Architecture And Archæology.

predicaments : —Either the style he produces is expressive of the thirteenth , fourteenth , and fifteenth centuries , and not of the nineteenth , —and then it is not Gothic , for Gothic is eminently expressive of the period in which it flourished ; or his style is expressive of the nineteenth century , —and then it is not Gothic , for Gothic is expressive of the

thirteenth , fourteenth , and fifteenth centuries ; or his style has no expression at all , —and then it is not Gothic , for Gothic is an eminently expressive style . Nor do I see how he can escape from the dilemna , except by showing that the tone , spirit , character , state of civilization and refinement , and stage of progress of the present century are identical with that of the Mediasval period . If he can prove thishe

, will overthrow my argument ; but I suspect that the more he studies Mediaeval architecture , and the history to which it forms an adjunct and commentary , the more difficult he will find his task . And I believe this view of the subject has been taken by persons far . more intimately acquainted with the matter than I can pretend to be . It will perhaps be said that the same line of reasoning

holds good with regard to all genuine architecture whatever . Unquestionably all great architectural works take their character from the period in which they were produced , aud express it accordingly ; but this may not be so much from the nature of the style itself , as from the manner of handling it . In Classic architecture , we can in great measure separate the style from the building . The style in itself have

may no individual expression , while the building has a great deal . In Mediaeval architecture , the style itself is expressive ; and therefore , if transported to a period to which it does not belong , it runs the risk of expressing something which does not exist to be expressed , and consequently of being anomalous and out of place . The Classic style , having no peculiar expression of its own , except that of refinement ,

may be endued by the architect with any expression his genius enables him to invest it with , and will readily receive and reflect the character of the age and people who adopt it . Moreover , there is a greater affinity between our own age and country , and those in which ancient Classic architecture flourished , than between ourselves and our Mediasval ancestors . Our tastes in art and literature are nearly

indentical . Take any fair specimen of our literary style , —a leading article , for instance , in any established newspaper , — and we shall find in it the same excellences which we should look for in a good writer of the Augustan age -. —cleaness , force of expression , a happy choice of words , fluency , and harmony of rhythm , an avoidance of anything quaint or archaic , and an elegance resulting more from instinctive

perception than from an elaborate selection and arrangement of our phrases : these are beauties which must be attained in a greater or less degree by every writer who intends to be read . And these are just its characteristics of good Roman authors ; so thafc we might introduce literally translated passages from Cicero , Sallust , or Cassar , that shall altogether harmonize with our natural style , and

not appear in the slighest degree antiquated or obsolete . AYe read and enjoy Horace ' s odes , satires , and epistles as if they were productions of our own day and our own country ; we like them for themselves , and not merely as curious relics of the past . Nor should we feel that any poet who might form his style upon the study of these compositions was taking a retrograde step . So in sculpture

. The student who wishes to obtain eminence , and to advance his art , will exercise himself in copying , or carefully studying , the works of ancient Greek , Roman , and Renaissance arfcists ; and , though he will not neglect Gothic sculpture , he will not make ifc the great object of his attention , nor loot to it as a standard of excellence .

I am speaking of literary composition and sculpture as arts which may be communicated and advanced , and in which we can mark certain stages , whether of progress , culmination , or decline ; and I believe I may say , without fear of contradiction , we are not making a retrograde movement while we set up classic models . Genius and inspiration may show themselves in any agewhatever be its state of refinement

, ; nor can it fail of having an effect upon the progress of mankind ; but we must not mistake the genius of an individual for natural development . AYe should not look to Homeric Greece for a type of the Greek language in its completeness

and purity ; nor should we go back to the days of Giofcto and the great Mediaaval artists , whose genius led up to the Renaissance for models of Italian art in its perfection . But I must not dwell too long upon abstract points ; we will take a more material view of the subject . The difference between the constructive principles of Classic and Gothic

architecture is that the former professedly uses the beam or lintel , employing the arch rather as an expedient than as a predominant feature ; while the latter may be said to be purely the architecture of the arch , admitting the lintel at rare intervals and on a small scale . But the artistical principles of the style may be enunciated in a still broader and more summary manner . The Classic gives expression

to the solids , Gothic to the voids . Take a Greek colonnade . The columns , capitals , and entablatures are carefully elaborated in their form and proportion , while the opening between them is left to itself , or its breath determined upon with a view to the columns themselves , not to its own shape . In Gothic work , on the contrary , it is the form of the opening that engages the attention of the architects , the spandrils being the parts that in point of shape are left to shift for

themselves . Hence the greater portion of classic ornament finds its place on the surface of the wall , while the soffits and jambs , unless the depth of the arch be such as to give it the character of a vault , are comparatively plain . In Gothic work the decoration is mainly in the soffits—sometimes in the form of delicate and complicated mouldings , sometimes of flowers and foliage occupying the hollows ;

while the mouldings themselves branch out into foliation and tracery , filling the arch with beautiful patterns ancl figures . Even in the decoration of the surface the forms of the openings are repeated in blank arcades and panelling ; and the enrichment of the piers themselves has reference rather to arches they support , than to their own importance as solid masses , or to the actual wall above them . The

tendency of the Gothic system , as carried out in its works of the highest order—that is , in its cathedrals—is to the construction , or at least the suggestion of a lantern of open work , —a vast frame of stone , in which the portions of flat wall are reduced to the smallest amount possible , such as the choir of Tournay Cathedral , which is so tender that it has heed found necessary to connect every part together by ties of iron .

Now in Roman work the pier , or the wall itself , is made to attract attention , while the arch or opening , whatever it may be , is a secondary and subordinate feature , Change all the arches of the Coliseum into square-headed openings , as those in the upper stage , as well as at Pola , actually are , and I suspect the change in its character would be much less than we are apt to imagine .

Now , I am far from pronouncing the Gothic system to be wrong ; and it is undoubtedly productive of great elegance , force , and spirit . But I would maintain that the classic principle of giving expression to the walls themselves , rather than to the openings by which they are pierced , is architecturally sound . AVe build for the sake of what we get bthe walls and the roofs they

support—namelsecluy y , sion and shelter , —not for the sake of light and air , which we have in abundance without them . It is indeed necessary that we provide a sufficient supply of light ancl air , as well as means of access : but these are contingent necessities , not the main object ofthe building . Again , the tendency of Classic is to breadth of effect ; of Gothic to minute subdivisions , and an almost fantasfcic

variety of outline . The traveller on the Continent will probably be struck , as he proceeds southwards , with , the increasing breadth which characterizes the towns , villages , and groups of buildings . He cannot fail to notice the preponderance , so to speak , of mass over outline . In a Mediasval town in the north of France , and in the greatest part of Germany , his attention will be caught by the number and

variety of towers , spires , pinnacles , peaked gables , and the like ; on which great powers of design , as well as care in the execution of detail , are bestowed , while the mass itself is as much broken up , as may be by openings and projections which cause a constant play of light and shadow . In the south , he will have presented to him large and comparatively unbroken masses , ^ marked by few openings or projeotions , with just a sufficient number of towers and spires to