Part 2

Omitting then any inquiry into the architecture of our earth’s aborigines, which was evidently of the rudest character, reference may first be made to early architectural attempts in Asia. It has been ingeniously observed by M. Pair, that the Chinese imitated a tent as the model of their system, a result that undoubtedly arose from the fact that the first Tartar tribes were nomadic or wandering in their nature. It has also been remarked that a bird’s-eye view of a Chinese city at once suggests the idea of a fixed camp. In southern and south-western Asia may be found, on the other hand, the remains of extensive architectural productions in caves, such as that of the Pagoda Elephanta, from which many have argued that subterraneous dwellings were amongst the earliest; but it is evident that such could only be made in places where stone existed in masses, as a basis of the country. In a plain and sandy district, and in alluvial soil generally, such could not possibly have been produced. There is not the least doubt that the conditions of climate have in all cases determined the early character of each national system. In both hot and cold countries caves would naturally have been sought as affording shelter from the two extremes of heat and cold. Recent geological discoveries have brought to light the fact that the remains of human and quadruped bones have been found together in such situations, the human inhabitants having most probably been the predecessors of the beasts of prey, as also of the fowls of the air. It has been suggested too that the forest tree having formerly served for shelter, might have suggested the floral character of columns, and the use of floral decoration generally at their summit.

In respect to these “natural” and consequently primitive “systems” of architecture, Billington has made the following judicious remarks:--“Those people or nations who lived by the chase (and in the same class the Ichthyophagi, or fish-eaters, are included) could not for a great length of time have built themselves shelters. The long courses the hunters made prevented them from watching their property, which must have comprised [but] few articles; and they found it more convenient to make hollows in the rocks for their dwellings, or to profit by those which nature offered them in its caverns. It was the same with those who lived by fishing; passing a sedentary life on the sea shores, the sides of rivers, or the borders of the lakes, they always made themselves such abodes, or took advantage of those already formed by nature. The little industry which this mode of life required, and the natural idleness which followed it, was sufficient to induce them to prefer the dwellings presented by nature, to those of art. This fact is proved by experience at the present day, as these descriptions of persons continue to adopt the same plan of life in countries where the arts of civilization have not extended their beneficial influence. The pastors or shepherds, as they were inhabitants of plains during a great portion of the year, could not make use of the retreats hollowed and prepared in the mountains and rocks by the hand of nature; being obliged to seek change of pasture, and thus lead an ambulatory life, it was requisite to have dwellings or shelters that could be carried with them wherever they went, and hence originated the use of tents. But the active operations of agriculture requiring a definite situation, necessity suggested the propriety of building solid and fixed abodes. The agriculturist then, living on his own grounds, and in the enjoyment of his property, had to store his provisions; it was therefore necessary to have a habitation at once commodious, safe, healthful, and extensive; and the wood hut with its roof was soon erected.”

The same author considers that there is not the least certainty of this primitive wooden construction, with its inclined roof, having been the universal model of all nations, but especially in regard to Egypt and China. The peculiarities of the early Chinese style of architecture have been already named, and with the persistent continuity in one course yet prevalent, that style is still preserved. But the Grecian style was evidently founded on the rude model, and the ingenuity of that nation eventually led to the transference of material from wood to stone.

At the present day the Orders of Grecian architecture are fundamental to the principles of modern art in numerous varieties of detail; they have survived the prejudices, fancies, and dicta of various schools of art, although, as already shown, the Gothic and other systems have become formidable competitors, and in many cases, especially in regard to the picturesque, efficient, elegant, and ornamental substitutes. The taste for the latter characteristic has led to an increased adoption, for example, of the Italian style, which in many respects resembles the Grecian, but differs from it especially in lightness of detail, with greater variety. The author just quoted traces the origin of the Doric Order of the Greeks to a primary adaptation of the trunks of trees as external supports of the wooden dwelling, seeing in them the foreshadowing of the column designative of that order. “As trees are of greater circumference at their lower extremities, and diminish in rising, the diminution of the column was suggested by them.... These timbers (as supports) consisting of trunks of trees planted in the ground, offered not as yet the idea of bases and pedestals, as is seen in the Doric Order, which is without base. But in the course of time the inconvenience of this method was perceived, as it exposed the wood to rot, and to remedy this inconvenience pieces of wood were placed under each support to give it a better foundation, and to protect it from humidity. This practice may be traced in some of the ancient edifices in which the columns have no other base than a block of stone. But afterwards, the number of pieces of wood employed for the base was increased, in order to give greater elevation to the supports, or to effect better security against the effects of humidity. From this multiplication of blocks as footings, sprung the _torus_ and other mouldings of the base, an origin far more probable than that of ligaments of iron, as imagined by Scamozzi and others. It is also more conformable to the nature of capitals, in which it is known that the same proceeding was employed. After beginning with a simple abacus, several others were afterwards added, which were enlarged, as they rose, one above another, in such a manner that as the base was to the column a kind of footing on which it rested more solidly, so the capital made a head more capable of receiving and supporting the weight and form of the architrave, a large beam placed horizontally on perpendicular supports, and destined to receive the covering of the whole edifice.”

The author goes on, in a similarly ingenious manner, to prove the derivation, from nature, of the Orders of Grecian architecture. He ascribes the form of the roof as having necessarily suggested that of the pediment. On this point he quotes the remark of Cicero: “It is not to pleasure that we are indebted for the pediment of the Capitol and those of our temples: necessity suggested the form for the better draining off the water; nevertheless, its beauty is so very great, and it is become so necessary for edifices, that if a Capitol were to be built in Olympus, where it was never known to rain, it would, notwithstanding, be necessary to give it a pediment.”

The preceding remarks and ingenious theory amply justify the opinion already suggested, that nature must be the foundation of every true principle of art. Assuming, as we are compelled to do, that the Grecian style as a whole was original, the only perfect model that could have been selected was that afforded by natural objects, in all of which are found the most perfect results, derived from few means but answering an infinity of ends. It will be remembered that the construction of the Eddystone lighthouse was based in regard to durability, and resistance to the force of the waves, on those properties which are possessed by any kind of tree exposed to the full force of the tempest. “Nature ought to be the basis of all imitation.”

Proceeding from the teachings of nature, the Greeks learned gradually to introduce new types, consistent in the main with the original mode, but of great variety in detail. By further refinement of this, but close adherence to the facts or the analogies of nature, the Grecian art became developed in the invention of other Orders, the names of which are sufficiently known to all interested in architecture. Limited space prevents our entering into a class of analyses of the characteristics of each. Little doubt exists of the Doric Order having been the first produced, and following it were the Ionic, Corinthian, Composite, and Tuscan, which constitute the five Orders in general of architecture.

Perhaps the best epoch of ancient architecture was that during which, subsequent to the battle of Marathon, the Greeks commenced to rebuild the remains of Persian buildings, and to re-construct Athens. The ruins of this period yet with us, attest the advance which Grecian architectural art had attained. The ingenuity and refinement of Greek art gradually spread to Rome, the Romans adopting the Doric Order under the modification known as the Tuscan. The art having been introduced into Etruria by the Pelasgi, under the celebrated Augustus, Rome attained that magnificence which has ever since rendered its name famous as a seat of the arts. Amongst the great erections of this period was the Pantheon, one of the grandest efforts of genius that the world has yet known. Under subsequent emperors architecture also progressed, and the name of Trajan is identified with the erection of triumphal arches, &c., the ruins of which still receive the admiration of every qualified judge in art.

The removal of the seat of Roman government to Byzantium led to the decadence of art at Rome, which was completed by the incursions of the Visigoths. Eventually the Gothic style arose, phœnix-like, from the ruins of Grecian and Roman art, and obtained a place that has rendered it ever since one of the most favourite styles of architecture.

Just as under the heathens, the art had been chiefly promoted by erections for religious purposes, so when the Christians began to obtain the ascendancy, the erection of churches led to a similar result. From the fourth to the seventh century some magnificent buildings of this kind were erected. At the commencement of the eleventh century the church of St. Mark at Venice attested the wonderful progress which architecture had made, and it continued to progress during the next two or three centuries, being confined chiefly, however, to Italy. But the Gothic style, suited to a northern clime, never obtained full hold there; Italy cannot boast of a single pure Gothic edifice. Gradually the new style spread over Europe. The Cathedral at Strasbourg, the Louvre at Paris, suggested improvements in our own country at Windsor Castle, Oxford, &c., all indicated the rapid extension of the Gothic style or its modifications. But in numerous instances the taste that was exhibited showed a decadence from the simplicity and grandeur of the Grecian and Latin styles. In respect to the latter, indeed, the materials of the new erections were obtained from the ruins of the ancient edifices, the columns, &c. there found, being pressed into the service, in any manner, of the new school of architects.

Towards the middle of the fifteenth century a revival in architectural art took place, especially under Brunelleschi. The patronage of the Medici added a stimulus to the progress thus initiated. Improvements were introduced in the erection of private residences in most parts of Western Europe, the art having in its best form been chiefly till then directed to building edifices for religious purposes alone. In the sixteenth century architecture in Rome attained a perfection nearly equal to that it had formerly enjoyed under the Cæsars, especially during the Augustan age. Private and public buildings were erected of great magnificence, yet of simplicity of form combined with grandeur. Under Vignola architecture attained great excellence. Michael Angelo was appointed architect of St. Peter’s at Rome about the middle of the sixteenth century, and the mention of his name alone is sufficient to call to mind the extent and value of his labours in the art. In the seventeenth century, about the year 1620, Inigo Jones was engaged in repairing St. Paul’s Cathedral in London, and subsequently produced designs for the Royal Palace at Whitehall in the reign of Charles I. Greenwich and Chelsea Hospitals, and other noted buildings, were designed about this period. In France and other continental countries architecture attained great perfection at this period, both in respect to public and private buildings. Among the most eminent architects of a period somewhat nearer to our own time, was Sir Christopher Wren, whose St. Paul’s Cathedral serves as a monument to the great genius of that eminent man. This era may, comparatively speaking, be considered as the commencement of the modern style of English church architecture, inasmuch as several productions of Wren are still used for the purposes to which they were first applied, having undergone little or no change since their completion.

Such is a brief, and necessarily very imperfect resumé of the progress of architecture. The styles of Eastern Europe, ancient Mexico, and many others, have not been described, because unnecessary, in this Introduction, which has only for its object to call general attention to the causes which have led to the present state of the art. Like all others it has been the subject of alternating prosperity and adversity. At one time fostered by men eminent in their profession, and by those whose means permitted them to lavish riches on magnificent piles, fountains, villas, &c.; and at others, degraded by its students, and neglected by those who should have been its patrons.

In all branches of architecture direct reference should be had to the objects for which the building is intended. An eminent architect, already quoted, has well set forth this essential point in the following remarks:--“The art of characterizing, that is to say, of rendering evident by material forms the intellectual qualities and moral ideas required to express in edifices, or to make known by the harmony and suitableness of all the constituent parts that enter into their composition the use for which they are intended, is perhaps of all the secrets of architecture the most difficult to develope or to attain. This happy talent of conceiving and of communicating the conception in the physiognomy suitable to each edifice; this sure and delicate discernment, which exhibits the distinguishing parts of such edifices, that at first appear susceptible of no characteristic distinctions; this judicious employment of the different styles which are as the tones of architecture; this skilful application of the signs which the art employs to affect the sight and understanding; this exquisite feeling, which errs neither in the just disposition of the masses and employment of the details, nor in the just dispensation of richness and simplicity, and which is able to combine true expression of character with the harmonious accord of all the qualities susceptible of being represented by architecture--all this requisite talent, which study perfects, but does not produce, is a gift possessed by few. This suitable expression presents itself under two relations, the one appertaining to architecture in general, and the other to edifices in particular. The first consists in the expression of the qualities or intellectual ideas which are the results of the art metaphysically considered; the second, in the true indication of the uses for which edifices are designed, that is, in considering architecture as a certain mode of expressing or painting. This expression, according to the nature of the buildings and edifices, may be produced by the gradation of richness and greatness proportionate to the nature and the object for which they are erected; by the indication of the moral qualities attached to each edifice, the manner of expressing which is beyond the reach of rules; by the general and particular form of architecture; by the species of the construction and the quality of the materials that may be employed in the execution; and lastly, by the resources of decoration.” In these remarks will be found a highly valuable _précis_ of the excellence to which the art of the architect should be directed, and the means that must be adopted to obtain pleasing and successful results.

The erection of country mansions, villas, and other residences, has of late years been greatly stimulated in our country. The enormous annually accumulated savings of the commercial portion of the community have induced a large amount of capital to be invested in such objects. In regard to questions of taste and decoration, it should be borne in mind that but very little extra cost is incurred in building a residence in a pleasing and picturesque style than in one having not the least pretension to architectural beauty. In our earlier remarks on the nature of the picturesque the _general principles_ of obtaining that effect have been pointed out. In the following pages the special details are amply descanted on, and illustrated by designs, drawings, &c. It is the object of every department of constructive skill at the present day, to endeavour to obtain the best possible result by the least possible expenditure of material, and thus taste actually causes economy rather than increased expense. Tons of heavy and unsightly materials are now replaced by hundredweights of decorative, and yet substantial, masonry and iron work. A number of modern elegant erections, affording accommodation equal in extent, but vastly superior in quality, are now made at an expenditure of stone or brick less by one-third in quantity than was employed in many old houses; those in High Street, Edinburgh, by way of example. The result has been arrived at by the joint aid of science and art, the former giving data as to the strength of the material, and the latter directing its disposal. The peculiar character of English scenery is exactly adapted for giving a picturesque character to villa residences, provided the latter are designed and erected in accordance with the principles of sound taste. Surely he who would spend money in building a house, in which all or most of the remainder of his days are to be spent, will not grudge making that dwelling the subject of decoration or ornamental art, by which its aspect shall at all times be suggestive of pleasure rather than of aversion or disgust. It has been said that most individuals, by long association together, acquire a mutuality of tastes and even physical resemblance. It cannot be denied that even inanimate objects, such as our dwellings, furniture, landscapes, gardens, and other such surroundings, have a parallel effect on us. Hence the wisdom of using all the means which architectural art places at our disposal. Errors in this respect often proceed from thoughtlessness, if not from want of refined taste. An instance may suffice to show how much such matters should be attended to in the choice of a site and other conditions. A retired manufacturer erected a mansion at a cost exceeding fifty thousand pounds, and had never paid any heed to the fact that the most prominent object seen from his dining-room window was the cemetery of the adjacent town! Soon this became unbearable, and the house has been comparatively deserted by the family, caused by an oversight that the least consideration would have remedied.

The designs given in the following pages have for their object to suggest the most approved, tasteful, and effective plans for the mansion, the villa, or cottage, and great care has been devoted to their production. Whilst a residence must necessarily be kept within a cost suitable to the means of the proprietor, by judicious care of the professional man, possessed of a competent knowledge, a little money may go a long way in the decorative art. Many of the drawings are devoted to the minor but not less effective portions of the house. Congruity in detail inside the dwelling is equally required with symmetry, beauty, or picturesque character of the exterior. Want of judgment in this point may speedily convert the most elegant building into little better than a repository for gewgaws selected without taste and arranged without skill. It is impossible for _every_ man to become his own architect; but it is possible, in most cases, for all who have the means, to select such a design as shall best comport with their taste, leaving the working out of details to the architect. But a remote possibility exists of an unprofessional being able even to state what he requires, and should he ask an architect for a design or plan, it is more than likely that the latter would fail to please. When, however, a variety of designs is placed before the eye of any intelligent person the act of selection becomes easy. Although no single plan may succeed, a combination may suggest itself, and the architect can then readily work on something like a sound foundation, and with the hope of success. This work is intended to supply such requirements.

Again, in building a house, or in effecting alterations in an old one, points apparently of minor, but really of great importance, require attention. A badly constructed chimney will make the whole house miserable, independent of the injury done to furniture, decorations, &c., and the destruction of paint and paperhangings. A defective drainage may render that which was intended to be an abode of peace, plenty, and happiness, a living charnel-house, or the door to the grave! A question of vital importance is that of ventilation. These apparently minor questions can therefore scarcely be exaggerated in their value, for neglect of them will render nugatory the best external efforts of the architect. Hence they have hereafter full attention, in their practical details, directed to them.