My Fine Art Story Book: Volume Nine

My Fine Art Story Book

Volume Nine

Stories of Artists and Fine Art

Pieces for the Young Reader

Compiled by Marlene Peterson

Libraries of Hope

My Fine Art Story Book

Volume Nine

Copyright © 2023 by Libraries of Hope, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission of the publisher. International rights and foreign translations available only through permission of the publisher.

Book Design and Layout: Krystal D’Abarno

Cover Image: The Girl I Left Behind Me, by Eastman Johnson (c. 1875). In public domain, source Wikimedia Commons.

Clement, Clara Erskine. (1886). An Outline History of Architecture for Beginners and Students. New York: Frederick A. Stokes Co.

Libraries of Hope, Inc.

Appomattox, Virginia 24522

Website: www.librariesofhope.com

Email: librariesofhope@gmail.com

Printed in the United States of America

Architecture - Part Twod

St. Peter’s Basilica Giovanni

Christian Architecture

3000 B.C. to A.D. 328

I have written more in detail concerning Ancient architecture than I shall do of that of later times, because it is best to be thorough in studying the beginnings of things; then we can make an application of our knowledge which helps us to understand the results of what has gone before, just as we are prepared for the full-blown rose after we have seen the bud. Or, to be more practical, just as we use the simplest principles of arithmetic to help us to understand the more difficult ones; sometimes we scarcely remember that in the last lessons of the book we unconsciously apply the first tables and rules which were so difficult to us in the beginning.

I shall not try, because I have not space, to give a connected account of Christian architecture, but I shall endeavor to give such an outline of its rise and progress in various countries as will make a good foundation for the knowledge you will gain from books which you will read in future.

The architecture of Italy in the period which followed the conversion of the Emperor Constantine is called the Romanesque order. As the Christians were encouraged under Constantine and became bold in their worship, many basilicas were given up for their use. The bishops

held the principal place upon the platform formerly occupied by the king and his highest officers, and the priests of the lower orders were ranged around them. The same altars which had served for the heathen sacrifices were used for the worship of the true God, and from this cause the word basilica has come to signify a large, grand church, in the speech of our time.

Among the early basilicas of Rome which still remain, none are more distinguished than that of San Paolo fuori della Mura, or St. Paul’swithout-the-Walls. It was ancient, and splendid in design and ornament. In 1823 it was burned, and has been rebuilt with great magnificence, but the picture here shows it as it was before the fire. It was built about 386 A.D. under the Emperors Valentinian II and Theodosius.

This basilica had four rows of Corinthian columns, twenty in each row; many of these pillars were taken from more ancient edifices, and were composed of very beautiful marbles, forming by far the finest collection of columns in the world. The bronze gates were cast at Constantinople; the fine paintings and magnificent mosaics with which it was decorated added much to its splendor. Tradition taught that the body of St. Paul was buried beneath the high altar.

In the early days there were many circular churches throughout Italy; some of these had been built at first for tombs. The Christians used churches of this form for baptisms, for the sacrament for the dying, burials, and sometimes for marriage.

The circular temple of Vesta is very beautiful. It had originally twenty Corinthian columns; nineteen of which still remain. This temple is not older than the time of Vespasian, and is not the famous one mentioned by Horace and other ancient writers, in which the Palladium was preserved—that temple no longer exists. It is probable that many of the earliest churches built by Christians in Italy were circular in form, and numbers of these still remain in various Italian cities; but they differed from the ancient temples of this form in their want of exterior decoration. The ancient Romans had used columns, peristyles,

Church Service in Cathedral of Monza by Unknown Author

and porticoes; the Christians used the latter only in a few instances, but even these were soon abandoned.

The beautiful baptistery at Florence was originally the cathedral of the city. It is octagonal, or eight-sided, and this form is not infrequent in buildings of the fourth and following centuries. It is said that this Baptistery was built by Theodolinda, who married Autharis, King of the Lombards in 589. ...

The cathedral of Monza is very interesting from its historical associations. Here is deposited the famous iron crown which was presented to Theodolinda by Pope Gregory I. This crown is made of a broad band of gold set with jewels, and the iron from which it is named is a narrow circlet inside, said to have been made from one of the nails used in the crucifixion of Christ, and brought from Jerusalem by the Empress Helena. This crown is kept in a casket which forms the centre of the cross above the high altar in the cathedral of Monza; it was carried away in 1859 by the Austrians; at the close of the Halo-Prussian war, in 1866, the Emperor of Austria gave it to Victor Emmanuel, then King of Italy. This crown has been used at the coronation of thirty-four sovereigns; among them were Charlemagne, Charles V, and Napoleon I. The latter wore it at his second coronation as King of the Lombards in 1805. He placed it on his head himself, saying, “God has given it to me, woe to him who touches it!”

There are few secular buildings of this period remaining in Italy, and Romanesque architecture endured but a short time, for it was almost abandoned at the time of the death of Gregory the Great, in 604. During the next four and a half centuries the old styles were dying out and the Gothic order was developing, but cannot be said to have reached any high degree of perfection before the close of the eleventh century.

Fantastical Architecture

Gothic Architecture

It is difficult to speak concisely of Gothic architecture because there is so much that can be said of its origin, and then it has so extended itself to all parts of the world as to render it in a sense universal. Perhaps Ferguson makes it as simple as it can be made when he divides Europe by a line from Memel on the shores of the Baltic Sea to Spalatro on the Adriatic, and then carries the line westward to Fermo and divides Italy almost as the forty-third parallel of latitude divides it. He then says that during the Middle Ages, or from about the seventh to the fifteenth centuries, the architecture north and west of these lines was Gothic; south and east it was Byzantine, with the exception of Rome, which always remained individual, and a rule unto herself. There was a very general belief in all Christian lands that the world would end in the year 1000 A.D., and when this dreaded period had passed without that event happening, men seem everywhere to have been seized with a passion for erecting stone buildings. An old chronicler named Rodulphe Glaber, who died in 1045 A.D., relates that as early as the year 1003 A.D. so many churches and monasteries of marble were being erected, especially in France and Italy, “that the world appeared to be putting off its old dingy attire and putting on a

new white robe. Then nearly all the bishops’ seats, the churches, the monasteries, and even the oratories of the villages were changed for better ones.’’

Such a movement could not fail to have a great influence upon architecture, and it was at this time that the Gothic style began to be rapidly developed; and, indeed, so far as any particular time may be fixed for the beginning of the Gothic order, it would fall in the tenth and eleventh centuries. The classic forms, with their horizontal cornices and severe regularity, were then laid aside, and a greater freedom and variety than had ever obtained before began to make itself felt in all architectural designs.

We must first try to understand what are the distinguishing features of Gothic architecture. Perhaps the principal one may be called constructiveness; which is to say, that in Gothic architecture there is far greater variety of form, and the power to make larger and more complicated buildings than had been possible with the orders which preceded it. During the Middle Ages the aim was to produce large edifice; and to build and ornament them in a way that would make them appear to be even larger than they were. The early Gothic buildings are so massive as to have a clumsy effect, because the architects had not yet learned how to make these enormous masses strong and enduring, and yet so arranged as to be light and graceful in their appearance.

A second striking difference between the ancient orders and the Gothic, is that in the former, enormous blocks of stone or marble were used and great importance was attached to this. Many ancient works are called Cyclopean for this reason. It does not make a building more beautiful to have it massive, but it does make it grand. Even in a less colossal mode of building a column is more effective when it is a monolith, and an architrave more beautiful when its beams are not joined too frequently. But in the Gothic order the use of massive blocks is largely given up, and the endeavor is to so arrange smaller materials as to display remarkable constructive skill.

The Ruins of Holyrood Chapel

Reims, Cathedral

A third and a very important feature of the Gothic order is the use of the arch. The much-increased constructive power of which we have spoken depended very largely upon this. The ancients knew the use of the arch, but did not like it because they thought that it took away from the repose of a building. Even now the Hindoos will not use it; they say, “An arch never sleeps,” and though the Mohammedan builders have used it in their country, the Hindoos cannot overcome their dislike of it. In the Gothic order, however, the use of arches, both round and pointed, is unending. The results are very much varied, and range all the way from a grand and impressive effect to a sort of toy-like lightness which seems more suited to the blockhouses made by children than to the works of architects. The earlier Gothic arches were round, although pointed arches are occasionally found in very ancient buildings. The form of arch most used until the introduction of the pointed arch, which occurred in France during the twelfth century can be seen in the doorways of the next image [see Reims, Cathedral].

An important characteristic of Gothic architecture was the fact that every part of the building was so made as to show its use. Instead of hiding the supports they were made prominent. If a pier or buttress was to stand a perpendicular strain, even the lines of decoration were generally made to run in that direction; if extra supports were needed, they were not concealed, but built in so as to show, and even to be prominent. In the details the same feeling was often shown in a very marked degree; the hinges and nails and locks of Gothic buildings were made to be seen, and whatever was needed for use was treated as if it were of value as an ornament. The spouts by which the water was carried over the eaves were made bold and comparatively large, and carved into those curious shapes of animals and monsters called gargoyles, which are seen on so many mediæval edifices. Many of these details of Gothic buildings are very elegant, and serve to-day as models for modern workmen. ...

The Gothic builders gave loftiness to their edifices by the use of

spires and towers. They became very skilful in constructing them with buttresses below and pinnacles above, so that the spires should not detract from the apparent size of the buildings to which they were attached [see Laon Cathedral].

In the matter of design in ornament the Gothic order had no fixed method, except so far as its forms were symbolic. Every form of vegetable design was employed; vines and leaves were abundant. As a rule the use of human forms or animals as supports to columns or other weights was avoided. If they were introduced the animals were not reproductions of such as exist, but the imaginary griffin or other monster, and at times dwarfs or grotesque human beings, were represented as if for caricatures.

Sculptured figures were usually placed upon a pedestal either with or without niches for them, and were not made to appear to be a part of the building itself. The deep recesses of Gothic portals, the pinnacles and niches gave opportunities to display exterior sculpture to great advantage. The interiors were also appropriate for any amount of artistic ornament in bas-reliefs or figures that could be lavished upon them.

The most original and effective feature of ornament, however, which was introduced by Gothic architects is that of painted glass. To this they devoted their best talent. It is not necessary to say how beautiful and decorative it is; we all know this, and our only wonder is that it was left for the Gothic architects to apply it to architectural uses. We do not know precisely when stained or painted glass was invented, but we know that it existed as early as 800, and came into very general use in the eleventh and twelfth centuries.

Before painted glass was used windows were made very small, and it was some time before the large, rich style was adopted. ... The window became one of the most important and characteristic features of Gothic buildings. These large open spaces gave opportunity for elegant shapes and splendid colors, both the form of the opening and the dividing ribs, or tracery, as it was called, being made with the utmost beauty

and grace. The round windows, called rose windows and wheel windows, were often exquisitely designed, as the following example shows [see North Rose Window of Notre-Dame]. ...

Gothic architecture gradually extended from the centre of Italy to the most northern bounds of civilization, and though practised by so many nations, was as much the architectural expression of a religion as the architecture of a single ancient nation had been the outgrowth of its peculiar religious belief. During the Middle Ages the priests and monks preserved learning in the midst of general darkness and ignorance, and were the chief patrons of all art which survived the decline of the time. They built up the Christian faith by every means in their power. The monks were missionaries. They went to various countries, and selecting favorable spots they founded abbeys; around these abbeys a poor population settled; gradually churches were built, and it frequently happened that the monks not only planned the work to be done, but also executed it with their own hands. Many of them were masons and builders, and several bishops were architects. The finest buildings being thus made for religious purposes and under the direction of the clergy, they must have been as full an expression of Christianity as were the temple -palaces of Egypt an expression of the religion of Osiris and Isis, when the kings were both priests and sovereigns, and dwelt in these palaces. And this was true as long as Gothic art was in the hands of the clergy and used almost entirely for religious purposes.

Later on, when it was employed for civic edifices erected under the direction of laymen, it became an expression of political independence also. The freedom of thought which came with the decline of the feudal system inspired new aspirations and imaginations in the hearts and minds of men, and these found expression in all the arts, and very especially in architecture. If we cannot always admire the manner in which Gothic art was made to express these lofty desires, we can fully sympathize with the sentiment which was behind it.

The Gothic order held undisputed sway west and north of the geographical line of which we have spoken until the fifteenth century. Then a revival of classical literature took place, and with this there arose also a revival of classic art and architecture; this revival is known as the Renaissance, or the new birth, and the period of time is spoken of as that of the Renaissance. The effect of this classic reaction was very great upon all the educated classes of Europe, and its influence may be said to have endured through about three centuries. Again, during the eighteenth century, Gothic art was revived. A reverence has grown up for the good that wrestled with the darkness of the Middle Ages and survived all their evils. The rough, strong manhood of that time is now justly appreciated. Perhaps the feeling in this direction is too much exaggerated. While our regard for a rude and weather-stained monument of the spirit and architecture of the past may be natural and proper, the imitation of it which is made in our day may easily become absurd, and is very rarely suited to our purposes.

Spain is one of the countries which are on the Gothic side of the geographical line we have drawn, and among the many splendid edifices in that country some of the finest are of the Gothic order. There is no national architecture there, for though the Spaniards love art and its expression passionately, they have themselves invented almost nothing which is artistic.

But while it is true that the Spaniards invented no styles, they did modify those which they adopted, and there are peculiarities in the Spanish use and arrangement of the Gothic order which give it new elements in the eyes of those who understand architecture scientifically [see Collegiate Church, Toro].

Meantime in the south of Spain the Moresco or Moorish order had sprung up, of which the next image gives an example [see Iglesia de San Pablo, Zaragoza]. It was gradually adopted to a limited extent, until finally some specimens of it existed in almost every province of the country. The Gothic order was affected by it, inasmuch as the richness

Collegiate Church, Toro

Iglesia de San Pablo, Zaragoza

of ornament of the Moorish order so pleased the taste of the Spaniards that their architects allowed themselves to indulge in a certain Moorish manner of treating the Gothic style.

As has been said, the interior decoration of all Gothic churches was very rich and abundant. It is also true that all church furniture was made with great care; the matter of symbolism was carefully considered, and each design made to indicate the use of the article for which it was intended. No altar, preaching-desk, stall, chair, or screen was made without due attention to every detail, and the endeavor to have

it in harmony with its use and its position in the church. This image shows a rood-screen, which was the kind of screen that was placed before the crucifixion over the high altar.

The fantastic sculptures and wealth of ornament in Gothic decorations produce a confusing effect on the brain and the eye if we look at the whole carelessly; but when we remember that each separate design has its especial meaning we are interested to examine them and we find that the variety of forms is almost innumerable. ... [W]e find that meaning and thought were worked out in every bit of Gothic ornament,

and that what at first appears so wild and haphazard is full of a method which well repays one for the study of it.

The Gothic order was also used in building municipal edifices, palaces, and even for the purposes of domestic architecture. The finest remains of this kind are in Germany, the most interesting of them all being the castle on the Wartburg. This castle is large, grand, and imposing. It is also well preserved.

A remarkable story connected with Wartburg is the residence here of St. Elizabeth of Hungary, as she is called. This wonderful woman was the daughter of the King of Hungary, and when four years old she was betrothed to Prince Louis, son of Count Hermann, mentioned above. At this tender age she was given to his family. Her life at Wartburg was very remarkable, and I advise you to read about it, for it is too long to be given here. At last, her husband having died in Jerusalem, where he had gone with the Crusaders, his brother Henry drove her out with her children to seek a home where she could. She suffered much, and supported herself by spinning wool. But when the knights who had gone with her husband returned, they obliged Henry to give the son of Elizabeth his rights. She received the city of Marburg as her dower, but she did not live long. Miraculous things are told of her, and she is often represented by painters and sculptors.

Again, Wartburg was the residence of a remarkable person; for Luther dwelt there after escaping from the Diet at Worms. He was called Ritter George, and the room where he wrote and spent much of his time is shown to travellers who visit the castle.

We come back now to Italy, the country we left when we passed from the Romanesque to Gothic architecture. In the north of Italy where the Gothic order had prevailed after the eleventh century, it had been modified by the Romanesque influences and Roman traditions, in some such degree as the Moors had influenced the Gothic order in Spain. But, on the whole, the mediæval buildings of Northern Italy were Gothic in style.

Cathedral of Florence

Among the most interesting edifices of the Middle Ages are the Italian towers. They were frequently quite separate from the churches and were built for various purposes. Some of them were bell towers, and such a tower was called a campanile. Others were in some way associated with the civic power of the cities which built them; but the largest number were for religious uses.

The campanile is always square at the bottom and for some distance up, and then is frequently changed to an octagonal or circular form and finished with a slender spire or ornamental design. The tower of Italy ... which is most beloved and most famous is that of Giotto, beside the Cathedral of Florence.

The architecture of Venice and the Venetian Province must be treated almost as if it were outside of Italy, because it differs so much from that of other portions of that country. During the Middle Ages it was the most prosperous portion of Italy. Its architecture was influenced by the Byzantine and Saracenic orders, but is not like them; neither is it like that of Northern Italy; in fact, it is Venetian, being Gothic in principle, but treated with Eastern feeling and decorated in Oriental taste; and this was quite natural since the Venetians had extensive traffic and intercourse with the nations of the East.

There are few places in the world, of no greater extent, about which so many interesting associations cluster as about the Piazza of St. Mark’s in Venice. On one side stands the great basilica, and not far away are the campanile and the clock-tower; the ancient Doge’s Palace, and the beautiful Library of St. Mark, of later date, are near by, with their treasures of art and literature to increase the value of the whole. It is a spot dear to all, and especially so to English-speaking people, since the poetry of Shakespeare has given them a reason for personal interest in it under all its varying aspects. At some hours of the day St. Mark’s seems as if it were the very centre of the earth, to which men of all nations are hastening; again this bustle dies away, and one could fancy it to be forgotten and deserted of all mankind, though its silence is eloquent in

its power to recall the great events of the Venice of the past [see Piazza San Marco].

St. Mark’s Basilica is called Byzantine in its order, and in a general way the term is applicable to it; but on careful examination there are so many differences between it and a purely Byzantine church that it would be more properly described by the name Italian or Venetian Byzantine. Its five domes were added to its original form late in the Middle Ages, and though there are many Eastern mosques with this number, they are not arranged like those of St. Mark’s, and so have quite a different appearance. The portico with its five entrances is not European in form, but the details of these deep recesses are more like the Norman architecture than like anything Byzantine.

The church of San Miniato, which overlooks the city of Florence, was built in 1013, and is one of the most perfect as well as one of the earliest of the churches of the Byzantine-Romanesque order in Italy. It is not large, but the proportions are so good as to make it very pleasing; the pillars are so nearly classic in design that they were probably taken from some earlier building, and the effect of colored panelling both within and without is very satisfactory to the eye.

There arose in Sicily in the eleventh century, and after the Norman Conquest, a remarkable style of architecture. It belongs to Christian art because it was used by Christians to construct places of Christian worship; but, in truth, it was a combination of Greek spirit with Roman form and Saracenic ornament. It makes an interesting episode in the study of architecture. One such example is the church (San Giovanni Degli Eremiti) built by King Roger for Christian use as late as 1132, which, except for the tower, might well be mistaken for a purely Oriental edifice.

Hagia

Byzantine Architecture

This term strictly belongs to the order which arose in the East after Constantinople was made the Roman capital. It is especially the order of the Greek Church as contrasted with the Latin or Roman Church. It would make all architectural writing and talking much clearer if this fact were kept in mind; but, unfortunately, wherever some special bit of carving in an Oriental design or a little colored decoration is used—as is frequently done in the modern composite styles of building—the term Byzantine is carelessly applied, until it is difficult for one not learned in architecture to discover what the Byzantine order is, or where it belongs.

We have spoken of its influence and partial use in Italy. Now we will consider it in its home and its purity. Before the time of Constantine the architecture used at Rome was employed at Jerusalem, Constantinople, and other Eastern cities which were under Roman rule and influence. Between the time of Constantine and the death of Justinian, in A.D. 565, the true ancient Byzantine order was developed. The church of St. Sophia [see Hagia Sophia], at Constantinople, was the greatest and the last product of the pure old Byzantine style.

From that time the order employed may be called the Neo-Byzantine. This was a decline of art as much as the history of Greece and the Eastern Empire during the same period (about 600 to 1453) was the his-

tory of the decline and extinction of a power that had once been as great among governments as St. Sophia was among churches.

The chief characteristic of Byzantine architecture is the use of the dome, which is the most important part of its design. A grand central dome rises over the principal portion of the edifice, and just as in other orders, courts and colonnades were added to the simpler basilica form in the ground plan of the churches, so in the Byzantine order lesser domes and cupolas were added above until almost any number of them was admissible, and they were placed with little attention to regularity or symmetry of arrangement.

As domes were the chief exterior feature, so the profuse ornamentation was most noticeable in the interior. The walls were richly decorated with variegated marbles; the vaulted ceilings of the domes and niches were lined with brilliant mosaics; the columns, friezes, cornices, door and window-frames, and the railings to galleries were of marbles, and entirely covered with ornamental designs.

The historian Gibbon describes the building of St. Sophia and its decorations. He tells us that the emperor went daily, clad in a linen tunic, to oversee the work. The architect was named Anthemius; he employed ten thousand workmen, and they were all paid each evening. When it was completed and Justinian was present at its consecration, he exclaimed, “Glory be to God, who hath thought me worthy to accomplish so great a work; I have vanquished thee, O Solomon!” … Those objects that were most sacred were of solid gold and silver, while such as were less important were only covered with gold-leaf. In the sanctuary there was altogether forty thousand pounds of silver; the vases and vessels used about the altar were of pure gold and studded with gems. Its whole cost was almost beyond belief. At the close of his description Gibbon says: “A magnificent temple is a laudable monument of taste and religion, and the enthusiast who entered the dome of St. Sophia might be tempted to suppose that it was the residence or even the workmanship of the Deity. Yet how dull is the artifice, how in-

significant is the labor, if it be compared with the formation of the vilest insect that crawls upon the surface of the temple!”

Of course, individual taste must largely influence the opinion regarding the beauty of any work of art, but to me St. Sophia, which is the chief example of Byzantine architecture, is far less beautiful and less grand than the finest Gothic cathedrals. Comparatively little attention was paid to the elegance and decoration of the exterior in the Eastern edifices, while the interiors, in spite of all their riches, have a flat and unrelieved effect. Probably the chief reason for this is that color is substituted for relief—that is to say, in Gothic architecture heavy mouldings and panellings, though of the same color as the walls themselves, yet produce a marvellous effect of light and shadow, and even lend an element of perspective to various parts of the building. In the place of these mouldings flat bands of color are often used in the Byzantine order, and the whole result is much weakened, though a certain gorgeousness comes from the color. Another cause of disappointment in St. Sophia is the absence of painted glass. At the same time, and in spite of these defects, St. Sophia is grand and beautiful—but not solemn and impressive in comparison with the dim cathedral aisles of many Gothic churches in other parts of the world.

The Romanesque and Byzantine styles came at last to be so mingled that it would be folly to attempt to separate their influence, but the Byzantine had much more originality, and left a far wider mark.

Among the most noted examples of the latter style, beside St. Sophia and St. Mark’s, are the church of St. Vitale at Ravenna [see Basilica di San Vitale, Ravenna], the cathedral at Aix-la-Chapelle, supposed to have been built by Charlemagne about 800 A.D. and the church of the Mother of God at Constantinople.

Kiosk Unknown

Saracenic Architecture

In speaking of Saracenic architecture I will first explain that it is one with the Moresco or Moorish order of which I spoke in connection with Spain. The only difference is that the earliest Mohammedan conquerors of Spain are said to have come from ancient Mauri or Mauritania and were called Moors, while the name of Saraceni, which means “the Easterns,” was also given to them. Thus the Mohammedan architecture in Spain is called both Moresco, or Moorish, and Saracenic. Again, it is also called Arabian, but I think this is the least correct, since the Easterns who went to Spain were not so universally Arabian as to warrant this name. When we speak of Moresco or Moorish architecture we speak of Spain; but the term Saracenic is used for Mohammedan architecture in all countries where it is found, and is a just term, for they are Eastern or Oriental lands.

In absolute fact, Saracenic architecture is that of the followers of “the Prophet,” as Mohammed is called, and would be more suitably named if it were called Mohammedan architecture, or the architecture of Islam.

Mohammed was born at Mecca A.D. 570, but it was not until 611 that he was commissioned, as he believed, to build up a new faith and a new church. At first his followers were so few and so mingled with other sects and tribes in their outward life that they had no distinctive art. It

was not until A.D. 876, when the ruler Ibn-Touloun commenced his splendid mosque at Cairo, that the Mohammedans could claim any architecture as their own. It is very interesting to know that there were pointed arches in this mosque, probably two centuries, at least, earlier than they were used in England, for it is generally believed that they were first used there in the rebuilding of Canterbury Cathedral after it was burned in 1174. When, however, the Saracenic order was fully established it was so individual and so different from all other architecture that there is no mistaking it for that of any other religion or nation than that of Mohammed and his followers.

The picture of the mosque of Kaitbey shows one of the finest and most elegant mosques of the East. It is just outside the walls of Cairo, and is quite modern, having been built in 1463. This view of it gives an excellent idea of the appearance of a fine mosque and shows the minaret or tower, which is so important in a mosque. These minarets are constantly used for the many calls to prayer which are made throughout the day and night. The person who makes these calls is styled “the Muezzin,” and is usually blind. Several times during the day he ascends the minaret and calls out in a loud and melodious tone, “God is most great; there is no God but Allah, and I testify that Mohammed is Allah’s prophet! Come to prayer! Come to security! Prayer is better than sleep!” This is several times repeated and is called the Adan.

The form of words used for the night varies a little, ending, “There is no God but Allah. He has no companion! To Him belongs dominion, etc.;” this is called the Ula. The call made an hour before day is the Ebed, and praises the perfection of God. When one is sleeping near enough to a minaret to hear the muezzin’s voice it is a pleasant sound and helps one to realize that the care of God is ever about him; the clear, Christian bell can be heard by more people, and this was originally intended as a call to prayer. [See The Call to Prayer.]

The principal homes of Saracenic architecture are Syria, Egypt,

The Call to Prayer by Jean-Leon Gerome

Mecca, Barbary, Spain, Sicily, Turkey, Persia, and India. There are many very interesting mosques and minarets that might be mentioned had we space, but I can speak only of the mosque of Cordova, which is universally admitted to be the finest Saracenic edifice in the world, and shall quote a part of the interesting description of it given by De Amicis in his delightful book called “Spain and the Spaniards.”

This mosque was commenced by the Caliph Abd-er-Rahman in 786, and was completed by his son Hesham, who died 796. The great Caliph declared that he would build a mosque which should exceed all others in the world and be the Mecca of the West. De Amicis, after describing the garden which surrounds the mosque, enters and then goes on as follows: “Imagine a forest, fancy yourself in the thickest portion of it, and that you can see nothing but the trunks of trees. So, in this mosque, on whatever side you look, the eye loses itself among the columns. It is a forest of marble whose confines one cannot discover. You follow with your eye, one by one, the very long rows of columns that interlace at every step with numberless other rows, and you reach a semi-obscure background, in which other columns still seem to be gleaming. There are nineteen naves, which extend in every direction, traversed by thirty-three others, supported (among them all) by more than nine hundred columns of porphyry, jasper, breccia, and marbles of every color. Each column upholds a small pilaster, and between them runs an arch, and a second one extends from pilaster to pilaster, the latter placed above the former, and both of them in the shape of a horseshoe; so that, in imagining the columns to be the trunks of so many trees, the arches represent the branches, and the similitude of the mosque to a forest is complete…. How much variety there is in that edifice which at first sight seems so uniform! The proportions of the columns, the designs of the capitals, the forms of the arches change, one might say, at every step. Above several of the capitals one can still see traces of the crosses that were cut on them, which the Arabs broke with their chisels…. I stopped for a long time to look at the ceiling and

and walls of the principal chapel, the only part of the mosque that is quite intact. It is a dazzling gleam of crystals of a thousand colors, a network of arabesques, which puzzles the mind, and a complication of bas-reliefs, gildings, ornaments, minutiæ of design and coloring, of a delicacy, grace, and perfection sufficient to drive the most patient painter distracted…. Such is the mosque of to-day. But what must it have been in the time of the Arabs? It was not surrounded by a wall, but open, so that one could catch a glimpse of the garden from every part of it; and from the garden one could see to the end of the long naves, and the air was full of the fragrance of oranges and flowers. The columns which now number less than a thousand were then fourteen hundred; the ceiling was of cedar-wood and larch, sculptured and enamelled in the finest manner; the walls were trimmed with marble; the light of eight hundred lamps, filled with perfumed oil, made all the crystals in the mosaics gleam, and produced on the pavements, arches, and walls a marvellous play of color and reflection. ‘A sea of splendors,’ sang a poet, ‘filled this mysterious recess; the ambient air was impregnated with aromas and harmonies, and the thoughts of the faithful wandered and lost themselves in the labyrinth of columns which gleamed like lances in the sun.’”

The famous palace of the Alhambra is so well known that I cannot leave this part of our subject without one picture and one bit of description of it from the same author, De Amicis.

The Alhambra was built about four centuries ago, and the wall which inclosed it was four thousand feet long by twenty-two hundred feet wide. Within this there were gardens, fountains, kiosks, and many beautiful, fanciful structures, all of which doubtless cost as much as the more necessary parts of the edifice. The roofs of the different parts of the palace were supported by forty-three hundred columns of precious marbles; eleven hundred and seventy-two of these were presented to Abd-er-Rahman (for he was also the founder of the Alhambra) by sovereigns of other countries, or else brought by him from distant shores

for the decoration of this splendid, fairy-like place. All the pavements were of beautiful marbles; the walls, too, were of the same material, with friezes arranged in splendid colors; the ceilings were of deep blue color, with figures in gilding and interlacing designs running over all. In truth, nothing that could be imagined or wealth buy to make this palace beautiful was left out; and yet we are told that the palace of Zahra which was destroyed was still finer. All this leads one to almost believe that the “Arabian Nights” are no fanciful tales, but quite as true as many more serious sounding stories.

The Court of the Lions is called “the gem of Arabian art in Spain,” and of this our author says: “It is a forest of columns, a mingling of arches and embroideries, an indefinable elegance, an indescribable delicacy, a prodigious richness, a something light, transparent, and undulating like a great pavilion of lace; with almost the appearance of a building which must dissolve at a breath; a variety of lights, views, mysterious darkness, a confusion, a capricious disorder of little things, the majesty of a palace, the gayety of a kiosk, an amorous grace, an extravagance, a delirium, the fancy of an imaginative child, the dream of an angel, a madness, a nameless something—such is the first effect produced by the Court of the Lions!”

This court is not large; the ceiling is high, and a light portico runs round it upheld by white marble columns in clusters of two, three, or more, so arranged as to resemble trees coming up from the ground. Above the columns the designs almost resemble curtains, and there are little graceful suggestions like ribbons and waving flowers. “From the middle of the shortest sides advance two groups of columns, which form two species of square temples of nine arches each surmounted by as many colored cupolas. The walls of these little temples and the exterior of the portico are a real lace-work of stucco, embroideries, and hems, cut and pierced from one side to the other, and as transparent as network, changing in design at every step. Sometimes they end in points, in crimps, in festoons, sometimes in ribbons waving round the arches,

in kinds of stalactites, fringes, trinkets, and bows which seem to move and mingle with each other at the slightest breath of air. Large Arabic inscriptions run along the four walls, over the arches, around the capitals, and on the walls of the little temples. In the centre of the court rises a great marble basin, upheld by twelve lions, and surrounded by a little paved canal…. At every step one takes in the court that forest of columns seems to move and change place, to form again in another way; behind one column, which seems alone, two, three, or a row will spring out; others separate, unite, and separate again…. We remained for more than an hour in the court, and it passed like a flash; I, too, did what almost all people do, be they Spanish or strangers, men or women, poets or not. I ran my hand along the walls, touched all the little columns, and passed my two hands around them, one by one, as around the waist of a child; I hid among them, counted them, looked at them on a hundred sides, crossed the court in a hundred ways, tried if it were true that in saying a word, sotto voce, into the mouth of one lion, one could hear it distinctly from the mouths of all the others; I looked on the marbles for the spots of blood of poetic legends, and wearied both brain and eye over the arabesques…. In all my life I have never thought, nor said, nor shall I say, so many foolish, stupid, pretty, senseless things as I said and thought in that hour.’’

The study of Saracenic architecture in Turkey, Persia, and India is very interesting, but our space warns us that we must hasten to leave this dreamy, fairy-like part of our subject and come down to later times and more realistic matters.

The Opera House Paris, France

Modern Architecture

1400 A.D. to the PRESENT TIME

All Architecture since the time of the Renaissance is called Modern Architecture; this term, therefore, embraces all edifices erected during nearly four centuries.

When I first spoke of Architecture I said that it was a constructive art, and not imitative like Painting and Sculpture. In its earlier history this was true, but the time came when it also became an imitative art and had no true or original style. The Gothic order was the last distinct order which arose, and since its decline, at the beginning of the Renaissance, all architecture has been an imitation because it is a reproduction of what existed before; at times some one of the older orders has been in favor and closely imitated, and again, parts of several orders are combined in one edifice. Since the time of the Reformation it has been true, almost without exception, that every building of any importance has been copied from something belonging to a country and a people foreign to the land in which it was erected.

When the revival of Classic Literature began, Rome was the first to feel its influence. It was welcomed there with open arms. ... France was next to adopt the newly-revived ideas, for that country looked to Rome as the source of true religion, and a model in all things. Spain was

then in an unsettled state, and welcomed the revival of classic art as heartily as it had already embraced the Church of Rome.

In Germany the love of the classics was enthusiastic, but that nation was more taken up with literature and slower in adopting the revival of the arts than were the more southern peoples, and the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries are a barren period in the history of German architecture.

In England, too, the Renaissance made slow progress. It was not until the time of Charles I that any influence was felt in Great Britain from the revival of classic taste which was so well established on the Continent.

As it is true that no new order of Architecture has arisen since the time of those of which I have already told you, I shall try to make you understand something of Modern Architecture by speaking of certain important edifices in one country and another, with no attempt at any more detailed explanation of it.

ITALY

We cannot say that the art of the Renaissance originated in one city or another, because the movement in the revival of art was so general throughout Italy; but Florence has a strong claim to our first consideration from the fact that Filippo Brunelleschi was a Florentine and did his greatest work in his native city, and on account of it has been called “the father of the Art of the Renaissance.’’ He was born in 1377, and from his early boyhood was inclined to be an architect. The cathedral of Florence, which is also called the church of Sta. Maria del Fiore [see Il Duomo], had been built long before, but had never been finished by a roof or dome.

Brunelleschi was possessed with but one desire, which was to complete this cathedral. He went to Rome and diligently studied the remains of classic art which he found there, and especially the dome of the Pantheon. Returning to Florence he took measures to bring his plans

before the superintendents of the cathedral works; he was ridiculed and discouraged on every hand, but he never gave up his hopes nor lessened his study of the ways and means by which the dome could be built. Thus many weary years passed by; Brunelleschi made drawings in secret, and from these he constructed models in order to convince himself of what he could do.

At last those who had authority in the matter were ready to act, and a convention was called, before which the architects of different nations appeared and were requested to explain their theories of what could be done to cover the cathedral. Many artists were assembled and various plans were shown, but after all had been examined the work was given to Brunelleschi, and he was happy in finding that the years he had devoted to the study of the dome had not been spent in vain. ... In building the dome, Brunelleschi encountered great difficulties, but he lived to be assured of his success, for at his death, in 1444, it lacked but little of completion, and all the parts essential to its perfection and durability were finished.

The church of St. Peter’s at Rome, which is the largest and most magnificent of all Christian temples, was begun about 1450, and was not brought into its present form until about 1661, or more than two centuries later.

The history of its building is largely a story of contentions and troubles between popes, architects, and artists of different kinds. ... As it now stands it is as much the work of Michael Angelo as of any one man, but several other architects left their imprint upon it, both before and after his time; and all who aided in its construction were eminent men, in their way. ... “I have hung the Pantheon in the air!” Michael Angelo is said to have exclaimed, while looking at the splendid dome of St. Peter’s; and no dome in the world has a more imposing effect. [I]t must be admitted that the interior of St. Peter’s is superior to all other edifices of which we know.

From the time of the beginning of the Renaissance, about 1420, to 50

about 1630, the architecture of Venice was going through a change, and finally reached such perfection that during the next half century the most magnificent style of architecture prevailed which has ever been known there. We mean to say that the whole effect was the grandest, for, while it is true that the edifices of that time are stately and striking in their appearance, it is equally true that their form and ornamentation are not as much in keeping with their use as they had been in older edifices.

The Ducal Palace at Venice is called by John Ruskin, the great English critic, “the central edifice of the world.” It is divided into three stories, of which the uppermost occupies rather more than half the height of the building. The two lower stories are arcades of low, pointed arches, supported on pillars, the one beneath being bolder and heavier in character than the second. The capitals of the columns are greatly varied, no two in the upper arcade being exactly alike. Above the arches of the middle story was a row of open-work spaces, of the form called quatre -foil; while the third story is faced with alternating blocks of rose-colored and white marble, and is pierced with a few large pointed windows. The whole front, or façade, is crowned by an open parapet made up of blocks of stone carved into lily-like forms alternating with lance-shaped leaves. The whole effect is one of great richness and beauty, especially since time has mellowed its color, and softened without destroying the whiteness of its marbles. ...

I shall now leave Italy with saying that the early days of the Renaissance were the best days of Italian Architecture, and, indeed, of Italian Art.

SPAIN

From the time of the fall of Granada, in 1492 to 1558, Spain was the leading nation of Europe. The whole country had been united under Ferdinand and Isabella, and their reign was a glorious period for their country. The importance of the nation was increased by the dis-

covery of the New World, and so many great men were in her councils that her eminence was sure, and almost undisputed. Thus it followed that during the first half of the sixteenth century the Architecture of Spain gave expression to the spirit by which the nation was then animated.

This did not long continue, however, for the iron, practical rule of Philip II crushed out enthusiasm and was fatal to artistic inspiration. This sovereign desired only to extend his kingdom; the priests, who acquired almost limitless power under his reign, aimed only to strengthen their authority, while the people were wildly pursuing riches in the New World which opened up to them a vast and attractive field. Thus no place or time was left to the cultivation of Art, and the only noteworthy period of Spanish Architecture since the beginning of the Renaissance was the sixty years which we have mentioned. ...

The cathedrals of Granada, Jaen, and Valladolid, and the churches of Malaga and Segovia, with many other ecclesiastical edifices, are among the chief monuments of Spanish Renaissance Architecture, but we shall pass on to a little later period and speak of but one great achievement, the famous Escurial, which is of much historic interest. This combination of basilica, palace, monastery, and college was begun in 1563 by Philip II, in accordance with a vow which he made to St. Lawrence at the battle of St. Quentin. This battle was fought in 1557 under the walls of the French town of St. Quentin, by the French and the Spaniards, and the latter were completely victorious.

This image gives an idea of how grand and impressive this collection of walls, towers, courts, and edifices must be, all crowned with the dome of the basilica. It is almost like a city by itself, and all who visit it agree that it is a gloomy and depressing place in spite of its grandeur. ... Indeed, the Escurial is a marvellous place, and is often called “the eighth wonder of the world.” The richest marbles, splendid pictures, and many magnificent objects help to make it one of the grandest works of modern architecture.

Church of St. Michael

During the sixteenth century there were many palaces erected in Spain, but nothing can be added to the impressions you will get from the descriptions we have quoted of the cheerful, gay Alhambra, and the gloomy, sad Escurial.

FRANCE

After the reigns of Charles VIII and Louis XII the French people became somewhat familiar with Italian Art, and at length, during the reign of Francis I, from 1515 to 1546, everything Italian was the fashion in France. Francis invited such artists as Leonardo da Vinci, Benvenuto Cellini, Primaticcio, and Andrea del Sarto to come to France and aid him in his works at Fontainebleau and elsewhere.

It was not long before the Gothic architecture which had been so much used and improved in France was thought to be inferior in beauty to the Italian architecture as it existed in the sixteenth century, and very soon the latter style was adopted and considered as the only one worthy of admiration. But the French architects had been so trained to the Gothic order that it was not easy for them to change their habits of design, and the result was that new edifices were largely of the Gothic form, but were finished and ornamented like the Italian buildings; by this means the effect of the whole, when completed, was such as is seen in this picture of the church of St. Michael at Dijon. In these days no one approves of this union of Gothic design and Italian decoration, but when it was the fashion it was thought to be very beautiful by French architects.

In Italy, the principal buildings of the Renaissance were churches or convents, or such as were in some way for religious uses. [The Italian styles] would scarcely have harmonized with the river banks and the lovely undulating meadows around a country villa or chateau. So it gradually happened that French Architecture was more graceful, light, and elegant than the architecture of the churches, monasteries, and other religious edifices of Italy, and at the same time the Italian feeling

and influence can easily be traced in the French buildings of the time of which we speak. ...

Perhaps the Church of the Invalides is the most remarkable building of the seventeenth century in France. It was designed by Jules Hardouin Mansard, a skillful architect, who was born in 1647, and died in 1708. The erection of the dome of the Invalides occupied him from 1680 to 1706. It is a fashion to criticize this as well as all famous buildings, but if it is remembered that the dome was intended to be the feature of the edifice, and that it was therefore necessary to sacrifice something to it, in the construction of the whole, we must admit that what its admirers claim for it is true—namely, that it is one of the finest domical edifices in Europe, and a most satisfactory example of the architecture of its class.

Directly underneath this dome is the crypt in which is the sarcophagus which contains the remains of Napoleon Bonaparte. On the door which leads to the crypt are inscribed the following words, taken from the will of the exile at St. Helena: “I desire that my ashes may rest on the banks of the Seine, in the midst of the French people whom I have loved so well.’’

The church of St. Genevieve, or the Pantheon, as it is usually called, is a very important architectural work. It was twenty-six years in building, and was not completed until after the death of its architect, Soufflot, which occurred in 1781.

It is said that this church was begun as the fulfilment of a vow made by King Louis XV when he was ill, but as the French Revolution was in progress when it was completed, it was dedicated to the “Grands Hommes,’’ or the great men of France, and not to God or the sweet St. Genevieve, who was one of the patron saints of Paris.

In the beginning of the present century French architects believed it best to reproduce exactly ancient temples which had been destroyed. According to this view the church of the Madeleine was begun in 1804, after the designs of Vignon. Outwardly it is a temple of the Corinthian

Church of the Invalides

order, and is very beautiful, though its position greatly lessens its effect. If it were on a height, or standing in a large square by itself, it would be far more imposing.

We have already spoken of the sort of building in which Francis I delighted. Of all his undertakings the rebuilding of the Louvre was the most successful. Its whole design was fine and the ornaments beautiful; many of these decorations were made after the drawings of Jean Goujon, who was an eminent master in such sculptures. The court of the Louvre has never been excelled in any country of Europe; it is a wonderful work for the time in which it was built, and satisfies the taste of the most critical observers.

The architecture of the reign of Napoleon III requires the space of a volume, at least, were it to be clearly described, for during that reign there was scarcely a city of France that did not add some important building to its public edifices. First, the city of Paris was remodelled and rebuilt to a marvellous extent, and as in other matters Paris is the leader, so its example was followed in architecture. The new Bourse in Lyons, the Custom House at Rouen, and the Exchange at Marseilles are good specimens of what was done in this way outside the great metropolis.

During the reign of Louis Philippe, and a little later, French domestic architecture was vastly improved, and since then much more attention has been given by Frenchmen to the houses in which they live. The appearance of the new Boulevards and streets of Paris is picturesque, while the houses are rich and elegant. Many portions of this city are more beautiful than any other city of Europe; and yet it is true that the architecture of forty years or so ago was more satisfactory than that of the present time.

The French are an enthusiastic people, and have been very fond of erecting monuments in public places which would remind them continually of the glories of their nation, the conquests of their armies, and the achievements of their great men.

Triumphal Arches and Columns

of Victory are almost numberless in France; many of them are impressive, and some are really very fine in their architecture. Since the Porte St. Denis was erected, in 1672, almost every possible design has been used for these monuments, in one portion of France or another, until, finally, the Arc de l’Etoile was built at the upper end of the Champs Élysées, at Paris. This is the noblest of all modern triumphal arches, as well as one of the most splendid ornaments in a city which is richly decorated with architectural works of various styles and periods—from that of the fine Renaissance example seen in the west front of the Louvre, built in 1541, down to the Arc de l’Etoile, the Fontaine St. Michel, and the Palais du Trocadero of our own time.

The French architecture of the present century is in truth a classic revival; its style has been called the néo-Grec, or revived Greek, and the principal buildings of the reign of Napoleon III all show that a study of Greek art had influenced those who designed these edifices.

ENGLAND

We may say that England has never had an architecture of its own, since it has always imitated and reproduced the orders which have originated in other countries. The Gothic order is more than any other the order of England, and, in truth, of Great Britain. All English cathedrals, save one, and a very large proportion of the churches, in city and country, are built in this style of architecture.

It is also true that during the Middle Ages, when the Roman Catholics were in power in England and made use of Gothic architecture, they built so many churches, that, during several later centuries, it might be truly said that England had no church architecture, because so few new churches were required or built.

It is so difficult to trace the origin and progress of the Classical or Renaissance feeling in English architecture that I shall leave it altogether, and passing the transition style and period, speak directly of the first great architect of the Renaissance in England, Inigo Jones, who

was born in 1572 and died in 1653. He studied in Italy and brought back to his native country a fondness for the Italian architecture of that day. He became the favorite court architect, and there are many important edifices in England which were built from his designs. His most notable work was the palace of Whitehall, though his design was never fully carried out in it; had it been, this palace would have excelled all others in Europe, either of earlier or later date. Among the churches designed by Inigo Jones that of St. Paul’s Covent Garden, is interesting because it is probably the first important Protestant church erected in England which still exists. It is small and simple, being almost an exact reproduction of the early Greek temples called distyle in antis, such as I described when speaking of Greek architecture.

Inigo Jones made many designs for villas and private residences, and perhaps he is more famous for these works than for any others. Among them are Chiswick and Wilton House, and many others of less importance.

After Jones came Sir Christopher Wren, who was the architect of some of the finest buildings in London. He was born in 1632 and died in 1723. The great fire, in 1666, when he was thirty-four years old, gave him a splendid opportunity to show his talents. Only three days after this fire he presented to the king a plan for rebuilding the city, which would have made it one of the most convenient as well as one of the most beautiful cities of the world.

Sir Christopher Wren is most frequently mentioned as the architect of St. Paul’s Cathedral. This was commenced nine years after the great fire, and was thirty-five years in building. St. Paul’s is the largest and finest Protestant cathedral in the world, and among all the churches of Europe that have been erected since the revival of Classical architecture, St. Peter’s, at Rome, alone excels it.

The western towers of Westminster Abbey are said to have been built after a design by Wren, but of this there is a doubt. Among his other works in church architecture are the steeple of Bow Church, 65

London; the church of St. Stephen’s, Walbrook; St. Bride’s, Fleet Street; and St. James’s, Piccadilly.

Churches, palaces, university buildings, and fine examples of municipal and domestic architecture are so numerous in England and other portions of Great Britain that we cannot speak of them in detail. The culmination of the taste for the imitation of Classical architecture was reached about the beginning of the present century, and among the most notable edifices in that manner are the British Museum, Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge, and St. George’s Hall, Liverpool.

A revival of Gothic Architecture has taken place in England in our own time. The three most prominent secular buildings in this style are Windsor Castle, the Houses of Parliament, and the New Museum, at Oxford. Of course, in the case of Windsor Castle, the work was a remodelling, but the reparations were so extensive as to almost equal a rebuilding. Sir Jeffry Wyatville had the superintendence of it, and succeeded in making it appear like an ancient building refitted in the nineteenth century—that is to say, it combines modern luxury and convenience in its interior with the exterior appearance of the castellated fortresses of a more barbarous age.

In the Houses of Parliament there was an attempt to carry out, even to the minutest detail, the Gothic style as it existed in the Tudor age, when there was an excess of ornament, most elaborate doorways, and the fan-tracery vaultings were decorated with pendent ornaments which look like clusters of stalactites. Sir Charles Barry was its architect. The present school of artists in England are never weary of abusing it; they call it a horror and declare its style to be obsolete. In fact, it is not the success at which Barry aimed; but it excels the other efforts to revive the Gothic in this day, not only in England, but in all Europe, and has many points to be admired in its plan and its detail, while the beauty of its skyline must be admitted by all. ...

English architecture of the present day may be concisely described by saying that it is Gothic for churches, parsonage-houses, school-houses,

and all edifices in which the clergy are interested or of which they have the oversight. On the other hand, palaces, town-halls, municipal buildings, club-houses, and such structures as come within the care of the laity, are almost without exception in the Classic style. Neither of these orders seems to be exactly suited to the climate of England or to the wants of its people; therefore, neither would satisfy the demands of the ancients, who taught that the architecture of a nation should be precisely adapted to its climate and to the purposes for which the edifices are intended. In fact, the ancients carried their ideas of fitness so far that one could tell at a glance the object for which a structure had been designed; we know that it is not possible to comply with this law in this day, although it is doubtless in accord with the true ideal of what perfect architecture should be. At the present day there is little doubt that the edifices of the Church and clergy are far more praiseworthy and true architecturally than are those for secular and domestic uses.

GERMANY

I shall not speak of the period of the Renaissance in Germany, but shall go forward to the time of the Revival of Classic Architecture, which dated about 1825. During the eighteenth century the discoveries which were made in Greece were of great interest to all the world, and the drawings which were made of the temples and monuments, as well as of the lesser objects of art which existed there, were sent all over Europe, and had such an effect upon the different nations, that with one accord they began to adopt the Greek style of architecture, whenever any important work was to be done. This effect was very marked in Germany, and the German architects tried to copy every detail of Greek architecture with great exactness.

Before taking up the Revival, however, I wish, for two reasons, to give a picture of the Brandenburg Gate, at Berlin [see Entry of Napoleon I Into Berlin]. This gate was erected between 1784 and 1792. It is important

because such monuments are more rare in Germany than in other European countries, especially of the time in which this was built, and because it is one of the best imitations of Greek art that exists in any nation.

It is interesting to remember that when Napoleon entered Berlin as a conqueror, after the Battle of Jena, he sent the Car of Victory, which surmounts this gate, to Paris, as a trophy of his prowess. After his abdication it was returned to its original position.

The effect of the German revival of Greek art is more plainly seen in Munich than in any other city. ... Of the Munich churches erected under Louis I that of St. Ludwig is in the Byzantine order; the Aue Kirche is in the pointed German Gothic, and the Basilica is like a Roman basilica of the fifth century. It resembles that of St. Paul’s-without-the-Walls; it was begun in 1835 and completed in 1850. In a vault beneath this basilica Louis and his Queen, Theresa, are buried. It has an extreme simplicity; its whole effect is solemn and satisfactory; still one must regret that since it is so fine up to a certain point, it should not have been made still finer.

The Ruhmeshalle, or Hall of Fame, at Munich, is an interesting and somewhat unique edifice. It is a portico of marble with forty-eight Doric columns, each twenty-six feet high. Against the walls are brackets holding busts of celebrated Germans who have lived since 1400. In front of the portico stands the colossal bronze statue of Bavaria. She is represented as a protectress with a lion by her side; in the right hand she holds a sword, and a chaplet in the left; ... inside, a staircase leads up into the head, where there are seats for eight persons. The view from the top of this statue is fine, and so extensive that in a favorable atmosphere the heights of the Alps can be discerned. The grand statue is intended to be the principal object of interest here, and the portico is made so low as to throw the figure out and show it off to advantage; altogether it is one of the most successful architectural works in Munich. The Museum of Berlin is a striking result of the same Revival of

Salvatorkirche and Walhalla

Classic architecture, and is far more splendid than anything in Munich. In Dresden the most important works in this style are the New Theatre and Picture Gallery. The last is almost an exact reproduction of the Pinakothek of Munich. All over Germany the effects of this Revival are more or less prominent, but I shall speak of but one other edifice, the Walhalla. This is also a Temple of Fame, and is situated about six miles from Ratisbon. It overlooks the River Danube from a height of more than three hundred feet. It was begun in 1830, and was twelve years in building, costing eight millions of florins. It is of white marble, and on the exterior is an exact reproduction of the Parthenon at Athens. The interior is divided into two parts by an entablature, which supports fourteen caryatides, made from colored marbles. These figures in turn support a second entablature, on which is a frieze in eight compartments, on which is sculptured scenes representing the history of Germany from its early days to the time of the introduction of Christianity. Along the lower wall there are one hundred busts of illustrious Germans who had lived from the earliest days of Germany down to those of the poet Goethe. ... [A]side from this sort of interest the whole thing seems incongruous and strangely unsuited to its position; [a]nd yet it is true that the Walhalla is the only worthy rival to St. George’s Hall, Liverpool, as an example of the possible adaptability of Greek or Roman Architecture to the needs and uses of our own days.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

When we remember that we have been able to give some account of architecture as it existed thousands of years before Christ, and to speak of the temples and tombs of the grand old nations who laid the foundation of the arts and civilization of the world—and then, when we remember the little time that has passed since the first roof was raised in our own land, we may well be proud of our country as it is—and at the same time we know that its architecture may in truth be said to be

a thing of the future.

It is but a few years, not more than seventy, since any building existed here that could be termed architectural in any degree. To be sure, there were many comfortable, generous-sized homes scattered up and down the land, but they made no claim to architectural design, and were not such edifices as one considers when speaking or writing of architecture.

The first buildings to which much attention was given in the United States were the Capitols, both State and National, and until recently they were in what may be called a Classic style, because they had porticoes with columns and certain other features of ancient orders; but when the cella, as is the case in America, is divided into two or more stories, with rows of prosaic windows all around, and chimneys, and perhaps attics also added, the term Classic Architecture immediately becomes questionable, and it is difficult to find a name exactly suited to the needs of the case; for it is still true that from a distance, and in answer to a general glance, they are nearer to the Classic orders than to anything else.

The National Capitol at Washington, which is the principal edifice in the United States, was begun in 1793, when General Washington laid the foundation-stone; the main portion was completed in 1830; two wings and the dome have since been added, and its present size is greater than that of any other legislative building in the world, except the British Houses of Parliament.

The dome, and the splendid porticoes, with the magnificent flights of steps leading up to them, are the fine features of the Capitol. The dome compares well with those that are famous in the world, and taken all in all the Washington Capitol is more stately than the Houses of Parliament, and is open to as little criticism as buildings of its class in other lands.

In domestic architecture, while there has been no style so original and absolutely defined as to be definitely called American, we may

A Mansion of Olden Time by

roughly classify three periods—the Colonial, the Middle, and the Modern. These terms have no close application, and you must understand that I use them rather for convenience than because they accurately, or even approximately, indicate particular styles. The mansions of the Colonial period are, perhaps, most easily recognized, and in some respects were the frankest and most independent class of houses ever built in this country. The early settlers took whatever suited them from all styles, and instead of imitating the English, the Dutch, or the French manner of building, mingled parts of all, with especial reference to the needs of their climate and surroundings.

Sir William Pepperell’s House shows the plain, yet quaint style of many of the mansions of the Colonial period. Its interior, with heavy wainscoting of solidy mahogany, was more imposing by far than the exterior. The Van Rensselaer homestead at Albany [see A Mansion of Olden Time] is an excellent example of a more stately house, possessing much dignity and impressiveness.

The Middle period was a time when domestic architecture, still without any originality and losing much of the independence of the Colonial, copied more closely from foreign models. Some fine old mansions belong to this period, which covered the last years of the last century and the first half of this. The celebrated Cragie House at Cambridge, occupied by the poet Longfellow; “Elmwood,” the home of James Russell Lowell; “Bedford House,” in Westchester County, New York, the home of the Hon. John Jay, are to be referred to this period; and so is the imposing “Old Morrisania,” at Morrisania, New York, the old Morris mansion.

These views serve to illustrate the want of anything like a regular style, of which I spoke above; but they show how many different forces were at work to influence building in the Modern period. This division is meant to extend to and include the present time, and so great is the diversity of styles now employed that in a work like this it would be idle to attempt anything like an enumeration of them, and still less to try

and determine their origin and importance. ... A modern writer on American architecture claims that in private dwellings an American order is gradually being developed by the changes made to adapt foreign forms to our climate, and especially to the brilliancy of the sunlight here. All this is so difficult to define, however, that it would be impossible to show it clearly in the limits of a book like this, even if it exists. In public buildings many splendid edifices have been erected of late years. The imitation of classic forms which was formerly the fashion, and which is so strikingly exhibited by Girard College, Philadelphia, is now almost entirely laid aside. A lighter, less constrained style, which may be called eclectic—which means selecting—because it takes freely from any and all styles whatever suits its purpose, is arising; and as this selecting is being every year more and more intelligently done, and as original ideas are constantly being incorporated with those chosen, the prospects for architecture are more promising than ever before in this country. The Casino, at Newport, is a fine example of a modern building; and the still more recent Casino in New York shows a fine example of the adapting of ideas from Saracenic architecture to American uses. The Capitol at Albany has many fine features, but it is the work of several designers who did not harmonize. Memorial Hall, at Cambridge, is one of the more striking of modern American buildings, but its skyline—that is, its outline as seen against the sky—lacks simplicity and repose.

The churches in this country exhibit the widest variety of style. Trinity Church in New York was the first Gothic church erected in America, and Trinity Church in Boston, one of the latest churches of importance, is also Gothic, though of the variety called Norman Gothic, and considerably varied. The Roman Catholic Cathedral of New York, and many others of less magnitude, might be cited as a proof that American architecture is advancing, and that we may speak hopefully of its future.

Rail road depots and school-houses of certain types are among the

Main Building, Girard College

most distinctive and characteristic American edifices. The first, especially, are being constructed more nearly in accordance with the ancient principle of suiting the structure to its uses than are any other buildings that are worthy to be considered architecturally. Art museums and public libraries, too, now form an important feature in both town and country, and, in short, the beginning of American architecture, for that is all that can be claimed for what as yet exists, is such as would be the natural outcome of a nation such as ours—varied, restless, bold, ugly, original, and progressive. All these terms can be applied to American art, but in and through it all there is a promise of something more. As greater age will bring repose and dignity of bearing to our people, so our Fine Arts will take on the best of our characteristics; as we outgrow our national crudities the change will be shown in our architecture, and we may well anticipate that in the future we shall command the consideration and assume the same importance in these regards that our excellence in the Useful Arts has already won for us in all the world.

U.S. Civil War d

A Bit of History

The Civil War Through the Eyes of the Artist

The attack on Fort Sumter on April 12, 1861 marked the official beginning of the Civil War. The event was captured by artist Conrad Wise Chapman and his father, John Gadsby Chapman. Conrad enlisted as a soldier in the Confederate Army when he was just 19 years old. He continued to fight for the rebel army throughout the four long years of struggle.

This was not a war of nation against nation. This was a war in which brothers, sons, fathers and friends fought one another. In this painting by Constant Mayer, a Union soldier has just died on the battlefield. A Confederate soldier holds him close, in grief. The title of the painting, “Recognition” refers to the fact that the living soldier has just recognized that the man he has killed is his younger brother. Notice the landscape behind them—lush foliage behind the living soldier and stark rocks behind the dying one, contrasting life and death. * * * * *

Sorrow was not reserved for the battlefield. Families anxiously sent their loved ones off to war, not knowing if they would ever return, as depicted in this painting by Felix Octavius Carr Darley, The Departure of the Volunteer. *

Similarly, while other artists painted raging battle scenes, Eastman Johnson also chose to focus on the heart wrenching element of the struggle of the loved ones left behind, naming his work The Girl I Left Behind Me. She is a young, beautiful girl, unsure of where to go next in the circling windstorm of events. The gold wedding ring on her finger suggests her new husband has gone to war. She looks down from a high hilltop. The split-rail fence and the swirling fog portray a world filled with division. The painting carried the name of an Irish ballad, popular at the time. * * * * *

The Girl I Left Behind Me by Eastman

Eastman also shows us a young boy, writing to his father who is away at war.

Many of the soldiers of the Civil War were not grown men, but young boys, such as this Wounded Drummer Boy, also painted by Eastman Johnson

Winslow Homer was one of a small number of artist-reporters who were embedded with the Union Army for the purpose of illustrating the war to readers of Harpers Weekly Illustrations. A largely self-taught artist, he was only 25 years old at the time.

One of his most famous paintings of the Civil War is A Sharpshooter on Picket Duty. New developments in weaponry now made it possible for soldiers to take aim at targets hundreds of yards away. Many soldiers now got shot while eating or playing cards or taking time to shave. Because of hidden sharpshooters, soldiers lived in constant danger, on and off the battlefield.

Homer wrote, “I looked through one of their rifles once when they were in a peach orchard in front of Yorktown in April, 1862. The impression struck me as being as near murder as anything I ever think of in connection with the army and I always had a horror at that branch of the service.”

He was not alone in his feelings.

Homer was uncomfortable with battle scenes. He painted only one: Skirmish in the Wilderness .

Most of his paintings give us a look at camp life, simply portraying weary, homesick men, enduring. Many of them had left behind young wives and children, with neither side having any idea whether their loved ones were safe or even alive.

He largely lived the life of the soldier, facing battles, injuries, starvation and disease. The work was dangerous and exhausting. One time, he went for two or more months “without food 3 days at a time & all in camp either died or were carried away with typhoid fever,” his mother had written to his younger brother. “He came home so changed that his best friends did not know him.” * * * * *

George Cochran Lambdin was an artist known for painting beautiful flowers and other plant life before taking on portraying what the horrors of war did to the soldiers who fought in the Civil War. He painted At the Front in 1866 which features a Union officer in full uniform, staring at the ground. The expression on his face suggests that he is reflecting on the horrifying scenes he has witnessed in combat; scenes that will likely haunt him for the rest of his life.

Albert Bierstadt was a German-born painter who moved to the United States with his family as a baby in 1831. He was initially drafted into the Union Army in 1863. He was wealthy enough that he was able to pay for a replacement to fight for him. He made his mark on the Civil War with his paintbrush rather than a rifle. A work titled Guerrilla Warfare which he painted in 1862 became one of the most famous Civil War paintings of all time. It features a beautiful landscape that would appear to be a serene setting except for the presence of a small group of Union soldiers on ‘picket duty,’ their rifles propped on a fence as they fire upon a column of Confederate soldiers. Notice the farmhouse in the background. * * * * *

Most of the paintings depicting Civil War scenes center around Union soldiers. That’s because the Southern newspapers and publications didn’t have the resources nor the skilled engravers to send into the field, which is what makes this famous painting by William Gilbert Gaul so unique.

Here is a group of Confederate soldiers fighting with great courage to hold fast the line they are charged to maintain and prevent the Union army from taking. The men are bloodied and battered from the fight, yet they continue to fight the enemy that we cannot see.

This work was painted in 1882 and is said to be named after the famous poem by Walt Whitman, Holding the Line at All Hazards. *

The Road March

The war finally ended after four long, brutal years of fighting. Julian Scott has given us a scene of an almost endless stream of soldiers marching home from the war. Notice the details of the painting. For instance, Scott used his likeness as one of the two men in the lower left corner. One is a soldier. The other is an artist holding a sketchbook. Here are two young drummer boys, the lead one barefoot with his shoes hung around his neck. Behind him are two soldiers leading a hay wagon.

Two freed slaves carry satchels while one carries a soldier’s musket. Perhaps it is an officer who is lying on top of the hay wagon, protected from the blazing sun by an umbrella. Some say the man following the wagon bears a resemblance to Robert E. Lee on Traveller. But the artist never confirmed that. What will await them at home?

For some, they will return to a hearty welcome and celebration.

“The men will cheer and the boys will shout and the ladies, they will all turn out...when Johnny comes marching home.”

But for far too many, they will return to scenes of ruin and desolation. There is nothing to do but pull up their sleeves and rebuild that which has been lost. It will take time.

The Lost Cause by Henry Mosler

“Recollect that we form one country now. Abandon all these local animosities and make your sons Americans.”

-- General Robert

“Let us have peace.”

-- General Ulysses S. Grant