered. Pulpits were probably derived in their modern form from the amboncs in the early Christian church. There are many old pulpits of stone, though the majority are of wood. Those in churches are generally hexagonal or octagonal; and some stand on stone bases, and others on slender wooden stems, like columns. The designs vary according to the periods in which they rvero erected, having panelling, tracery, cuspings, crockets, and other ornaments then in use. Some are extremely rich, and ornamented with colour and gilding. A few also have fine canopies or sounding-boards. Their usual place is in the nave, mostly on the north side, against the second pier from the chancel arch. -Pulpits for addressing the people in the open air were common in the mediaeval period, and stood near a road or cross. Thus there was one at Spital Fields, and one at St Paul’s, London. External pulpits still remain at Magdalene College, Oxford, and at Shrewsbury. Pulpits, or rather places for . reading during the meals of the monks, gre found in the refectories at Chester, Beaulieu, Shrewsbury, &c., in England; and at St Martin des Champs, St Germain des Prés, &c., in France; also in the cloisters at St Die and St Lo. Shortly after the Reformation the canons ordered pulpits to be erected in all churches where there were none before. It is supposed that to this circumstance we owe so many of the time of Elizabeth and James. Many of them are veιy beautifully and elaborately carved, and are evidently of Flemish workmanship. The pulpits in the Mahometan mosques are quite different in form, being usually canopied and approached, by a straight flight of steps. These have a doorway at the foot, with an architrave, and boldly moulded head; the whole of the work to this and to the stairs, parapet, and pulpit itself being of wood, richly inlaid, and often in part gorgeously painted and gilt.

Pulvinated (Lat. pulvinus, a cushion or bolster), a term used to express the swelling or bolstering of the frieze which is found in some of the inferior works of the Roman school, and is common in Italian practice. It is used indifferently with pillowed. Pycnostyle (Gr. τrυκvis, dense, and στ5λos, a column), having columns thickly set. The space or intercolumniation implied by this teιm is one diameter and a half. (See Eustyle.) Quarrel, Quarry (from the French carri, square), any square- . shaped opening; applied in the Beauchamp Roll to the quatrefoils in Perpendicular windows, sometimes to squares of paving, but most commonly to the lozenge-shaped pieces of glass in lead casements.

Quarters, the main upright posts in framing, sometimes called studs; the filling in quarters were formerly named prick posts.

Quatrefoil, any small panel or perforation in the form of a four-Jeaved flower. They are sometimes used alone, sometimes in ’circles, and over the aisle windows, but more frequently they are in square panels. They are generally cusped, and the cusps are often feathered. (See Cinquefoil.) Quoins, large squared stones at the angles of buildings, buttresses, &c., generally used to stop the rubble or rough stone work, and that the angles might be true and stronger. Saxon quoin stonee are said to have been composed of one long and one short stone alternately. Early quoins are generally roughly axed; in later times they had a draft tooled by the chisel round the outside edges, and later still were worked fine from the saw.

Rag-Stone, a name given by some writers to work done with stones which are quanied in thin pieces, such as the Horsham sandstone, Yorkshire stone, the slate stones, &c.; but this is more properly flag or slab work. By rag-stone, near London, is meant an excellent material from the neighbourhood of Maidstone. It is a very hard limestone of bluish-grey colour, and peculiarly suited for mediaeval work. It is often laid as uncoursed work, or random work, sometimes as random coursed work, and sometimes as regular ashlar. The first method, however, is the more picturesque.

Random Work, a term used by the rag-stone masons for stones fitted together at random without any attempt at laying them in courses. Random Coursed Work is a like term applied to work coursed in horizontal beds, but the stones are -of any height, and fitted to one another.

Rear Vault, a name sometimes applied to the inner hood-mould of a window or doorway, but no ancient authority for the use of such a term has been cited.

Refectory, the hall of a monastery, convent, &c., where the religious took their chief meals together. It much resembled the great halls of mansions, castles, &c., except that there frequently was a sort of ambo, approached by steps, from which to read tho legenda sanctorum, &c., during meals. (See Pulpit.) Regula (Lat.), a rule or square, the short fillet or rectangular block, under the tenia, on the architrave of the Doric entablature.

Reredos, Dorsal, or Dössel (Fr., retable), the screen or other ornamental work at the back of an altar. In some large cathedrals, as Winchester, Durham, St Albans, &c., this is amass of splendid tabernacle work, reaching nearly to the groining. In smaller churches there are sometimes ranges of arcades or panellings behind the altars; but, in general, the walls at the back and sides of them were of plain masonιy, and adorned with hangings or paraments. In large churches abroad, the high altar usually stands under a sort of canopy or ciborium, and the sacrarium is hung round at the back and sides with curtains on movable rods. (See° Ciborium. ) In private houses the iron plates behind the fire, where there are andirons, are sometimes called reredoses. Respond, the half pier or pillar at the end of a range of piers and arches, nr other arcades; they are generally exactly half the other piers, with a short piece of wall finishing at right angles to the end or cross wall.

Ressaunt, a sort of flat ogee. A ressaunt lorymer (or larmier) is supposed to be an ogee with a drip.

Retro Choir. (See Back Choir, Presbytery.) Rib (Fr. nerf d'arête, nervure, Ital. costola, Ger. Rippe). (See Groin Rib, and also Groined Vaulting.) The earliest groining had no ribs. In early Norman times plain flat arches crossed each other, forming Ogive Ribs. These by. degrees became narrower, had greater projection, and were chamfered. In later Norman work the ribs were often formed of a large roll placed upon the flat band, and then of two rolls side by side, with a smaller roll or a fillet between them, much like the lower member. Sometimes they are enriched with zigzags and other Norman decorations, and about this time bosses became of very general use. (See Boss.) As styles progressed, the mouldings were more undercut, richer and more elaborate, and had the dog-tooth or ball-flower or other characteristic ornament in the hollows. In all instances the mouldings are of similar contours to those of arches, &c., of the respective periods. (See Mouldings.) In Perpendicular work the ribs are broader aud shallower, and almost always have two great hollows of elliptic shape, one on each side. In those churches of the Early English and Decorated periods where there is a groining of wooden ribs filled in between the spandrils with their narrow oak boards, these ribs resemble those of stone, but are slighter, and the mouldings not so bold. (See Ceiling.) Later, wooden roofs are often tormcd into cants or polygonal barrel vaults, and in these the ribs are generally a cluster of rounds, and form square or stellar panels, with carved bosses or shields at the intersections; Ridge (Fr. faite, faUage, Ital., comignolo, Ger. Rucken}, a flat piece of board running from the apex of principal to principal, to which the heads of the common rafters are nailed; also the lead or tile covering to the same. (For ornamental ridges, see Cresting.) Roll Moulding or Scroll Moulding, a moulding so called because it resembles the section of half a scroll or flexible book rolled up so that the edge projects over the other part. (See Label.) Rood, a name applied to a crucifix, particularly to those which were placed in the rood-loft or chancel screens. These generally had not only the image of the crucified Saviour, but also those of St John and the Virgin Mary, standing one on each side. Sometimes other saints and angels are by them, and the top of the screen is set with candlesticks or other decorations.

Rood-Loft, Rood-Screen, Rood-Beam, Jube Gallery, &c., the arrangement to carry the crucifix or rood, and to screen off the chancel from the rest of the church during the breviary services, and as a place whence to read certain parts of those services. ^See Jube.) Sometimes the crucifix is carried simply on a strong transverse beam, with or without a low screen, with folding-doors below but forming no part of such support. The general construction of wooden screens is close panelling beneath, about 3 feet to 3 feet 6 inches high, on which stands screen work composed of slender turned balusters or regular wooden mullions, supporting tracery more or less rich with cornices, crestings, &c., and often painted in brilliant colours, and gilded. These not only enclose the chancels, but also chapels, chantries, and sometimes even tombs. In mansions, and some private houses, the great halls were screened off by a low passage at the end opposite to the dais, over which was a gallery for the use of minstrels or spectators. These screens were sometimes close and sometimes glazed. There are many of these in England, generally more or less mutilated: one of the most perfect galleries is that at Chariton-on-0 tmoor, in Oxfordshire.

Rood-Stair, a small winding stair or vice leading to the gallery. (See Rood-Loft.) In England they generally run up in a small turret in the wall at the west end of the chancel. This also often leads out on the roof. On the Continent these stairs often lead out of the interior of churches, and are enclosed with exquisitely perforated tracery, as at Rouen, Strasbourg, &c.

Rood-Tower, a name given by some writers to the central tower, or that over the intersection of the nave and chancel with the transepts.

Rose Window (Fr. rosace), a name given to a circular window with radiating tracery, called also wheel window. Rough Cast, a sort of external plastering in which small sharp stones are mixed, and which, when wet, is forcibly thrown or cast from a trowel against the wall, to which it forms a coating of pleasing appearance. Some of the rough cast at St Albans is supposed to be coeval with the building itself. This material was also much used in timber houses, and when well executed the work is sound and durable.

Roving, anything following the line of a curve; thus the bowtell or torus going up the side of a bench end and round a finial is called a roving bowtell. (See Bowtell. ) Rubble Work, a name applied to several species of masonry. One kind, where the stones are loosely thrown together in a wall between boards, and grouted with mortar almost like concrete, is called in Italian muraglia di getto, and in French blocage. Work executed with large stones put together without any attempt at courses, or random work, is also called nibble.

Sacristy (Lat. sacrarium, Fr. sacristie, Ital. sagrestia), a small chamber attached to churches, where the chalices, vestments, books, &c., were kept by the officer called the sacristan. In the early Christian basilicas there were two semicircular recesses or apsides, one on each side of the altar. One of these served as a sacristy, and the other as the bibliotheca or library. Some have supposed the sacristy to have been the place where the vestments were kept, and the vestry that-where the priests put them on; but we find from Durandus that the sacrarium was used for both these purposes. Sometimes the place where the altar stands enclosed by the rails has been called sacrarium. Saddle Bars (Fr. traverses), narrow horizontal iron bars passing from mullion to mullion, and often through the whole window from side to side, to steady the stone work, and to form stays, to which the lead work is secured. When the bays of the windows are wide, the lead lights are further strengthened by upright bars, passing through eyes forged on the saddle bars, and called stanchions (see Stanchion and Armature). When saddle bars pass right through the mullions in one piece, and are secured to the jambs, they have sometimes been called stay bars. Sanctus Bell-Cot or Turret, a turret or enclosure to hold the small bell sounded at various ’parts of the service, particularly where the words “Sanctus,” &c., are read. This differs but little from the common bell-cot, except that it is generally on the top of the arch dividing the nave from the chancel. At Cleeve, however, the bell seems to have been placed in a cot outside the wall. Sanctus bells have also been placed over the gables of porches. On the Continent they run up into a sort of small slender spire, called flèche in France, and guglio in Italy. (See Bell-Cot.) Scappling, reducing a stone to a rough square by the axe or hammer; in Kent, the rag-stone masons call this knobbling.

Scotia (Gr. σκοria, shadow or darkness), a concave moulding most commonly used in bases, which projects a deep shadow on itself, and is thereby a most effective moulding under the eye, as in a base. It is like a reversed ovolo, or rather what the mould of an ovolo would present.

Screen, any construction subdividing orc part of a building from another—as a choir, chantry, chapel, &c. The earliest screens are the low marble podia, shutting off the chorus cantantium in the Roman basilicas, and the perforated cancelli enclosing the bema, altar, and seats of the bishops and presbyters. The chief screens in a church are those which enclose the choir or the place where the breviary services are recited. This is done on the Continent, not only by doors and screen work, but also, when these are of open work, by curtains, the laity having no part in these services. In England screens were of two kinds, one of open wood work, generally called rood-screens or jubes (which see), and which the French call grilles, clôtures du choeur ; the other, massive enclosures of stone work enriched with niches, tabernacles, canopies, pinnacles, statues, crestings, &c., as at Canterbury, York, Gloucester, and many other places both in England and abroad.

Scroll, synonymous with Volute, q.v., but commonly applied to ordinary purposes, whilst volute is generally restricted to the scrolls of the Ionic capital.

Scutcheon. (See Escutcheon.) Section, a drawing showing the internal heights of the various parts of a building. It supposes the building to be cut through entirely, so as to exhibit the walls, the heights of the internal doors and other apertures, the heights of the stories, thicknesses· of the floors, &c. It is one of the species of drawings necessary to the exhibition of a Design, q.v. Sedilia, seats used by the celebrants during the pauses in the mass. They are generally three in number, for the priest, deacon, and sub-deacon, and are in England almost always a species of niches cut into the south walls of churches, separated by shafts or by speciee of mullions, and crowned with canopies, pinnacles, and other enrichments more or less elaborate. The piscina and aumbry sometimes are attached to them. Abroad, the sedilia are often movable seats: a single stone seat has rarely been found as at Lenham; but some have considered this to be a confessional chair, and others a frith-stole, or place to which criminals fled for sanctuary.

Sepulchre, Easter, a recess in the wall of a church, generally in the north side, often ornamented with a canopy, finials, &c., for the crucifix to stand in during certain rites from Good Friday to Easter Day.

Set-off, the horizontal line shown where a wall is reduced in thickness, and consequently the part of the thicker portion appears projecting before the thinner. In plinths this is generally simply chamfered. In other parts of work the set-off is generally concealed by a projecting string. Where, as in parapets, the upper part projects before the lower, the break is generally hid by a corbel table. The portions of buttress caps which recede one behind another are also called sets-off.

Severy (probably connected with the English word sever), any main compartment or division of a building. (See Bay.) The word has been supposed to be a corruption of Ciborium, asGervase of. Canterbury uses the word in this sense; but he probably alludes to the vaulted form of the upper part of the groining of each severy. (See Ciborium.) Shaft (Fr. colonnette, Ital. colonnetto, Ger. Schaft), in classical architecture that part of a column between the necking and the apophyge at top of the base. In later times the term is applied to slender columns either standing alone or in connection with pillars, buttresses, jambs, vaulting, &c.

Sιι ed Roof or Lean-to, a roof with only one set of rafters, falling from a higher to a lower wall, like an aisle roof.

Shingle (Med. Lat. scandula, scindula, Fr. bardeau, essente, Ital. scandola, Ger. Schindel), a sort of wooden tile, generally of oak, used in places where timber is plentiful, for covering roofs, spires, &c. In England they are generally plain, but on the Continent the ends are sometimes rounded, pointed, or cut into ornamental form.

Shrine (Med. Lat. feretorium, scrinium, Fr. châsse, êcrin, Ital. 'scrigno), a sort of ark or chest to hold relics. Sometimes they are merely small boxes, generally with raised tops like roofs; sometimes actual models of churches; sometimes large constructions like that at St Albans, that of Edward the Confessor at Westminster, of St Geneviève at Faris, &c. Many are covered with jewels in the richest way; that of San Carlo Borromeo, at Milan, is of beaten silver.

Sill or Sole (Lat. solum, a threshold, whence the Fr. seuil), the horizontal base of a door or window-frame. A technical distinction is made between the inner or wooden base of the windowframe and the stone base on which it rests,—the latter being called the sill of the window, and the former that of its frame. This term is not restricted to the bases of apertures; the lower horizontal part of a framed partition is called its sill. The term is sometimes incorrectly written cill.

Sleeper (Fr. dormant), a piece of timber laid on low cross walls as a plate to receive ground joists.

Slype, a name for the covered passage usually found in monasteries between the end of the transept and the chapter-house.

Soffit (Ital. soffitta, a ceiling), the inverted horizontal face of anything, as, for example, of ay entablature resting on and lying open between the columns or the underface of an arch where its thickness is seen.

Solar, Sollf.r (Med. Lat. solarium, Fr. galetas, ltal. solaio), a room in some high situation, a loft or garret, also an elevated chamber in a church from which to watch the lamps burning before the altars.

Sole. See Sill. Sommer (Fr. sommier), a girder or main-beam of a floor; if supported on two story posts and open below, it is called a brace-summer. Sound Board (Fr. abat-voix), the covering of a pulpit to deflect the sound into a church. (See Tester.) Span, the width or opening of an arch between the walls, &c., from which it springs, also the width of a roof between the plates.

Span Roof, a roof having two sides inclining to a centre or ridge, in contradistinction to at Sued Roof (which see).

Spandril or Spandrel, the space between any arch or curved brace and the level label, beams, &c., over the same. The spandrils over door-ways in Perpendicular works are generally richly decorated. At Magdalene College, Oxford, is one which is perforated, and has a most beautiful effect. The spandril of doors is sometimes ornamented in the Decorated period, but seldom forms part of the composition of the doorway itself, being generally over the label.

Spire (Fr. aiguille, flèche, Ital. guglio, Ger. Spitze), a sharply-pointed pyramid or large pinnacle, generally octagonal in England, and forming a finish to the tops of towers. In this country, in Norman times, the only attempt at anything like a spire consisted in the termination of some turrets, as those at Rochester, at St Peter’s, Oxford, &c.; but these are rather 1’ innaci.es (which see) than spires. Later Norman spires are supposed to have been merely low pyramidal roofs. In the Early English period they appear at first to have been low, as the remains of the one at Christ Church, Oxford, show; but afterwards they become much more lofty and simply pointed. The probability is that the sight of the high •domes and aspiring minarets of the Holy Land had suggested the erection of these lofty monuments to the Crusaders. At this porio<l the spires generally covered the whole tower top, ar.d had hmm·hings where the square broke into the octagon. In the Decorated period the spires became still slenderer and sharper; the broach spire gradually gave place to those rising at once in octagon form from the flat of the towers surrounded with parapets, often richly perforated, and with pinnacles at the angles. The spires themselves often are decorated with ball-flowers and crockets, and sometimes have broad horizontal bands of tracery at intervals. In both these styles spire lights or lucarnes are common. Perpendicular spires partake also of most of these characteristics, except that they scarcely furnish an example of a broach spire. It is remarkable with how little material some of the loftiest spires have been erected, that at Salisbury being barely 9 inches thick for a great part of its height. On the Continent the spire seems to have been used earlier than with us. That at Brantôme is a mere low pyramid. At Saintes it is a low carved cone, with something of domical character. AtEoullet it is a sharp circular cone, with four open pinnacles at the base. At Isomes it is octagonal, and as sharp as many of our Early English spires. In all these examples the windows below are semicircular. Timber spires are very common in England. Some are covered with lead in flat sheets, others with the same metal in narrow stripes laid diagonally. Very many are covered with shingles. Abroad there are some elegant examples of spires of open timber work covered with lead.

Spire-Lights. See Lucarne. Springer, the stone from which an arch springs,; in some cases this is a capital, or impost, in other cases the mouldings continue down the pier. The lowest stone of the gable is sometimes called a springer.

Spur, Sperver. The word spur is often applied to the carved λvooden brackets or hanses which support the penthouse of a door, the level part being called a sperver. Squinches, small arcliee or corbelled sets-off running diagonally, and, as it were, cutting off the corners of the interior of towers, to bring them from the square to the octagon, &c., to carry a spire. (See Pendentive.) Squint, an oblique opening, often a mere narrow, square-headed slit, piercing the walls of the chancel arch, and evidently intended to afford a view of the high altar. F quints are often without any ornament, but are sometimes arched and occasionally enriched with open tracery. Sometimes they look from the rooms over porches, sometimes from side chapels, but in every instance are so situated that the altar may be seen. The most probable use of them was to let the acolyte appointed to ring the sanctus bell see the performance of mass, and enable him to sound the bell at the proper time.

Stage, an elevated floor, particularly the various stories of a bell-tower, &c. The term is also applied to the plain parts of buttresses between cap and cap where they set back, or where they are divided by horizontal strings and panelling. It is used, too, by William of Worcester to describe the compartments of windows between transom and transom, in contradistinction to the word bay, which signifies a division between mullion and mullion. (See Story.) Stall, a fixed seat in the choir for the use of the clergy. In early Christian times the throwus, cathedra, or seat of the bishop, was in the centre of the apsis or bema behind the altar, and against the wall; those of the presbyters also were against the wall, branching off from side to side round the semicircle. In later times the stalls occupied both sides of the choir, return seats being placed at the ends for the prior, dean, precentor, chancellor, or other officers. The seats are very peculiar. (See Miserere.) In general, in cathedrals, each stall is surmounted by tabernacle work, and rich canopies, generally of oak, of which those at Winchester, Henry VII.’s Chapel, and Manchester, may be quoted as line instances. (See Tabernacle, Canopy.) The word is sometimes used to express any chief seat, as in a dining hall.

Stanchion, a word derived from the French étançon, a wooden post, and applied to the upright iron bars which pass through the eyes of the saddle bars or horizontal irons to steady the lead lights. The French call the latter traverses, the stanchions monians, and the whole arrangement armature. Stanchions frequently finish with ornamental heads forged out of the iron.

Stay Bars, saddle bars passing through the mullions in one length across the whole window, and secured to the jambs on each side. (See Saddle Bar.) Steeple (Fr. clocher, Ital. campanile, Ger. Glockenthurm), a general name for the whole arrangement of Tower, Belfry, Spire, &c. (See under those headings.)

Stele (Gr. στήλη, Lat. cippus, a small monument), the ornament on the ridge of a Greek temple, answering to the antefixae on the summit of the flank entablatures.

Stereobate (Gr. στepeJs, solid, and βiσιs, a base), a basement, distinguished from the nearly equivalent term Stylobate, q.v., by the absence of columns.

Stilted, anything raised above its usual level.

Stoa (Gr. στοά, a portico), the Greek equivalent for the Latin Γorticus, and the Italo-English Portico, q.v Story (Lat. tabulatum, Fr. étage, Ital. piano, G er. Geschoss'). When a house has rooms one over the other, each set of chambers divided horizontally by the floors is called a story. They are thus named in the different languages :·— [table]

Stoup (Fr. bénitier), a vessel placed close to the entrance of a church to contain the holy water. They are generally small bowls fixed against a column, or on a stem.. In the north of'Italy they are larger, and often carried on the back of a lion, and sometimes they are elegant tazze of exquisite workmanship.

String or String-Course, a narrow, vertically-faced, and slightly projecting course in an elevation. If window-sills are made continuous, they form a string-course; but if this course is made thicker or deep,er than ordinary window-sills, or covers a set-off in the wall, it becomes a blocking-course.

String-Courses, horizontal mouldings running under windows, separating the walls from the plain part of the parapets, dividing towers into stories or stages, &c. Their section is mueh the same as the labels of the respective periods; in fact, these last, after passing round the windows, frequently run on horizontally and form strings. Like labels they are often decorated with foliages i ball-flowers, &c.

Strip Pilaster, a very narrow pilaster.

Studs, an old name for upright quarters or posts; thus door-studs are door-posts or jambs.

Style (Gr. σ∙τυλos, a column). The term style in architecture has obtained a conventional meaning beyond its simpler one, which applies only to columns and columnar arrangements. It is now used to signify the differences in the mouldings, general outlines, ornaments, and other details which exist between the works of various nations, and also those differences which are found to exist between the works of any one nation at different times.

Stylobate (Gr. σrυKοs, a column, and βd<rιs, a base), a basement to columns. (See Stereobate.) Stylobate is synonymous with pedestal, but is applied to a continued and unbroken substructure or basement to columns, while the latter term is confined to insulated supports.

Surbase (Lat. super, whence the Fr. mir, above or upon, and Base, q.υ.), an upper base is the term applied to what, in the fittings of a room, is familiarly called the chair-rail. It is also used to distinguish the cornice of a pedestal or stereobate, and is separated from the base by the dado or die.

Systyle (Gr. σύν, together with, and στύλο s, a column), having columns rather thickly set,—an intercolumniation to which two diameters are assigned. (See Eustyle.) Tabernacle, a species of m’che or recess in which an image may be placed. In Norman work there are but few remains, and these generally over doorways. They are shallow and comparatively plain, and the figures are often only in low relief, and not detached statues. In Early English work they are deeper, and instead of simple arches there is often a canopy over the figure, which was placed on a small low pedestal. Later in the style the heads of the tabernacles became cusped,either as trefoils or cinquefoils, and they are often placed in pairs, side by side, or in ranges, as at Wells Cathedral. Decorated tabernacles are still deeper and more ornamented, the heads are sometimes richly cusped and surmounted with crocketed gables, as at York, or with projecting canopies, very much like the arcade at Lichfield. In this case the under side of the canopy is carved to imitate groin ribs, and the figures stand either on high pedestals, or on corbels. Perpendicular tabernacles possess much the same features, but the work is generally more elaborate; the figures generally stand on rich pedestals, but sometimes on corbels, and the canopies generally project, sometimes in a triangular form, and sometimes, with a sort of domical top. (See Corbel, Canopy, Niche, &c.) The word tabernacle is also often used for the receptacle for relics, which was often made in the form of a small house or church. (See Shrine.) Tabernacle-Work. The rich ornamental tracery forming the canopy, &c., to a tabernacle is’ called tabernacle-work; it is common in the stalls and screens of cathedrals, and in them is generally open or pierced through.

Table, Tablet, a name for various mouldings, as string-courses, cornices, &c.

Terminal. Figures of which the upper parts only, or perhaps the head and shoulders alone, are carved, the rest running into à parallelopiped, and sometimes into a diminishing pedestal, with feet indicated below, or even without them, are called terminal figures.

Tessellated Pavements, those formed of tesserae, or, as some write it, tessellce r or small cubes from half an inch to an inch square like dice, of pottery, stone, marble, enamel, &c. (See Mosaic.) Tester, anything placed horizontally over the head, as the soundboard of a pulpit, the flat boards over an old-fashioned bed, &c.

Tetrastoön (Gr. τ∈τpα, four, and στ6a, a portico). An atrium or rectangular court-yard, having a colonnade or projected orthostyle on eveιy side, is called a tetrastoön.

Tetrastyle (Gr. τ∈τpα, four, and στυ ∖ οs, a column), a portico of four columns in front.

Tholobate (Gr. θ6λοs, a dome or cupola, and βdσιs, a base or substructure), that on which a dome or cupola rests. This is a term not in general use, but it is not the less of useful application. What is generally termed the attic above the peristyle and under the cupola of St Paul’s would be correctly designated the tholobate. A tholobate of a different description, and one to which no other name can well be applied, is the circular substructure to the cupola of the University College, London.

Through Carving, a term supposed to signify such as is much undercut, as the tendrils, stalks, &c., in Decorated, and the vignettes in Perpendicular work. In the Durham roll it clearly means perforated work, as it is “to giue ayre.”

Tiles, Roof (Lat. tegula, imbrex, Fr. tuile, Ital. tegola), flat pieces of clay burned in kilns, to cover roofs in place of slates or lead. In England, in mediaeval times, the flat or planetile seems only to have been used, judging from what we find now left. From MS. and remains abroad, a kind of plane tile, with ornamented ends, forming a sort of scale covering, seems to have been in vogue.

Torus (Lat.), a protuberance or swelling, a moulding whose form is convex, and generally nearly approaches a semicircle. It is most frequently used in bases, and is generally the lowest moulding in a base.

Tower (Gr. ∏υpγos, Lat. turris, Fr. tour, clocher, Ital. torre, Ger. Thurm), an elevated building originally designed for purposes of defence. Those buildings are of the remotest antiquity, and are, indeed, mentioned in the earliest Scriptures. In mediaeval times they are generally attached to churches, to cemeteries, to castles, or are used as bell-towers in public places of large cities. In churches, the towers of the Saxon period are generally square, the only round example being supposed to be that of Tasburgh. They are not very lofty, and are of strong, rude workmanship. Two only, Brigstock and Brixworth, have staircases supposed to be original; both these are on the west front of the tower. The masonry partakes of the usual character attributed to Saxon work, as strip pilasters, long and short work, &c. The upper windows are generally circular-headed in two lights, separated by a shaft much resembling . a turned baluster sometimes with heavy projecting caps. Norman towers are also generally square. Many are entirely without buttresses; others have broad, flat, shallow projections, which serve for

• this purpose. The lower windows are very narrow, with extremely wide splays inside, probably intended to be defended by archers. The upper windows, like those of the preceding style, are generally separated into two lights, but by a shaft or short column, and not by a baluster. Sometimes these towers have arcades round them, and are ornamented, as at St Albans, in some cases very richly, as at Norwich, "Winchester, Tewkesbury, Southwell, Sandwich, &c. They frequently have stone staircases at one of the angles. . In many of our churches the Norman tower is placed between the chancel and nave, and is of the full width of the latter. For the covering of these towers abroad, see Spire, Pinnacle, Parapet. A few round towers of this period (and also of the next) are found on the coasts of Norfolk and Suffolk; as these mostly have no external doors, and are accessible only from the church, and as some have chimneys, they are supposed to have been built as places of refuge in case of invasion. Early English towers are generally taller, and of more elegant proportions. They almost always have large projecting buttresses, and frequently stone staircases. The lower windows, as in the former style, are frequently mere arrow-slits; the upper are in couplets or triplets, and sometimes the tower top has an arcade all round, as at Middleton Stoney. The spires are generally Broach Spires (which see); but sometimes the tower tops finish with corbel courses and plain parapets, and (rarely) with pinnacles. Some of the towers and spires, particularly in the midland counties, are richly ornamented; a very good specimen is at Raunds. A few Early English towers break into the octagon from the square towards the top, and still fewer finish with two gables, as at Brookthorpe and Ickford; Both these methods of termination, however, are ’ common on the Continent. At Vendôme, Chartres, and Senlis, the towers have octagonal upper stages surrounded with pinnacles, from which elegant spires arise. Decorated towers differ but little from these last, except that they are often lighter in effect; the buttresses, too, are set angularly; the parapets are also frequently embattled, or perforated in elegant designs, and these generally have pinnacles. The spires, also, now generally arise at once from the octagon, and are not broach spires; those that are of this latter character have the haunchings much smaller. There is a fine example of a Decorated tower and spire at Ellington, in Huntingdonshire. Most Perpendicular towers are very fine, particularly the great central towers, as at Canterbury and Gloucester. They are generally richly panelled throughout; the buttresses project boldly, and are sometimes set anglewise, and sometimes square, not close to each other, but showing a ' small portion of the angle of the tower where they otherwise would have intersected. The pinnacles are often richly canopied and the battlements panelled, and often perforated; sometimes a pinnacle, and sometimes a canopied niche, is placed in the middle of the parapet. At Boston, and in several other places, there are fine lanterns at the tops of the towers. Taunton, Evesham, Louth, Magdalene College, Oxford, and very many other places, have very fine Perpendicular towers. In the north of Italy, and in Rome, they are generally tall, square shafts in four to six stages, without buttresses, with couplets or triplets of semicircular windows in each stage, generally crenellated at top, and covered with a low pyramidal roof. The well-known hanging tower at Pisa is cylindrical, in five stories of arcaded colonnades. In Ireland there are in some of the churchyards very curious round towers.

T racery, the ornamental filling in of the heads of windows, panels, circular windows, &c., which has given such characteristic beauty to the architecture of the 14th century. I,ike almost everything connected with mediaeval architecture, this elegant and sometimes fairy-like decoration seems to have sprung from the smallest beginnings. The circular-headed window of the Normans gradually gave way to the narrow-pointed lancets of the Early English period, and as less light was afforded by the latter system than by the former, it was necessary to have a greater number of windows; and it was found convenient to group them together in couplets, triplets, &c. When these couplets were assembled under one label, a sort of vacant space or spandril was formed over the lancets and under the label. To relieve this, the first attempts Were simply to perforate this flat spandril, first by a simple lozenge-shaped or circular opening, and afterwards by a quatrefoil. By piercing the whole of the vacant spaces in the window head, carrying mouldings round the tracery, and adding cusps to it, the formation of tracery was complete, and its earliest result was the beautiful geometrical work such as is found at Westminster Abbey. When this style had reached perfection the usual decline followed; and the architects of the Decorated period designed tracery, beautiful in itself, but which wants the vigour of the geometrical, and appears more as if the stonework had been twisted than if it had been cut out of the solid. Nevertheless, however fanciful the design may be, the whole element is really geometrical—that is, it is formed of portions of circles, the centres of which fall on the intersections of certain geometrical ligure3. The great east window at Carlisle is composed of 86 distinct pieces of stone, and is struck from 263 centres; and the glorious west window at York is probably produced from a still greater number. Probably as a reaction against the weakness of the Decorated, the flowing tracery gradually admitted upright straight lines into its element.. This change was τ>erhaps made to afford, as it were, rectilineal frames to suit the glass painter, the foliages and medallions of the preceding styles having given way to single figures, standing on pedestals under rich canopies. Be this as it may, these have given a name to the style of the 15th and 16th centuries. The mullions then, as at King’s College Chapel, at St Jøhn’s, Oxford, and in several other examples, had more flow, and fewer perpendicular lines, till at last plain, upright, and transverse bars took their place, and held casement lights, which were at last superseded by our modern sash windows. On the Continent, the windows of the first period, or ogivale primitive, were very much like our own Early English. So in like manner those of the early part of the ogivale secondaire were very much like our own Geometrical Decorated. Later, however, in France and Germany, two. styles prevailed, the Rayonnant and Flamboyant, the one having tracery assuming the character of stars or rays, and after this another coeval with our Perpendicular, resembling flames of fire.

Trachelium (Gr. τρdχηλοs, the neck). In Doric and Ionic columns there is generally a short space intervening between the hypotrachelium and the mass of the capital, which may be called the trachelium or neck.

Transept (Med. Lat. crux, Fr. transept, Ital. crociata, Ger. Kreuz- (jctng) y that portion of a church which passes transversely between the nave and choir at right angles, and so forms a cross on plan.

Transom (Fr. traverse, I tai. traversa, Ger. Querbalken}, the horizontal construction which divides a window into heights or stages. Transoms are sometimes simple pieces of mullions placed transversely as cross-bars, and in later times are richly decorated with cuspings, &c.

Trayle. See Vignette. Trefoil (Lat. trifolium), a cusping, the outline of which is derived from a three-leaved flower or leaf, as the quatrefoil and cinquefoil are from those with four and five.

Triforium, the arcaded story between the lower range of piers and arches and the clerestory. The name has been supposed to be derived from très and fores —three doors or openings—that being a frequent number of arches in each bay. Professor Willis, however, believed that the word is to be traced to a monkish latinisation of “thoroughfare.”

Triglyph (Gr. τp∈Γs, three, and y ∖ υ<ρh, an incision or carving). The vertically channelled tablets of the Doric frieze are called triglyphs, because of the three angular channels in them, two perfect and one divided,—the two chamfered angles or hemiglyphs being reckoned as one. The square sunk spaces between the triglyphs on a frieze are called metopes.

Tudor Flower, or Cresting, an ornament much used in the Tudor period on the tops of the cornices of screen w ork, &c., instead of battlements. It is a sort of stiff, flat, upright leaf standing on stems.

Turret (Fr. tourelle), a small tower, especially at the angles of larger buildings, sometimes overhanging and built on corbels, and sometimes rising from the ground.

Tympanum (Gr. ripπavοv), the triangular recessed space enclosed by the cornice which bounds a pediment. The Greeks often placed sculptures representing subjects connected with the purposes of the edifice in the tympana of temples, as at the Parthenon and Aegina.

Under-Croft, a vaulted chamber under ground.

Valure, Vamure. See Alure. Vane (Fr. girouette, Ital. banderuola, Ger. Wetterfahne), the weathercock on a steeple. They seem in early times to have been of various forms, as dragons, &c.; but in the Tudor period, the favourite design was a beast or bird sitting on a slender pedestal, and carrying an upright rod, on which a thin plate of metal is hung like a flag, ornamented in various ways.

Vault (from I tai. voltato, turned over), an arched ceiling or roof. A vault is, indeed, a laterally conjoined series of arches. The arch of a bridge is, strictly speaking, a vault. Intersecting vaults are said to be groined. (See Groined Vaulting.) Vaulting Shaft, a small column or series of clustered shafts, rising from above the capitals of the pillars of an arcade, and generally supported on a corbel, and thence rising and finishing with a capital, from which the various groin ribs spring.

Verge, the edge of the tiling projecting over the gable of a roof; that on the horizontal portion being called eaves. Verge Board, often corrupted into Barge Board, the board under the vèrge of gables, sometimes moulded, and often very richly carved, perforated, and cusped, and frequently having pendents and sometimes finials at the apex.

Vesica Piscis (Fr. amande mystique), panels, windows, and other ornaments of the form of a species of oval with pointed end, but in τeality struck from two centres, and forming part of two circles cutting each other.

Vestry. See Sacristy. Vignette, a running ornament, representing, as its name imports, a little vine, with branches, leaves, and grapes. It is common in the Tudor period, and runs or roves in a large hollow or casement. It is also called Trayle. Volute (Lat. volutum, from volvo, to roll up or over), the convolved or spiral ornament which forms the characteristic of the Ionic capital. The common English term is Scroll, q.v. Volute, scroll, helix, and cauliculus, are used indifferently for the angular horns of the Corinthian capital.

Voussoir, a name in common use for the various wedge-shaped stones of an arch.

Waggon-Ceiling, a boarded roof of the Tudor time, either of semicircular or polygonal section. It is boarded with thin oak, and ornamented with mouldings forming panels, and with loops at the intersections. (See Panel.) Ward, a name for the inner courts of a fortified place. At Windsor Castle they are called the upper and lower wards. (See Bailey, Base Court, Enceinte, &c.) Weathering, a slight fall on the top of cornices, window sills, &c., to throw off the rain.

Wicket (Fr. guichet, Ital. portello), a small door opening in a larger. They are common in mediaeval doors, and were intended to admit single persons, and guard against sudden surprises.

Wind Braces, diagonal braces to tie tne rafters of a roof together and prevent racking. In the better sort of mediaeval roofs they are arched, and run from the principal rafters to catch the purlins.

Zoophorus (Gr. ζωοv, an animal, and <ρlρω, to bear). This term is used in the same sense as frieze, and is so called because -that part of the entablature frequently bore sculptures representing various animals.